PvP Main Season points shouldn't decrease.
Comments
-
Except you are missing my main point, there are 2 other modes for win X matches earn Y rewards. Don't take the strategy out of Versus mode.shardwick said:
Except that they are earning it by putting in the time and effort to get those rewards. You act like people are doing three wins and being handed all of the rewards on a silver platter or something.Milk Jugz said:
More mindless grinding.......Pants1000 said:I'm curious if they'll do another win-based test this off season, and if they'll tweak anything. Who knows, maybe in another season or two we'll end up with win-based season progression rewards.
Why do you deserve those rewards? There are 2 other modes that give you rewards just for playing. It took me almost 2 years to build my roster to the point that I can consistently earn the 4* cover in PVP. (2 more 900s this season and it will be my first season of 900+ in every event). PVP scoring works as intended and I really, really, really hope the devs do not make progression win based. Just because it's there doesn't mean it should be handed to you.... Earn it!!!1 -
The strategy in pvp doesn't apply to 99% of the people playing. Sure, for the people in alliances who have turned pvp into an actual competitive thing, it might work great, but for the horde of normals who play in 3* land or below, none of that means anything. All pvp is, for them, is this dull pingponging back and forth between boring wins and unavoidable losses until you get lucky and pass whatever threshold for 10 seconds.
The whole point of people wanting to overhaul pvp is that, for them, they *want* to have some strategy in their strategy game, which currently lacks it.6 -
You should support a dual system then because it will mean a lot more people playing for wins which is more targets for you to go after. They get rewards via wins, you can still get yours with your strategy and shield hopping to 900+ without grinding for tons of wins.Milk Jugz said:
Except you are missing my main point, there are 2 other modes for win X matches earn Y rewards. Don't take the strategy out of Versus mode.shardwick said:
Except that they are earning it by putting in the time and effort to get those rewards. You act like people are doing three wins and being handed all of the rewards on a silver platter or something.Milk Jugz said:
More mindless grinding.......Pants1000 said:I'm curious if they'll do another win-based test this off season, and if they'll tweak anything. Who knows, maybe in another season or two we'll end up with win-based season progression rewards.
Why do you deserve those rewards? There are 2 other modes that give you rewards just for playing. It took me almost 2 years to build my roster to the point that I can consistently earn the 4* cover in PVP. (2 more 900s this season and it will be my first season of 900+ in every event). PVP scoring works as intended and I really, really, really hope the devs do not make progression win based. Just because it's there doesn't mean it should be handed to you.... Earn it!!!4 -
shardwick said:
You should support a dual system then because it will mean a lot more people playing for wins which is more targets for you to go after. They get rewards via wins, you can still get yours with your strategy and shield hopping to 900+ without grinding for tons of wins.Milk Jugz said:
Except you are missing my main point, there are 2 other modes for win X matches earn Y rewards. Don't take the strategy out of Versus mode.shardwick said:
Except that they are earning it by putting in the time and effort to get those rewards. You act like people are doing three wins and being handed all of the rewards on a silver platter or something.Milk Jugz said:
More mindless grinding.......Pants1000 said:I'm curious if they'll do another win-based test this off season, and if they'll tweak anything. Who knows, maybe in another season or two we'll end up with win-based season progression rewards.
Why do you deserve those rewards? There are 2 other modes that give you rewards just for playing. It took me almost 2 years to build my roster to the point that I can consistently earn the 4* cover in PVP. (2 more 900s this season and it will be my first season of 900+ in every event). PVP scoring works as intended and I really, really, really hope the devs do not make progression win based. Just because it's there doesn't mean it should be handed to you.... Earn it!!!
The problem is: The people most affected by moving the 15 CP to placement only (which is high level 4* and 5* players) don't SEE these extra targets because they'll still be lower than 1K so we can't queue them.
It's a myth that the new system will give high level players more targets, if we want 40 wins we'll have to grind it out against fellow high level players.3 -
carrion pigeons said:...
The whole point of people wanting to overhaul pvp is that, for them, they *want* to have some strategy in their strategy game, which currently lacks it.
