PVP Points

1235»

Comments

  • GurlBYE
    GurlBYE Posts: 1,218 Chairperson of the Boards
    Also if you have to use cooperation in the games pvp to prosper, that should be a really be highlight there.

    There aren't any group prizes, so why exactly is it that many feel this system needs to have mandatory cooperation? 
  • Calnexin
    Calnexin Posts: 1,078 Chairperson of the Boards
    ZootSax said:
     if I followed the general consensus of not hitting any targets less than 38-40 pts (the break-even point for scoring), I would likely have to stop at 300 or less in my progression. 
    I have a similar climb.  I'm always confused by the advice "skip a lot and wait until you find someone worth at least 45 points."  That tends not to happen for me either.  More often I cycle through 4-5 opponents worth 17-32 until the stack disappears entirely.  If I do find something worth more, it's usually something I can't win, like double champ 5* or maxchamp boosted 4*s.

    MMR seems to have a sweet spot.  If you're in the donut hole, all you can do is hit those low point matches, shield as soon as you're high enough to be seen by the big dogs, and pray you get lucky for those last 1-2 match queues to push you past your target threshold.

    I suppose that's what shield check rooms are for - so you can queue worthy points for the short time they're available.
  • aa25
    aa25 Posts: 348 Mover and Shaker
    GurlBYE said:
    Also if you have to use cooperation in the games pvp to prosper, that should be a really be highlight there.

    There aren't any group prizes, so why exactly is it that many feel this system needs to have mandatory cooperation? 
    I think the system is designed to have cooperation and the progression rewards are group prizes. The system is designed based on pts win and pts lose. For the most part until your are at the top, the winner takes 2x of the pts that the one who lose lost (or maybe even more than 2x, I don't remember). So the net sum of the pts between this two players is increased as a result of the match. The best scenario comes when the one who lose is shielded, so the winner gains pts without the one who loses losing any pts.

    The more win/loss that happens will make more pts available for players to reach higher progression.


  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,501 Chairperson of the Boards
    Calnexin said:

    That tends not to happen for me either.  More often I cycle through 4-5 opponents worth 17-32 until the stack disappears entirely.  If I do find something worth more, it's usually something I can't win, like double champ 5* or maxchamp boosted 4*s.

    This happens for a very specific MMR related reason that you can take advantage off if your prepared. Specifically the reason why you see the cluster in scores is because your cache was established in the past when higher points were available. The stack "dissapears" because the system has worked through the existing old cache and is queing targets that are currently out. The key inference is that as the time between when the que cache lengthens, You will see a more pronounced change between "advertised" scores vs "real time" score, this was the clue that told people that caches and the points within can be manipulated.
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited August 2017
    aa25 said:
    GurlBYE said:
    Also if you have to use cooperation in the games pvp to prosper, that should be a really be highlight there.

    There aren't any group prizes, so why exactly is it that many feel this system needs to have mandatory cooperation? 
    I think the system is designed to have cooperation and the progression rewards are group prizes. The system is designed based on pts win and pts lose. For the most part until your are at the top, the winner takes 2x of the pts that the one who lose lost (or maybe even more than 2x, I don't remember). So the net sum of the pts between this two players is increased as a result of the match. The best scenario comes when the one who lose is shielded, so the winner gains pts without the one who loses losing any pts.

    The more win/loss that happens will make more pts available for players to reach higher progression.


    Personal progression prizes are really "group prizes"... yeah... ok...
  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,011 Chairperson of the Boards
    aa25 said:
    GurlBYE said:
    Also if you have to use cooperation in the games pvp to prosper, that should be a really be highlight there.

    There aren't any group prizes, so why exactly is it that many feel this system needs to have mandatory cooperation? 
    I think the system is designed to have cooperation and the progression rewards are group prizes. The system is designed based on pts win and pts lose. For the most part until your are at the top, the winner takes 2x of the pts that the one who lose lost (or maybe even more than 2x, I don't remember). So the net sum of the pts between this two players is increased as a result of the match. The best scenario comes when the one who lose is shielded, so the winner gains pts without the one who loses losing any pts.

    The more win/loss that happens will make more pts available for players to reach higher progression.


    Exactly right.  Every time a shielded player is hit it adds points to the shard without removing any.  Which is what encourages the cooperation.  It also requires spending which is a positive thing for demi.  Say player A joins early and gets to 900 on day 1. (S)he then hops several times to get to 1200.  On each of those hops because s(he) is worth more and more points to more and more people s(he) gets queued up and hit repeatedly.  As long as s(he) is shielded when those hits come in the points are added to the shard and trickle down to everyone else.  

