Progression Reward Changes in Versus Tournaments (7/20/17)

Meander

Also, I need to clarify. To me, the issue isn't the attempt to get rid of coordination or nullify losses or any of that. The issue is the loss of cp and the high target. Reset it to have the cp at 40 or 50? We good. Want to have people still spend on shields? Great, still add that cp to ranking, and I will give no bothers trying to get in a pissing contest over it. In fact, do that and I'd like it more than the current system. Removing the top progression item is straight dumb

VizMantis

The point yo-yo'ing while trying to make progression was exactly the reason I've mostly avoided PvP in my 3+ years of play, so this sounds great!  This also fixes another complaint I've had about PvP, the fact that making any serious point gains in the first couple days was essentially useless.

If this change goes through, my only concern will be where I'll find the time to play PvP and PvE.

Vhailorx

Brigby said:

Hi Everyone. Please keep in mind that this is still just a test run. The developers will be reviewing the feedback after the event is over, and making any necessary adjustments after that.

I am sure this is true brigby. But it's not really the point.  The concern i have is what this test says about the game Demi wants mpq to be.  These changes suggest that demi think 40 pvp matches 3x a week, plus ~54 pve matches, plus ddq, plus LRs is the amount that someone should have to play to get access to the highest tier of rewards (and the only reasonable supply of cp available anywhere).  Playing what used to be a fairly heavy grind (4/6 in pve and 20-30 pvp matches in each event) will now result in significantly fewer rewards than was the case 6 months ago (especially in terms of cp, the most precious resource in the game).  

These are not changes that improve my quality of life as a player, but they seem to be the pretty clear intent of demi's tests.

charmbots

I really like this idea, but I agree 40 wins is a bit much. 40 wins is about what it takes to get to 2000 in shield sim and we have a whole season to do that. Plus with no boosted characters to fight the matches are much shorter. 

What I think would be great is if a system was implemented where progression could be obtained by either wins or points: for example, the four star cover would be awarded by reaching either 30 wins or 900 points and the 15 CP by reaching 50 wins or 1200 points. 

PorkBelly

Philosophically, this is a good change.

But 40 is too high for the 4* cover.  I would say, in general, I'd hit 900 points in roughly half that many matches under the current system.

babinro

Initial on paper impressions:

- Punishes anyone who joined in the last 24 - 36 hours to do pvp before.
- Makes progression FAR more accessible for all tiers of play and all rosters.
- Demands a lot more play for the same rewards (excluding the placement rewards).
- Punishes all players who played pvp for progression and not placement by locking out the primary reward.

For me personally the proposed changes are a nightmare.   I joined pvp within the last 24 hours, did 2 major climbs and shielded out as soon as I hit 1200ish leaving me to finish top 25 to top 50.   According to the new system I'll maybe hit the 575 CP progression reward of 16-20 wins and there's no way I achieve the placement cp.   Same time and resource investment for roughly half of the meaningful rewards.

Some of the decisions here are interesting and open up pvp to other players...but I hope I've illustrated why those positives come at a major cost to at least some of your existing veteran players.

For me these changes are a complete disaster.   At least on paper.

Justice Jacks

Meander nailed it.  Looks like I'm taking an event off.*  Best of luck, folks. 

*  For the record, this will be the first non-t25 finish I'll have had in PVP in over 9 months of events and the first non-t10 since Obama was president.

DFiPL

I've hit 900 once, ever. It hasn't been fun, previously, and I've never been inclined to shield hop to do it, even if the HP spent is 'less' than HfH or whatever previous cover-buying mechanism existed.

Does 40 matches sound on the high side? Sure, maybe. That's like 13/day on top of PVE, so I could wish that came down some...but at the same time, this is a concrete path to a 4* cover now. The only thing preventing me from getting a cover if, say, Prof X yellow were to pop up, is me.

I can live with that.

I'll be participating in the test. I'm glad to see Demiurge trying something different here.

mr_X

40 matches for a 4* cover. Darn lets just make pvp just as grindy as pve. And 15cp only for final top 10 is massive step backwards. Not sounding like a very good idea. 

swordfishdata

entrailbucket said:

This is quite possibly the worst change that has ever been made in this game.  How is one supposed to prevent another player from hitting progression rewards if we can't take away points from them?  Please reconsider this, or let us give -1 win for each time we beat a player, or something.

Why on god's green earth would you want to prevent another player from hitting progression? Do you just enjoy ruining someone's day?

wymtime

I had to relog into the form after reading this announcement.  This is a horrible change to PVP.  4p matches to get a single 4* cover is horrible especially when you take match making into consideration.  I play PVP to get 1200 points and the CP.  this change will now significantly lower my ability to earn CP .  Now to get the same CP I will need to climb higher in PVP to possible get top 10.  

40 matches in one PVP is a significant amount.  I might play 30 matches in one PVP to get 1200 points with many of my fights wining 70 plus points.  D3 you are now punishing players who can score high.  I can't imagine the average player wins 40+ PVP matches in an event.  
You thought outside the box D3 but this is a swing and a miss.  Go back to the drawing board

mpqr7

40 wins should be for earlier players. For more advanced players, it should be 20 wins.