Hmmm .... yes, "strategy" .... 1 win ... 2 wins ... 3 wins .....Developing 5 using Counting Strategies for 0–10
KindergartenDescription
Understand the relationship between numbers and quantities by counting, producing, and constructing the numbers 0–10 as well as developing 5 as a benchmark.
http://www.nctm.org/Classroom-Resources/ARCs/Counting-Strategies/
3 -
I don't think not having Line is your problem. If you can't be bothered to try and fight any teams on a par with yours then you shouldn't expect to get barely any rewards.carrion pigeons said:My personal experience in PvP:
Enter the event, do the seeds. Do one more fight against a team of 270s, get super bored, realize I have to do at least 10 more and probably more like 30 more before I get anything worthwhile at it, and quit.
I expect that's a pretty typical experience among non-LINE players. PvP sucks.
3 -
I actually agree with you, in principle, but it's hard to look at the "big picture" and not find overall engagement in PVP to be low. I'm one of the 575 & quit players, which is almost always good enough for Top 100 (i.e. better than 80% of all players in my bracket). When I'm lazy and only hit the token at 300, that's almost always good enough for Top 200 (i.e better than 60% of all players in the bracket). When I've hit three seeds and quit at 101, that's almost always good enough for Top 400 (i.e. better than 20% of all players in my bracket). For the season, hitting the 10-pack at 4,000 is almost always good enough for Top 1,000-1,250 for the season (i.e. better than 75-80% of all players in my bracket)Rod5 said:
I don't think not having Line is your problem. If you can't be bothered to try and fight any teams on a par with yours then you shouldn't expect to get barely any rewards.carrion pigeons said:My personal experience in PvP:
Enter the event, do the seeds. Do one more fight against a team of 270s, get super bored, realize I have to do at least 10 more and probably more like 30 more before I get anything worthwhile at it, and quit.
I expect that's a pretty typical experience among non-LINE players. PvP sucks.
Meanwhile, in PVE, hitting the 8CP and stopping (which is what I normally do), is usually good enough for Top 400 (i.e better than 60% of all players in the bracket). Full progression when I've done it, is usually good enough for Top 200-250 (i.e. better than 75-80% of all players in the bracket).
I'll admit, my comparisons are all purely ancedotal and based solely on CL7 or CL8-level players who pre-join brackets, but for players who are willing to put in the same effort as I am for appoximately similar rewards (575/10CP & 8CP), engagement in PVE is ~10-20% higher than it is in PVP. That's significant, so if the dev's are seeing similar numbers from their data sets, I could see why they'd experiment with a change.3 -
My personal experience in PvE:My personal experience in PvP:
Enter the event, do the seeds. Do one more fight against a team of 270s, get super bored, realize I have to do at least 10 more and probably more like 30 more before I get anything worthwhile at it, and quit.
I expect that's a pretty typical experience among non-LINE players. PvP sucks.
Enter the event, do the easy nodes. Do one more fight against a team of 270s, get super bored, realize I have to do at least 24 more and probably more like 48-72 more before I get anything worthwhile at it.
I expect that's a pretty typical experience among non-T50 players. PvE sucks.
5 -
guys it is easy and clear, for PVP there are 2 rewards:
1- placement rewards: from its name, better players deserve it more than others.
2- progression rewards: this need to be changed, it should not decrease our progression points by losing (or at least we should not loss points, when others attack us and we loss, "and we lose points when we attack others and we lose, to prevent purposely falling down in rank to find easy targets"), we should always have progress when we win.
and the shield will still be needed for placements rewards (for players who are seeking it).
if both rewards points (placement and progression) goes up and down (based if we win or loss). then ((((( I DO NO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE ARE TWO REWARD SYSTEM ))))).
the thing is for new players or mid players, they will never or very hard (and need so long time, longer than what old players needed), to start earning good placements and progression rewards.
because these players when they get better, the others players (who before was better than them) they also getting better (and logically the others players "older" they are getting much better, because they were getting better rewards than the average players).
my conclusion is:
1- the rewards should not be based only on how strong you are (although true stronger deserve better rewards, hence the placement rewards).
