Do you like the new PvP system (progression rewards based on wins instead of points gained)?

Spudgutter

Qubort said:

 But just because you like pvp a particular way, why does everyone else have to like it?

What aspect of this new format is PVP? It's just a PVE event to 40 wins. They should rename the game to Marvel Grind Quest once this format is rolled out.

Very nice, addressing only part of my post, while selectively editing out the part where i also said 40 wins is too much.  Classy.  Also, we can talk about how PvP is called "Versus" if you want as well.  

If people actually read the thread and some of the positive responses, a lot of people talked about the variety of opponents they saw, which is also another departure from the normal versus structure, and another postive aspect to look forward to.

Spudgutter

Qubort said:

revskip said:

Most people who I see having these issues with dropping massive points aren't using shields correctly which is why they hit a giant wall.

That nail just got hit on it's head.

Too many people who refuse to use shields complain about losing points. Everyone should know roughly where they can float and when they'll have to hop. If someone doesn't know that, they should have no opinion of PVP because they have no concept of how to play it. 

Do you realize that they didn't always have shields?  Or time slices? Or many other variations and changes over the years?  The game changes, and people change with it.  Or do you think people who haven't been around long enough to know that should even have an opinion on that matter?

Qubort

Spudgutter said:

Qubort said:

revskip said:

Most people who I see having these issues with dropping massive points aren't using shields correctly which is why they hit a giant wall.

That nail just got hit on it's head.

Too many people who refuse to use shields complain about losing points. Everyone should know roughly where they can float and when they'll have to hop. If someone doesn't know that, they should have no opinion of PVP because they have no concept of how to play it. 

Do you realize that they didn't always have shields?  Or time slices? Or many other variations and changes over the years?  The game changes, and people change with it.  Or do you think people who haven't been around long enough to know that should even have an opinion on that matter?

I do realize that there has been an evolution of the game as I've been playing for years junior. 

Shields and slices aren't remotely new and have been around for YEARS. 

People that don't know how to utilize shields after years act surprised they don't hit top tier rewards. Gadzooks.   

Qubort

Spudgutter said:

Qubort said:

 But just because you like pvp a particular way, why does everyone else have to like it?

What aspect of this new format is PVP? It's just a PVE event to 40 wins. They should rename the game to Marvel Grind Quest once this format is rolled out.

Very nice, addressing only part of my post, while selectively editing out the part where i also said 40 wins is too much.  Classy.  Also, we can talk about how PvP is called "Versus" if you want as well.  

If people actually read the thread and some of the positive responses, a lot of people talked about the variety of opponents they saw, which is also another departure from the normal versus structure, and another postive aspect to look forward to.

I was commenting on a particular point (that many have made) and not your entire post. That's why I only copied the part referring to instead of 4 paragraphs. I also didn't want to misrepresent nuances of your overall comment and left your name off the quote completely. But feel free to attack me personally, now that is real classy.

Spudgutter

Gatekeeping pvp just because they discovered the game before others.  Check.
Thinks that playing longer than someone allows them to call someone else "junior" and it is supposed to be an insult.  Check.
Doesn't even know how long the other person has been actually playing, turning play time into a urination contest.  Check

Gee, by not quoting an individual, you really can avoid misrepresenting any nuances.  

DarthDeVo

revskip said:

DarthDeVo said:

Already posted this in the Worst Moment of the Day thread, but felt it would be appropriate here: 

I. HATE. PVP. Black Vortex, got to 899. Want to guess how many points I lost trying to win one more match? 140. ONE HUNDRED FORTY FREAKING POINTS!!! Old PvP can die in a frigging dumpster fire. I finally gave up after blowing well over 1000 HP on healthpacks and shields and actually being worse off than when I started. This. THIS is why people HATE PvP with a burning passion. 

Only consolation is the end of vaulting, so maybe I'll have a chance to actually pull X-23's red cover. Probably not, though. 

Next time shield up when you hit that 899 instead of just getting in that one more match.  Do some skipping to find an easier team to beat in that last match.  Use a couple of boosts when you are ready to unshield, do your match or even two easy matches and then reshield.  

Most people who I see having these issues with dropping massive points aren't using shields correctly which is why they hit a giant wall.  As you rise closer and closer to 900 you appear in more players' MMR including people who couldn't queue you earlier because your team is too weak relative to theirs.  When you cross that Rubicon the only way to not lose tons of points is to use shields optimally.  