    In order to be able to queue that roster you might need to be past 600 points (5* roster) or 800 points (4* roster) to have them appear in your MMR with any team they might put out.  So if you climb to 575 and stop and are less than a 5* roster you have very little chance to queue them.  There are definitely choke points at every MMR where points get a little thin and you have to skip more than usual to get higher point targets.  With my roster it happens around 700 points.  

    I might have to skip 10 times to find anything over 38 points once I hit that spot.  Might be 20 if it is early in an event and few high scores are out.  Knowing that I try to hit my float point and stop there while occasionally queuing names I know climb high so that when I am ready to climb again I already have some good point targets available. Then I hit 3 decent targets and try to find one or two more to get over 800 where MMR opens up.  At that point I shield and from there on out every time I play it is one or two matches, three if insanely fast.  I use boosts on the hops to make it quicker.  I also try to communicate with the other people who I am hitting to get them while they are shielded since at that point I don't want to hurt their ability to progress either.  That communication helps everyone, even people who aren't communicating because it inflates the points available.  Which means better targets all the way down the line.  

    I generally spend a few thousand ISO on skipping opponents during a given event to find targets worth hitting.  That ISO is almost always paid back with the rewards I get for winning matches plus the ISO in progression and placement.  
  • SpringSoldier
    SpringSoldier Posts: 265 Mover and Shaker
    If they move 10 cp at 900, I won't be playing PVP at all.

    PVE already has more ISO for each match+ signal intercepts and I can go through a whole round without spending any hp or ISO on shielding, skipping or health packs. And no coordination with anyone required. Yes, it's best to play at certain times if you want a good placement reward, but I can pretty much play whenever I want and still get full progression.

    I only have 5 champed 4* (Medusa, Carol, Blade, Coulson and A.Venom), usually only of them is boosted and they get injured quite quickly. I usually drop out at 575, not because I'm bored or afraid of taking chances, but because I'm out of health packs for my 4* and all the teams I see are stronger 4* and unleveled 5*. Not to mention that fighting against Medusa/Carnage takes half a day by itself.

    I prefer the easy wins in PVE over the challenging and competitive PVP. Watching Thanos and Strange take out the goons is entertaining enough for me. I don't necessarily want PVP to change, I just wanted to suggest to the OP that PVE simply seems like the best and most fun option in the game.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    revskip said:
    aa25 said:
    GurlBYE said:
    Also if you have to use cooperation in the games pvp to prosper, that should be a really be highlight there.

    There aren't any group prizes, so why exactly is it that many feel this system needs to have mandatory cooperation? 
    I think the system is designed to have cooperation and the progression rewards are group prizes. The system is designed based on pts win and pts lose. For the most part until your are at the top, the winner takes 2x of the pts that the one who lose lost (or maybe even more than 2x, I don't remember). So the net sum of the pts between this two players is increased as a result of the match. The best scenario comes when the one who lose is shielded, so the winner gains pts without the one who loses losing any pts.

    The more win/loss that happens will make more pts available for players to reach higher progression.


    Exactly right.  Every time a shielded player is hit it adds points to the shard without removing any.  Which is what encourages the cooperation.  It also requires spending which is a positive thing for demi.  Say player A joins early and gets to 900 on day 1. (S)he then hops several times to get to 1200.  On each of those hops because s(he) is worth more and more points to more and more people s(he) gets queued up and hit repeatedly.  As long as s(he) is shielded when those hits come in the points are added to the shard and trickle down to everyone else.  

    In order to be able to queue that roster you might need to be past 600 points (5* roster) or 800 points (4* roster) to have them appear in your MMR with any team they might put out.  So if you climb to 575 and stop and are less than a 5* roster you have very little chance to queue them.  There are definitely choke points at every MMR where points get a little thin and you have to skip more than usual to get higher point targets.  With my roster it happens around 700 points.  

    I might have to skip 10 times to find anything over 38 points once I hit that spot.  Might be 20 if it is early in an event and few high scores are out.  Knowing that I try to hit my float point and stop there while occasionally queuing names I know climb high so that when I am ready to climb again I already have some good point targets available. Then I hit 3 decent targets and try to find one or two more to get over 800 where MMR opens up.  At that point I shield and from there on out every time I play it is one or two matches, three if insanely fast.  I use boosts on the hops to make it quicker.  I also try to communicate with the other people who I am hitting to get them while they are shielded since at that point I don't want to hurt their ability to progress either.  That communication helps everyone, even people who aren't communicating because it inflates the points available.  Which means better targets all the way down the line.  