2- there should be rewards for efforts you put in the game, how much time you spend, how many fights you do (this also should be rewarded (and it can help for new, mid players to catch the other players).
an example i am at 3* land (have 8 or 9 low cover 4* char), when the time that come trying to catch the current 4* land players, they would earn much much more rewards then me (i earn x rewards/month, they might earn 2 times x or 3 times x rewards/ month), (assuming no body quit playing the game), so even when i hit the 4* land, i would still can not have good placements rewards (which is fine because i don't deserve it), but also i will not be able to make a good progression rewards (because at that time all others players get much better than me by much more) which is not fine (because all the progress that i made and still can not have better progression rewards).
one last note: shouldn't the 800 points rewards (3* char) be easy for a 3* char land???!!!!!!!!!!!!1 -
I don't agree with your conclusion that when you hit 4* land you won't be able to get the better progression rewards. I'm far behind the top players with my roster, but I hit 900+ on most events now that I've built my roster up. When you get there you will be competing with people with similar rosters. I won't be able to see you in my MMR until you hit a certain threshold, that is the point your roster can take you to. With my roster now after I cross 900 I start seeing teams I can't compete with. With a 3* roster the threshold was lower, 600 ish, I didn't play as much then.Lucifier said:guys it is easy and clear, for PVP there are 2 rewards:
1- placement rewards: from its name, better players deserve it more than others.
2- progression rewards: this need to be changed, it should not decrease our progression points by losing (or at least we should not loss points, when others attack us and we loss, "and we lose points when we attack others and we lose, to prevent purposely falling down in rank to find easy targets"), we should always have progress when we win.
and the shield will still be needed for placements rewards (for players who are seeking it).
if both rewards points (placement and progression) goes up and down (based if we win or loss). then ((((( I DO NO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE ARE TWO REWARD SYSTEM ))))).
the thing is for new players or mid players, they will never or very hard (and need so long time, longer than what old players needed), to start earning good placements and progression rewards.
because these players when they get better, the others players (who before was better than them) they also getting better (and logically the others players "older" they are getting much better, because they were getting better rewards than the average players).
my conclusion is:
1- the rewards should not be based only on how strong you are (although true stronger deserve better rewards, hence the placement rewards).
2- there should be rewards for efforts you put in the game, how much time you spend, how many fights you do (this also should be rewarded (and it can help for new, mid players to catch the other players).
an example i am at 3* land (have 8 or 9 low cover 4* char), when the time that come trying to catch the current 4* land players, they would earn much much more rewards then me (i earn x rewards/month, they might earn 2 times x or 3 times x rewards/ month), (assuming no body quit playing the game), so even when i hit the 4* land, i would still can not have good placements rewards (which is fine because i don't deserve it), but also i will not be able to make a good progression rewards (because at that time all others players get much better than me by much more) which is not fine (because all the progress that i made and still can not have better progression rewards).
one last note: shouldn't the 800 points rewards (3* char) be easy for a 3* char land???!!!!!!!!!!!!
To your last note, 10 CP is clearly more valuable than 1 3* cover. Why the cover is @ 800 and the CP @575 I don't understand, they should be swapped. Or put the 3* cover @ 575. 10 CP @ 725, and the 50 HP @ 800.
2 -
That is just your opinion, I disagree with most of your conclusions.Lucifier said:guys it is easy and clear, for PVP there are 2 rewards:
1- placement rewards: from its name, better players deserve it more than others.
2- progression rewards: this need to be changed, it should not decrease our progression points by losing (or at least we should not loss points, when others attack us and we loss, "and we lose points when we attack others and we lose, to prevent purposely falling down in rank to find easy targets"), we should always have progress when we win.
and the shield will still be needed for placements rewards (for players who are seeking it).
if both rewards points (placement and progression) goes up and down (based if we win or loss). then ((((( I DO NO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE ARE TWO REWARD SYSTEM ))))).
the thing is for new players or mid players, they will never or very hard (and need so long time, longer than what old players needed), to start earning good placements and progression rewards.
because these players when they get better, the others players (who before was better than them) they also getting better (and logically the others players "older" they are getting much better, because they were getting better rewards than the average players).
my conclusion is:
1- the rewards should not be based only on how strong you are (although true stronger deserve better rewards, hence the placement rewards).
2- there should be rewards for efforts you put in the game, how much time you spend, how many fights you do (this also should be rewarded (and it can help for new, mid players to catch the other players).
an example i am at 3* land (have 8 or 9 low cover 4* char), when the time that come trying to catch the current 4* land players, they would earn much much more rewards then me (i earn x rewards/month, they might earn 2 times x or 3 times x rewards/ month), (assuming no body quit playing the game), so even when i hit the 4* land, i would still can not have good placements rewards (which is fine because i don't deserve it), but also i will not be able to make a good progression rewards (because at that time all others players get much better than me by much more) which is not fine (because all the progress that i made and still can not have better progression rewards).
one last note: shouldn't the 800 points rewards (3* char) be easy for a 3* char land???!!!!!!!!!!!!