And if for some reason you are just 100% against using shields (say a pure FTP player who also has need for more roster slots) then time your final climb at a time when fewer people are out hitting.  Time it with the end grind of a PVE event for instance, or at an off hour when fewer people are playing (I do this a lot at 4am EST when it is too late for the US players and morning commute time for the Western Europeans).  

I'm going back and forth in too many threads, so just copy and pasting the reply I already used in a different thread:

My whole climb was a mess from the word go. Didn't get any seed teams. I had already done one shield when I was at like 848 or something like that. I had already spent way too much time and resources, it was super late and I already should have been asleep and I just wanted to be done. 

In hindsight, I probably should have thrown up another shield, waited a few minutes, then tried for one more match. I was just so beyond over it at that point and wasn't thinking rationally. Price of not playing smart, I guess. Doesn't mean I have to like it or resign myself to saying, "Eh, that's just the way it is, I guess."

Oh, and how can I forget about all the crashes I had yesterday? Four at least. Once when I was just tooling around, switching between event screens, again on one of the Sinister Six side nodes I was farming for ISO, then twice during my climb in Black Vortex. Seriously should have just taken that as an omen.

TL;DR I was tired, ticked off and that led to me not playing smartly. I'll admit it. Right away after I finally threw in the towel was when I came here to rant, so high emotions there, too. Doesn't change the fact that I still strongly dislike current PvP and would love to see a change that also includes a compromise for vets. 

Most vets/5* players complain about spending too much time in this game, usually in regards to PvE. I don't play at that level, so I'll take them at their word, and from what I've read I can understand how scaling ramping up can make things take longer, that the rewards are no longer worth the time investment.

I think it's just about the opposite for earlier players; PvP is the huge time sink where they get few rewards for the time they invest. 

I can concede PvE is probably miserable and needs a fix for vets, even if that change isn't beneficial for me personally. Can you do the same in regards to PvP?

For what it's worth, I don't think either test was perfect, and each could use tweaks. It's a difficult needle to thread to adequately address the progression and placement needs of players at different levels of development, no doubt. I kind of thought that's what SCL was for, and does address some of those issues in some ways, but is sorely lacking in others. 

Blergh

Qubort said:

They also took out 15cp from progression. I don't know why anyone would cheer that move. 

The people cheering it were not getting the CP anyway. It makes no difference to them - so why should they care? There are more people averaging below 900 points than those getting 1200 - so why should the majority of players suffer for the few that do?

I mean you're now complaining you can't get the 15cp - so erm, kind of the same argument they have isn't it? That the top rewards are inaccessible to them? So why should they bother going past 575? 

Just seems a pretty hypocritical and short-sighted statement to make in that light. 

Qubort said:

 Also, 40 wins to get 4star progression equals 22.5 points per win. You have to play waaaay more matches to reach the 4 star cover.

Unless you wasn't reaching the four star in progression. 40 wins is quicker than never arriving. This just makes the above point more poignant. 

Qubort said:

 Why bother even calling it pvp?
[...]

What aspect of this new format is PVP? 

Couldn't the same aspect be applied to the 'cupcakes' you defended earlier? Couldn't you argue that its more like a player cooperating with player rather than versus on that basis? 

Just to be clear I'm not arguing that myself - as how anyone decides to play is entirely up to them. I'm just pointing out how reductionist your arguments are. And how they tend to contradict themselves. 

Qubort said: 

Too many people who refuse to use shields complain about losing points. Everyone should know roughly where they can float and when they'll have to hop. If someone doesn't know that, they should have no opinion of PVP because they have no concept of how to play it.  .  

There are no tutorials in game for new players to learn these strategies. If newer player are coming to forums complaining about issues around this nature - doesn't that indicate that there is something broken in the system itself that needs addressing? If they have no concept of how to play it from in game without outside council then maybe it's not their fault but that the design isn't intuitive enough anymore. That's what happens when you add piecemeal functionality to an existing simple system without any guidance. It become overly complex and needs more time that a casual mobile player would most probably be willing to invest. 

How would you fare if you never come across this forum? How many of the strategies that you use are your own or were developed with the help of others?

I'm just trying to broaden your perspective, kiddo. Not everyone's experience will be yours. 

