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

Options
1…6791112…32

Comments

  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Xenoberyll said:
    Why don't you combine the systems and have the progression rewards up to the 4star cover at wins and leave the 15cp at 1200 points. Wouldn't it be fun to see how many players stop at 1200, earning the CP but not the 4star cover because no way in hell they'll do 40 matches?
    This is actually a really good idea, better than the CP on T10 for sure.
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,561 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Mercator said:
    get out of slice 2 or 5 and come play in slice 1,3 or 4  ... then you know what hes talking about
    Why would I want to do that if those are the requirements?
  • acescracked
    acescracked Posts: 1,197 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2017
    Options
    broll said:
    Daiches said:
    Wow, that's the dumbest idea I have ever seen. I don't think anyone will enjoy getting progression by beating the same seals over and over and over and over and over, but if that's the toxic environment they want to create, okay.
    And taking away 15cp from that many people in scl 6 to 8 to give them to people in scl 1-5, who actively shouldn't be spending cp yet until you introduce scl based scaling? Dumb dumb dumb.
    You don't think anyone will like this?  Have you seen the positive replies in this very thread?

    This change is bad for a very small percentage of players based on what I'm reading (mainly those in 5* land and/or regularly easily hitting 900-1200 with less than 40 wins), but it's probably a positive change for 90% or higher of the players.  One of the biggest complaints for as long as I've been playing is the fact that PvP progression is hard to get because it's like walking a sand dune, the higher you get the faster you backslide.  This takes that out and let's all progress be guaranteed (which is what progress should be IMO) and makes it easier for anyone who's willing to put the time in get max PvP progression (and without throwing money/resources away on shields)
    Are you interested in ever growing your 5* roster? If you are you'll hate the game. 

    Pve will become an unfun nasty grind with 55k health dark avengers.

    PvP the only fun mode where your built 5* roster would've help you hit 1200 & get T50 and occasionally T25 rewards is gone. Edit- You'll be T25  a little more than occasionally, :)

    You say, well I don't need 5*s. Then why play if getting the top characters makes the game suck?
  • granne
    granne Posts: 852 Critical Contributor
    edited July 2017
    Options
    I'm going to reserve judgement on how this will affect me until I've actually tried it. On the face of it, 40 wins for a 4* cover seems manageable for me.

    It certainly does seem like this is going to suck for high-end and low-end players, though. 5* players are going to have to play many more matches for fewer rewards, and 2*-3* players are going to be ground into the dirt by 4* players.

    I can see the problems they're trying to solve, but I hope this is only a first step, because otherwise? Eesh.

    Oh, and please put the top CP progression back in. Moving that to placement makes no sense. And I say this as someone who has never even sniffed it.
  • Meander
    Meander Posts: 267 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    Daiches said:
    Wow, that's the dumbest idea I have ever seen. I don't think anyone will enjoy getting progression by beating the same seals over and over and over and over and over, but if that's the toxic environment they want to create, okay.
    And taking away 15cp from that many people in scl 6 to 8 to give them to people in scl 1-5, who actively shouldn't be spending cp yet until you introduce scl based scaling? Dumb dumb dumb.
    Daiches is dead on here.  This is a redistribution of wealth.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Dumb dumb dumb
  • Ledonjon
    Ledonjon Posts: 11 Just Dropped In
    Options
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,561 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    sh81 said:


    The PVP changes appear to rather negatively effect the 5* rosters.  But guess what?  The PVE testing screws absolutely everyone EXCEPT the 5* rosters.  Swings and roundabouts...
    Yeah, only we haven't heard about a new test, let alone an implementation of PVE changes for weeks, so 5* rosters are still screwed in PVE.