    I generally spend a few thousand ISO on skipping opponents during a given event to find targets worth hitting.  That ISO is almost always paid back with the rewards I get for winning matches plus the ISO in progression and placement.  
    I wouldn't call it exactly right, i am not convinced the system is *designed* (my emphasis) for cooperation. It sure encourages it, but due to the fact that in game chat is limited to alliance, and is garbage overall, that might not be the right word.

    And i don't mean to beat the dead horse, your post is great and hopefully helpful to several people, but...

    This information is obviously not widely available or known.  If you dont visit the forum and read through 5 pages of responses just in this thread alone, you don't learn it.  Heck, the thread ojsp linked is from May 2015!  

    If they (the devs) had something in game that directed to some sort of FAQ on pvp play, I would be more inclined to say "yeah, this is the way they intended it."  But they don't.  And since they got rid of cupcakes and ran a test pvp that had win based progression, i think it is safe to infer they want to make some sort of adjustment in pvp, presumably to increase engagement from lesser rosters.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    OJSP said:
    Spudgutter said:
    If they (the devs) had something in game that directed to some sort of FAQ on pvp play, I would be more inclined to say "yeah, this is the way they intended it."
    But, i've posted earlier in this same thread. The Help section in the game eventually points the player to the forum.  I think the forum migration might have something to do with difficulty in finding information, but most of the information are still here if we know where to look for it.
    Somehow threads like this one that was stickied in the old one, https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/35008/the-faq-project/p1 , became lost in the ether.

    As for the developer's intended way to play versus, it requires a bit more digging in the forum than i have the time for. But, most of these discussions have occured before. 
    Now there is a thread i haven't visited in awhile.  It still references rubberbanding and the true heal controversy ha!  That said, the advice in there for pvp is pretty solid.  
  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,011 Chairperson of the Boards
    Spudgutter said:
    OJSP said:
    Spudgutter said:
    If they (the devs) had something in game that directed to some sort of FAQ on pvp play, I would be more inclined to say "yeah, this is the way they intended it."
    But, i've posted earlier in this same thread. The Help section in the game eventually points the player to the forum.  I think the forum migration might have something to do with difficulty in finding information, but most of the information are still here if we know where to look for it.
    Somehow threads like this one that was stickied in the old one, https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/35008/the-faq-project/p1 , became lost in the ether.

    As for the developer's intended way to play versus, it requires a bit more digging in the forum than i have the time for. But, most of these discussions have occured before. 
    Now there is a thread i haven't visited in awhile.  It still references rubberbanding and the true heal controversy ha!  That said, the advice in there for pvp is pretty solid.  

    Anyone who is obsessive enough about the game will generally flock to the official forums, I know that was the first place I came after I decided that I liked the game a few weeks in.  

    All of this information is somewhat easily sussed out in the Tips and Guides section of the forum which is imho the friendliest and most helpful part of the entire forum.  So much great info there and even when some of it is a bit dated you can always create a new thread to hit up specifics.  

    That is true for almost every game these days, whether a platform game or a FTP.  If you want info on the game you venture to the interwebs and it is available.  For the most casual of match 3 people none of that info is necessary but in order to play almost anything competitively you have to do a little research.  Games just don't come with instruction manuals anymore (although I miss them, I remember dog-earring my copy of the King's Quest 3 manual so badly I eventually had to make a black and white photocopy of it).  
  • Alsmir
    Alsmir Posts: 508 Critical Contributor
    Phumade said:
    Alsmir said:

    What's with the obsession to prove that PvP is so challenging that only elite players can grasp it? We're still playing match-3 against AI.
    The difference is that placements and results are based on how efficiently you play compared to another  real person and not an ai.

    (...)


    How is that different than PvE that we have?
  • Calnexin
    Calnexin Posts: 1,078 Chairperson of the Boards
    Phumade said:
    ake advantage off if your prepared. Specifically the reason why you see the cluster in scores is because your cache was established in the past when higher points were available. The stack "dissapears" because the system has worked through the existing old cache and is queing targets that are currently out. The key inference is that as the time between when the que cache lengthens, You will see a more pronounced change between "advertised" scores vs "real time" score, this was the clue that told people that caches and the points within can be manipulated.
    I thought the cache refreshes whenever you win a match, and the only thing that stayed was the current targets.  If I'm seeing the old cache with old points as I skip, it's not making any difference to the scores I receive.  The points displayed tend to be right around that amount if I land on it after a skip.  The only time there's a wide difference is when it's an active target or retaliation, but that goes either way.  Sometimes they're worth far less because they didn't bother to shield.
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,501 Chairperson of the Boards
    Alsmir said:
    Phumade said:
    Alsmir said:

    What's with the obsession to prove that PvP is so challenging that only elite players can grasp it? We're still playing match-3 against AI.
    The difference is that placements and results are based on how efficiently you play compared to another  real person and not an ai.