Ducky

***Stop attacking each other or I'm going to hand out warnings***

Ducky

Now with my mod voice out of the way, I think they should keep the CP in placement and limit it to t10. However, I also think there should be SCL tethering so high rosters can't go further than 1 level lower than their highest SCL. 

I think this would help bring competition back into PvP and help lessen some of the outside collaboration going on, and also lower scoring so that other players aren't completely discouraged by the monster scores they see at the top of their brackets. If it doesn't, then ppl are free to help others take their rewards by not hitting them. Not rly my issue. 

My gut also tells me that this test change in PvP reward structure is just the first of several changes they want to make. And no, I have no insider knowledge regarding this, just a gut feeling. Also, they've changed PvE quite a bit over the past year and change, so it has got to be PvP's turn, right? 

turbomoose

A yes for me as it made it more fun because losing the odd fight didn't slow my progress in completing the challenge 

maybe you could get to 900 in fewer than 40 fights but I rarely get that high before I'm attacked by all the big hitters with five star rosters 

also I'm never higher than top 20 so have zero chance of getting 4* rewards for top 10

Rod5

One point that seems to be misunderstood is around shield hopping and being hit several times during one fight...as soon as you're not shielded, people can see your team and fight your team.

The longer you're unshielded, the more people are likely to hit you. If you get hit several times in one fight, it's because you've been out long enough for people to see and hit you. They didn't see and hit you in one fight - they saw you earlier and have taken untill that fight to hit. 

You learn how long you can stay out at whatever score, and tailor your hops accordingly. If you're in 4* world, at 900 it is not very long in whichever slice.

Spudgutter

Rod5 said:

One point that seems to be misunderstood is around shield hopping and being hit several times during one fight...as soon as you're not shielded, people can see your team and fight your team.

The longer you're unshielded, the more people are likely to hit you. If you get hit several times in one fight, it's because you've been out long enough for people to see and hit you. They didn't see and hit you in one fight - they saw you earlier and have taken untill that fight to hit. 

You learn how long you can stay out at whatever score, and tailor your hops accordingly. If you're in 4* world, at 900 it is not very long in whichever slice.

Which actually plays into the argument FOR progression based pvp.  People have made the complaint forever about pve for the same reason;  for optimal play, you have to play a certain amount, at a certain time.  

What some people are saying here is that they want to play a game when they want to play it, not around some weird and sometimes unknown play schedule.  

Why does someone, who is lucky enough to play at that schedule, get rewarded, while a fan of the game and marvel universe, who plays at every opportunity they can in their busy life, gets less?  If you were the business, wouldn't you try to do something that accommodates both?  

J0nnythejig

I personally hated it,  with 3 kids and a pretty stressful job I do a one hour climb in the last 3 hours of an event and shield up for (mostly) a T25 finish.  This was all gravy for me as I got the 10CP from progression and 95% of the time the 4* cover which I was always happy with....I'm ambivalent on the 1.2k 15CP move into placement as I suspect in most cases that score would place someone there anyway.  I just feel it's forcing people to grind for everything,  and I'd find it tough to find a window to get the 4* progression....takes a lot of fun out of the game.

revskip

Spudgutter said:

Rod5 said:

One point that seems to be misunderstood is around shield hopping and being hit several times during one fight...as soon as you're not shielded, people can see your team and fight your team.

The longer you're unshielded, the more people are likely to hit you. If you get hit several times in one fight, it's because you've been out long enough for people to see and hit you. They didn't see and hit you in one fight - they saw you earlier and have taken untill that fight to hit. 

You learn how long you can stay out at whatever score, and tailor your hops accordingly. If you're in 4* world, at 900 it is not very long in whichever slice.

Which actually plays into the argument FOR progression based pvp.  People have made the complaint forever about pve for the same reason;  for optimal play, you have to play a certain amount, at a certain time.  

What some people are saying here is that they want to play a game when they want to play it, not around some weird and sometimes unknown play schedule. 

Why does someone, who is lucky enough to play at that schedule, get rewarded, while a fan of the game and marvel universe, who plays at every opportunity they can in their busy life, gets less?  If you were the business, wouldn't you try to do something that accommodates both?  

Shields allow you to do exactly that Spud.  Don't want to play in the last 3 hours?  Use a shield and leave the event early.  Want to climb early to your float point and then play a little on the last day, you can do that too.  Want to put up a score in the 3000 range, just keep shield hopping throughout.  You can time things out to play exactly when you want once you understand how to effectively climb and shield.  