On your logic, as a player in 5* land shouldn't I get a 5* cover as a reward?
We all began somewhere...and 3/4* covers are a great deal easier to get hold of than they used to be.
If you play hard, you will progress ahead of the curve. You can't expect it to be given to you for minimal risk.
1 -
On your logic, as a player in 5* land shouldn't I get a 5* cover as a reward?
this is not exactly the same, since the 5* are the current highest level of char (then no it should not be that easy),
and on your logic, the one star char player (should not get the 1* cover easily too).
lets assume i have many 4* char champed, well getting to 800 points and get one extra 3* cover (it is not bad, but it is not good too, i wouldn't care much to hit 800 for one more 3* cover every 2/3 days), at that time 800 reward will not add much to me.That is just your opinion, I disagree with most of your conclusions.that is ok (that is the point of forum we share our thoughts), maybe my suggestion is not good for all, may be not accurate, but my end point, something need to change in pvp rewards.
and i read before someone posted in the forum (i can not remember the exact words) "obviously the dev know/think something need to be changed in pvp rewards, otherwise they wouldn't tested the win number progression reward system".We all began somewhere...and 3/4* covers are a great deal easier to get hold of than they used to be.was there 5* char when old players start playing, how many 4* char released at that time, how many 3 * char at that time.
easy math example, lets assume there is only 1 4* char released (lets assume between 4* cover rewards and cp purchase 4*), we can get 1 4* new cover every 2 days, so in 26 days you can champ this 4* char.
now imagine the same process with 20 4* char released, now imagine same process with 60 4* char released, and they keep releasing new char every now and then.
generally speaking as basic math (not related to new or mid players) number of char released increased, the rewards should increase too.
ALSO you said now 3/4* is easier to get for new players, well it is much more easier to get for old players, as long as you continue playing you are not just continue to be ahead of others, the gap between you and new/mid players will be bigger (as amount no as percentage).
maybe new system of pvp need to be implemented, like this category only for 2*char and lower, this category for 3* and lower, and so on, here the competition will be more fair about strategy, and I (3* char land) don't have to face 4* char or 5* char, (unless i join the 4* category).1 -
And you just spelled out the problem the developers are trying to fix. You were less engaged when you didn't have the guns to compete because there is no incentive for weaker rosters to even enter the node.Milk Jugz said:
With my roster now after I cross 900 I start seeing teams I can't compete with. With a 3* roster the threshold was lower, 600 ish, I didn't play as much then.
I too am a solo player. 25 champed 4s. With optimal climbs and shielding I can hit 900 regularly. But even with a strong roster I don't find it fun:
1) NOT playing the game, because I have to hide behind shields.
2) playing the same teams over and over repeatedly.
3) going backwards in something labeled "progression" and it being more likely to happen the MORE I play.
The "strategy" you speak of isn't really all that in-depth nor does it require complex thought. Same for PVE. Both involve just playing at optimal times. I feel sad for anyone who thinks that they are some kind of strategic mastermind because they can progress in PVP. It's the same strategy for everyone. Several guides on here all give the same advice. For those who want to flex their strategic muscles, they left placement based on points and even added the cp reward there so all the big dogs get an even bigger reward for being the best tactical mastermind.
I tend to find more strategy within matches with the wins-based model. I saw a bunch of different teams and was able to play much more of my roster to match up with what I was seeing. It was way more fun than, "play only my 2 best boosted (which usually results in a bunch of mirror matches), use boosts, win as fast as possible, then shield before I lose 300 points"... strategy?
Just becauae I can succeed in a mode it doesn't mean it's enjoyable or that it doesn't have problems. Glad the developers are making it more engaging for the majority, and the best way to do that is give placement rewards to the best teams while still giving progression rewards to those who put in the effort, so there's something there for them too.
Well done!5 -
I would actually prefer all the progression rewards being moved to placement over the grind fest that was PVP determined by win count. It was just another boring PVE slog. Just against higher leveled characters.Ducky said:
I think most of the vets on this board know I play solo as well, but our experience is still molded by all of those constructs that players have put in place.
And I think the reason they moved the CP to placement is because they want people to compete for those rewards and make it actually Versus, and not Co-OP.
If they moved all the progression rewards from Versus (it's never actually been called PvP officially by the devs) to placement rewards, would you cry foul then? Would that then be distributing the rewards in the most "earning it" type of way?