    Instead of finally rolling out the PVE changes they're coming up with this abomination.
  • veny
    veny Posts: 834 Critical Contributor
    edited July 2017
    Options
    Borstock said:
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
    Kidding, right? NOW it takes me one hour to get on 575 points and i never go under 30 point rivals, to it is less than 20 wins.
    To get 4* (impossible for me right now, cuz i am loosing points faster than i am gaining them) it would take me more 2 hours (which is acceptable, comparable to PvE), but 90 second per match is a nonsense. BUT i must admit this change comes with brand new strategy - picking weak foes that gives few points only to get progress reward faster.
  • jamesh
    jamesh Posts: 1,600 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    broll said:
    It would be nice if they counted defensive wins also, that would make the number sting a little less and make 40 wins much easier for people also trying for placement (since they'd be the target of more attacks).
    I can understand why they don't include defensive wins for the same reason they discount the points gained from defensive wins: if they did count, then people would start retreating at each other using the loaner 3* plus two characters they don't care about taking the health hit on.  It'd be much faster than actually playing 40 matches.
  • Dartmaster01
    Dartmaster01 Posts: 634 Critical Contributor
    edited July 2017
    Options
    This looks like a terrible change. Now requiring 40 matches to get what I was getting in 14-20. And no chance at the 15 cp now. Every change that has dropped this year has made me wonder if you guys are just trying to shut your game down. If that's the case, just shut your servers down. Quit torturing us and yourselves with this "we're trying to make things better" non-sense. No one wants to have to play longer to get the same cr@p. If this change goes permanent, I'll be done with pvp. **** are you people thinking?
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,561 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    veny said:
    Borstock said:
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
    Kidding, right? NOW it takes me one hour to get on 575 points and i never go under 30 point rivals, to it is less than 20 wins.
    To get 4* (impossible for me right now, cuz i am loosing points faster than i am gaining them) it would take me more 2 hours (which is acceptable, comparable to PvE), but 90 second per match is a nonsense. BUT i must admit this change comes with brand new strategy - picking weak foes that gives few points only to get progress reward faster.
    I don't understand what you're talking about. It sounds like you're saying this is a negative change, and yet you've just stated that getting a 4* cover now is impossible for you. This change makes it possible, because all you have to do is win matches you were apparently already playing and winning.

    I've never counted how many matches it takes for me to get to 900. It's way more than 900 / 40. This is because of all the times my score goes down when I'm attacked and because at a certain point the matchmaking system stops giving me anything more than 30 pts per match. From a conservative estimate, I'd say that I probably come close to 40 already. The benefit here is that, if I want that 4* cover, I can now play on my own schedule.

    The way this will be tricky is what happens if I get to 900 or so with 32 matches won/played. I want to keep my points for the overall season, but I can't stop playing because I need more wins. So I have to fight matches with my shield down, and I'm going to get clobbered during that time. So to get to 40, it's probably going to cost me points for the overall season. The only way to avoid this is to rush to 40 ASAP and then play for points later.
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 9,669 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    sh81 said:
    veny said:
    Borstock said:
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
    Kidding, right? NOW it takes me one hour to get on 575 points and i never go under 30 point rivals, to it is less than 20 wins.
    To get 4* (impossible for me right now, cuz i am loosing points faster than i am gaining them) it would take me more 2 hours (which is acceptable, comparable to PvE), but 90 second per match is a nonsense. BUT i must admit this change comes with brand new strategy - picking weak foes that gives few points only to get progress reward faster.
    PVP last 3 days dont they?  So to get the 4* you would need to do 13/13/14 wins each day.

    Maybe thats an hour each day, I dont know.

    I do know, for me, that will mean no health packs, no shields, and the ability to ease up on PVE as well.
    With seed teams at the beginning though (assuming you get them) it will probably be more like 16/12/12.
  • Wjohnson992
    Wjohnson992 Posts: 175 Tile Toppler
    Options
    This is great. SCL scaling is coming which will allow 5* rosters to sweep PVE and hoover up the 4* placement prizes. This change actually gives the rest of us a chance to get a 4* cover. This is a move for the better!
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,561 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    sh81 said:

    Borstock said:

    The way this will be tricky is what happens if I get to 900 or so with 32 matches won/played. I want to keep my points for the overall season, but I can't stop playing because I need more wins. So I have to fight matches with my shield down, and I'm going to get clobbered during that time. So to get to 40, it's probably going to cost me points for the overall season. The only way to avoid this is to rush to 40 ASAP and then play for points later.
    As stated, Im far from serious in PVP, but, this would be the case for everyone wouldnt it?

    So nobody would be getting the same points for placement as they used to, but you will still all be competing will you not?  Im sure shield hoping strategies etc will emerge, and that for those playing seriously things will level out much like they were before.

    Id hope so at least.
    I hadn't considered that, but I don't see any inherent flaw in your logic. We'll have to see how it plays out, but I think you're probably right.
  • Roland113
    Roland113 Posts: 298 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    As a PvE player, I think this is a great change to PvP.  Personally, I'm a fan.

Categories