Blergh

Spudgutter said:

Which actually plays into the argument FOR progression based pvp.  People have made the complaint forever about pve for the same reason;  for optimal play, you have to play a certain amount, at a certain time.  

What some people are saying here is that they want to play a game when they want to play it, not around some weird and sometimes unknown play schedule.  

Why does someone, who is lucky enough to play at that schedule, get rewarded, while a fan of the game and marvel universe, who plays at every opportunity they can in their busy life, gets less?  If you were the business, wouldn't you try to do something that accommodates both?  

The stupid thing is I don't think they need to introduce a win count to achieve those things - they just have to tweak the way the shield system operates. 

Instead of hour-timed shields and count downs why not just introduce a system that locks your score in when you shield. They could play around with how it does - at the 100 mark - 50 mark - exact score. - point charge as well as hp - whatever.  The player is not on a timer, and they protect their progression to an extent - whilst still buying shields. I think exact would be better for the placement climbers high end - as it'd most probably create a need to play in the last hour otherwise - unless there was some kind of cash out system too that perserved exact score......?  *shrugs* I dunno. Stuff like that needs time to workout and I don't care enough to spend the time figuring it out - as really - whats the point? 

There could be various ways to introduce penalties for quick hops to discourage abuse - like increased HP charges - decreased iso win or levy - reduced points or cool-down or something. I suppose you could still design around there being three shields with various cool down lengths it just doesn't hide you for a limited time.  Keeps it pay to win and people can still compete for placement - but means you don't have to put a clock-watch on your life. Just pop back whenever. I mean you wouldn't even need to lock in scores for that aspect just get rid of the timers. 

You could play with the fact they are taken from queues when shielded too.... maybe - depending on how it'd be implemented. 

I am not saying it's perfect - as it'd most probably cause point inflation and might not be as tactical as the shield system in  place - but it is just two minutes of random thought. Am  sure there are solutions to those problems I can't be bothered to think about as I am not a designer nor wish to be.

But me introducing a full fleshed out system or even a fun system isn't the point of this post, so feel free to rip it apart. It was literally two minutes of thought - and that's the point. 

I'm just saying if you really wanted to sit down and think about it there maybe better ways to merge the progression element, the causal element with the competitive element rather than a grindy win system that just doesn't seem to fit with the current model. It just seems like an odd solution to me.It feels like something that has been imported from other gaming systems and doesn't quite belong. 

I expect there are loads of ways to tweak the existing shield system in a fun way that can retain the competitive element with the casual without adding something that doesn't quite fit or works against itself.

But maybe they did contemplate this kind of change for hours and it'd be rubbish and I'm just not dedicating enough time /thought /effort to see why. But at a cursory glance - as that's all I've given it - such an overall doesn't seem necessary. 

FokaiHI

I think for the most part, people don't want to spend the 75 or 150 hp to get the cover at 900. Wait. These are the same people spending a 100 hp/ day for that Heroic token. That wouldn'take sense though. So obviously I must be wrong. 

Spudgutter

revskip said:

Spudgutter said:

Rod5 said:

One point that seems to be misunderstood is around shield hopping and being hit several times during one fight...as soon as you're not shielded, people can see your team and fight your team.

The longer you're unshielded, the more people are likely to hit you. If you get hit several times in one fight, it's because you've been out long enough for people to see and hit you. They didn't see and hit you in one fight - they saw you earlier and have taken untill that fight to hit. 

You learn how long you can stay out at whatever score, and tailor your hops accordingly. If you're in 4* world, at 900 it is not very long in whichever slice.

Which actually plays into the argument FOR progression based pvp.  People have made the complaint forever about pve for the same reason;  for optimal play, you have to play a certain amount, at a certain time.  

What some people are saying here is that they want to play a game when they want to play it, not around some weird and sometimes unknown play schedule. 

Why does someone, who is lucky enough to play at that schedule, get rewarded, while a fan of the game and marvel universe, who plays at every opportunity they can in their busy life, gets less?  If you were the business, wouldn't you try to do something that accommodates both?  

Shields allow you to do exactly that Spud.  Don't want to play in the last 3 hours?  Use a shield and leave the event early.  Want to climb early to your float point and then play a little on the last day, you can do that too.  Want to put up a score in the 3000 range, just keep shield hopping throughout.  You can time things out to play exactly when you want once you understand how to effectively climb and shield.  