    (...)


    How is that different than PvE that we have?
    You've missed this key fundamental distinction.

    In PVE.  All you can control is:
    1.  What specific time you chose to start a match. (understanding the clock)
    2.  The order in which you chose to play a node. (understand the math of node points, will always tell you the highest scoring path irrespective of Easy, normal, hard labels)

    In PVP, You control.

    1.  Time you start the match (i.e. choosing to play cooperatively or negatively (I use negative as the absence of coordination play, maybe there's a better word)

    2.  The key difference is that you have more power than choosing the order in playing a node.  You have the ability to decline to play a node and play a different team (with a different owner) for similar points or even choose to withdraw your points and que off the table.

    This extra distinction is what makes PVP scoring much more strategic, in depth, and where human negotiation/collaboration/collusion occurs. 

    To tie this back to the surfing analogy.

    PVE would be akin to surfing different deserted empty beaches.  Some beaches are easy to surf and some are harder to surf.  But other human surfers don't impact your ability to catch and ride any one specific wave.  
    This is why I think most noobs like pve.  The game is plenty challenging and other players have no effect on the your points or difficulty of play.

    PVP is surfing those same beaches, with 20 other surfers of wildly different abilities.  Specifically,  while you may have an optimal strategy to get to a specific spot.  You may not realize that another players strategy/activities might completely override your plan or position.  This is why understanding the players in your shard is much more important in pvp vs pve.

    Analogies are always difficult and imprecise ways to communicate concepts and idea.  So I'm not interested in refining the analogy other than to highlight that:

    PVP play has significantly more player to player interaction that PVE and its that interaction that can exponentially raise the complexity of pvp play.
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,501 Chairperson of the Boards
    Calnexin said:
    Phumade said:
    ake advantage off if your prepared. Specifically the reason why you see the cluster in scores is because your cache was established in the past when higher points were available. The stack "dissapears" because the system has worked through the existing old cache and is queing targets that are currently out. The key inference is that as the time between when the que cache lengthens, You will see a more pronounced change between "advertised" scores vs "real time" score, this was the clue that told people that caches and the points within can be manipulated.
    I thought the cache refreshes whenever you win a match, and the only thing that stayed was the current targets.  If I'm seeing the old cache with old points as I skip, it's not making any difference to the scores I receive.  The points displayed tend to be right around that amount if I land on it after a skip.  The only time there's a wide difference is when it's an active target or retaliation, but that goes either way.  Sometimes they're worth far less because they didn't bother to shield.
    Thats not the only time the cache refreshes,
    it may not be obvious but you can control when the cache refreshes.  Thats all I'll say on that topic.
  • Milk Jugz
    Milk Jugz Posts: 1,122 Chairperson of the Boards
    Phumade said:

    1.  Time you start the match (i.e. choosing to play cooperatively or negatively (I use negative as the absence of coordination play, maybe there's a better word)
    Independently?
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,501 Chairperson of the Boards
    Milk Jugz said:
    Phumade said:

    1.  Time you start the match (i.e. choosing to play cooperatively or negatively (I use negative as the absence of coordination play, maybe there's a better word)
    Independently?
    Yeah thats a reasonable way to say it.  I don't mean it as negative connotation.  other than to say some people coordinate play, some purposely do not coordinate (they know line, and check rooms and purposefully choose not to participate), some snipe on purpose (which I would say is  negative or suppressive play)
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    Why can't the people who like hopping and coordination and stuff still do that for placement, but rosters (new and old) willing to put the work in, still *progress* in their progression?  Progression should never turn to regression but it often does in PVP and it's very disheartening for newer players which leads to people doing "575 and out" or not engaging at all.  

    I loved being able to play different characters on my roster and not worry about being punished for playing them. I also loved seeing more than the same three characters every match.

    I also loved being able to pick up and play whenever I wanted.  A match here, a match there.  There's not nearly enough of that in a simple match-3 game, aside from Sim and Gauntlet maybe twice a year. 

    In the test the developers left points-based placement for those interested in their "strategeries".

Categories