Matches for early players are a couple minutes each. Matches for advanced players can be 5 or more minutes each... yikes. Plus numerous health packs.

TetsujinOni

swordfishdata said:

entrailbucket said:

This is quite possibly the worst change that has ever been made in this game.  How is one supposed to prevent another player from hitting progression rewards if we can't take away points from them?  Please reconsider this, or let us give -1 win for each time we beat a player, or something.

Why on god's green earth would you want to prevent another player from hitting progression? Do you just enjoy ruining someone's day?

I think that's what he just said he wanted to be able to do? 

Some players like that sort of cut-throatness..... and it's not out of bounds in the mechanics of the game.

In fact, it's possible to really (and rather easily, compared to now) interfere with a players' ability to progress into the 5* tier in the new model, far more so than the old model.

Returning CP to the progression award table removes the ability for coordinated players to prevent a particular player from progressing into the 5* tier, and that change should be implemented before even one test of this plan. 

That would address the most significant structural issue, though Vhailorx's point about "time required to completely engage the game" growing instead of easing is well taken.

MPQ is rapidly heading for "more required time than a WoW Progression Raiding Guild" time requirements.

Pongie

Why is everyone concerned about trying to reach 1200 or beyond if this gets implemented? Progress rewards only care about the number of wins. I assume season progress will be the same once this gets implemented. That means points only matter for placement rewards, both personal and alliance. Points required for top 10 could either go up or down, but I'm thinking it will probably go down. There's no reason for players to hit 900 or 1200 anymore, the majority of players will simply get their x wins and stop. Overall points will be lower, but the same will be true for top x cutoffs. The meta will then adjust accordingly, alliance minimums will correspond with whatever the new norm will be.

TetsujinOni

Pongie said:

Why is everyone concerned about trying to reach 1200 or beyond if this gets implemented? Progress rewards only care about the number of wins. I assume season progress will be the same once this gets implemented. That means points only matter for placement rewards, both personal and alliance. Points required for top 10 could either go up or down, but I'm thinking it will probably go down. There's no reason for players to hit 900 or 1200 anymore, the majority of players will simply get their x wins and stop. Overall points will be lower, but the same will be true for top x cutoffs. The meta will then adjust accordingly, alliance minimums will correspond with whatever the new norm will be.

Which means MMR will suck so trying to jockey for points will suck unless you climb until MMR breaks as it does now, so .... you still need to climb, but the points available high will be more of a vacuum.

Maceo511

swordfishdata said:

entrailbucket said:

This is quite possibly the worst change that has ever been made in this game.  How is one supposed to prevent another player from hitting progression rewards if we can't take away points from them?  Please reconsider this, or let us give -1 win for each time we beat a player, or something.

Why on god's green earth would you want to prevent another player from hitting progression? Do you just enjoy ruining someone's day?

I'm with entrialbuffet, defense wins championships.  If he can keep players from getting CP and covers, that's less competition down the road.

PuceMoose

Likely it won't be much of a change for me - I typically play to 300 on the first day of a PvP event, take a few hits, then climb back up to hit 575 for the 10 CP in the last eight hours, and throw out an eight hour shield to keep my score. 16 wins for the 10 CP is equivalent to 36 points per win in the old system, which is usually around the minimum I shoot for anyway. In my MMR 575 is almost always good for top 50, and in the unlikely event I manage to hit 650 that usually clears me for top 25. 
+ less need to grind in "bursts" if you are only shooting for 575
- tasty 50+ point matches are less valuable

HaywireII

mr_X said:

40 matches for a 4* cover. Darn lets just make pvp just as grindy as pve.

Story Event players are typically doing 9 nodes x 4 plays each day of a 3 day event for their progression prize so that's 106 matches for that 4 star cover.  40 sounds like a deal.

Story Mode also has the final command points at the end of the progession so it does seem odd they wouldn't leave the Versus mode final command points in progression and move it to placement.  It would be nice if they move it back.

Punisher5784

This change has intrigued me to log in to give feedback.

At first glance I hate the change but after thinking about it I think I like it. This definitely nerfs the late joiners, but now you can safely join the PvP event early and slowly grab wins throughout the day. I definitely reached 575/900 in less fights but that climb to 900 was too stressful if I didn't have the right boosted 4*s. Now I won't need to care about losing pts or skipping beatable teams with less pts. I won't have to spend HP for shield hops. Idc about placement for a 3* cover if I can grab a 4* cover more frequently then it sounds like a win right now.

@Brigby
What I'm interested about is the future. Will this Win progression also apply to Shield Sim (100 wins)? Will it also change Season Progression (300 wins for 10pk)? Also since more PvP matches are required, can we go back to 4/6 match full progression in PvE?

smkspy

I keep saying over and over. Benchmarks for progression, you could still lose points between them keeping the pvp element in tact, but alloying people to battle their way between 800 to 900, for example, without fear of dropping a hundred fifty points during one match. 

This is just another overly complicated system that promotes more grindin....scl levels are gonna explode.