My point is, what if i wanted to play in the last 3 hours?  With the point loss system, you get pummeled three steps back for every step forward.  I actually already play by the second example you give. I play to the 10 cp, the go for 900 when i have the time, and shield the rest of the event.  

I've said it before, 40 was way too high. During the test, i played to 900 and stopped, probably wasn't even 20 matches.  

My point is, we have a system that a lot of people people complain about negative aspect "X."  They say they stop playing after a certain point because of "X."  If you are in charge, wouldn't you try to address that X? 

Spudgutter

Blergh said:

Spudgutter said:

Which actually plays into the argument FOR progression based pvp.  People have made the complaint forever about pve for the same reason;  for optimal play, you have to play a certain amount, at a certain time.  

What some people are saying here is that they want to play a game when they want to play it, not around some weird and sometimes unknown play schedule.  

Why does someone, who is lucky enough to play at that schedule, get rewarded, while a fan of the game and marvel universe, who plays at every opportunity they can in their busy life, gets less?  If you were the business, wouldn't you try to do something that accommodates both?  

The stupid thing is I don't think they need to introduce a win count to achieve those things - they just have to tweak the way the shield system operates. 

Instead of hour-timed shields and count downs why not just introduce a system that locks your score in when you shield. They could play around with how it does - at the 100 mark - 50 mark - exact score. - point charge as well as hp - whatever.  The player is not on a timer, and they protect their progression to an extent - whilst still buying shields. I think exact would be better for the placement climbers high end - as it'd most probably create a need to play in the last hour otherwise - unless there was some kind of cash out system too that perserved exact score......?  *shrugs* I dunno. Stuff like that needs time to workout and I don't care enough to spend the time figuring it out - as really - whats the point? 

There could be various ways to introduce penalties for quick hops to discourage abuse - like increased HP charges - decreased iso win or levy - reduced points or cool-down or something. I suppose you could still design around there being three shields with various cool down lengths it just doesn't hide you for a limited time.  Keeps it pay to win and people can still compete for placement - but means you don't have to put a clock-watch on your life. Just pop back whenever. I mean you wouldn't even need to lock in scores for that aspect just get rid of the timers. 

You could play with the fact they are taken from queues when shielded too.... maybe - depending on how it'd be implemented. 

I am not saying it's perfect - as it'd most probably cause point inflation and might not be as tactical as the shield system in  place - but it is just two minutes of random thought. Am  sure there are solutions to those problems I can't be bothered to think about as I am not a designer nor wish to be.

But me introducing a full fleshed out system or even a fun system isn't the point of this post, so feel free to rip it apart. It was literally two minutes of thought - and that's the point. 

I'm just saying if you really wanted to sit down and think about it there maybe better ways to merge the progression element, the causal element with the competitive element rather than a grindy win system that just doesn't seem to fit with the current model. It just seems like an odd solution to me.It feels like something that has been imported from other gaming systems and doesn't quite belong. 

I expect there are loads of ways to tweak the existing shield system in a fun way that can retain the competitive element with the casual without adding something that doesn't quite fit or works against itself.

But maybe they did contemplate this kind of change for hours and it'd be rubbish and I'm just not dedicating enough time /thought /effort to see why. But at a cursory glance - as that's all I've given it - such an overall doesn't seem necessary. 

That's the most infuriating thing about this whole issue, and game in general. Whenever they make a change, it takes two days or less for the announcement thread come up with half a dozen good ideas that would address the issue much better.  But for whatever reason, we never hear WHY they don't implement something.  They wonder why the forum gets rabid sometimes, it's the mushroom principle.  Stop keeping us in the dark and fed excrement.

How hard would it be to just come in, reply to a comment or two, and say "Oh, that's not feasible with the code," or "We thought of that too, but want to try this first."

sambrookjm

I really liked the change. Out of curiosity, I was keeping track of my score vs number of wins for the various rewards. The 575 point reward I got when my score was in the 520s. I nearly hit the 800 marker (3-star cover) with 27 wins, and about 600 points. I may be in the minority, but I was getting the rewards quicker with the # of wins than I was with the points, especially with the backslide in points caused by a retaliation. Too bad defensive wins didn't count as a win, though...my team got three or four of those.

Stick

Defensive wins did count, I'm pretty sure.