Edit: Fixed typos
The mode as it exists now is a great metric of roster strength with the added bonus of allowing for strategy and varying play styles. You can snipe, coordinate with other snipers to suppress scores, coordinate with others for mutual benefit or simply run to the 10 CP and bail.1 -
If they did that I think you'd see a mass exodus of many non-vets from even attempting PvP. I certainly wouldn't even both for one. You call win based a slog fest, grinding through 20-40 wins and still only getting T50-T100 and getting practically nothing for it. That's my idea of fun! Pfffftttt...revskip said:
I would actually prefer all the progression rewards being moved to placement over the grind fest that was PVP determined by win count. It was just another boring PVE slog. Just against higher leveled characters.Ducky said:
I think most of the vets on this board know I play solo as well, but our experience is still molded by all of those constructs that players have put in place.
And I think the reason they moved the CP to placement is because they want people to compete for those rewards and make it actually Versus, and not Co-OP.
If they moved all the progression rewards from Versus (it's never actually been called PvP officially by the devs) to placement rewards, would you cry foul then? Would that then be distributing the rewards in the most "earning it" type of way?
Edit: Fixed typos
The mode as it exists now is a great metric of roster strength with the added bonus of allowing for strategy and varying play styles. You can snipe, coordinate with other snipers to suppress scores, coordinate with others for mutual benefit or simply run to the 10 CP and bail.0 -
Milk Jugz said:
1- I don't agree with your conclusion that when you hit 4* land you won't be able to get the better progression rewards.
2- With a 3* roster the threshold was lower, 600 ish, I didn't play as much then.
3- To your last note, 10 CP is clearly more valuable than 1 3* cover. Why the cover is @ 800 and the CP @575 I don't understand, they should be swapped. Or put the 3* cover @ 575. 10 CP @ 725, and the 50 HP @ 800.
1- i've read before in forum, advising not to open the legendary token or spend the command point, to avoid getting 5* cover, because it will cause high scaling (and they were talking about PVP not just PVE).
someone said before he got 5* char and then he can hit like 650 in PVP (or something close) while before that he can hit 900+
so i don't know how the matching works in PVP, i have 10 legendary and 670 CP, i am not using them right now.
2- well then how come the 800 point reward is 3* char!!!!
3- i agree with you, even i do not agree about 50HP, 50HP is not much of prize (a one 3* char better than 50HP at least for me).
0 -
I think you missed some details in those discussions - If you have a few 4*s above level 255, then simply rostering 5*s will not effect you in PVP. The problem comes in when people with small or low level rosters add some 5*s or level their one or two 5*s way above the rest of their roster. It just takes some common sense; you need to build your roster in a balanced way.Lucifier said:
1- i've read before in forum, advising not to open the legendary token or spend the command point, to avoid getting 5* cover, because it will cause high scaling (and they were talking about PVP not just PVE).
someone said before he got 5* char and then he can hit like 650 in PVP (or something close) while before that he can hit 900+
so i don't know how the matching works in PVP, i have 10 legendary and 670 CP, i am not using them right now.0 -
Blindman13 said:
I think you missed some details in those discussions - If you have a few 4*s above level 255, then simply rostering 5*s will not effect you in PVP. The problem comes in when people with small or low level rosters add some 5*s or level their one or two 5*s way above the rest of their roster. It just takes some common sense; you need to build your roster in a balanced way.well i don't know much about it, yet it make sense for PVE, but why for PVP???!!! for example now with 3* char i can hit 575/650 sometimes 725, well if i open my token and get 5* shouldn't i be able to still hitting 575/650 or 725, and logically i should be better, well i don't know, is this is the case now or how it works now?
0 -
There are lots of other posts discussing MMR and how it works, but in short: the points you can get in PVP are limited by the opponents you are matched against. No one knows the exact calculation, but the level of your highest leveled covers determines who you get matched up with.Lucifier said:
well i don't know much about it, yet it make sense for PVE, but why for PVP???!!! for example now with 3* char i can hit 575/650 sometimes 725, well if i open my token and get 5* shouldn't i be able to still hitting 575/650 or 725, and logically i should be better, well i don't know, is this is the case now or how it works now?
Right now you are getting matched against players with similar rosters. If your current best characters are around level 150-200 add a few 5*s to your team it will boost you up against tougher opponents. If you already have some 4*s maxed and you add 5*s it doesn't effect your rating.0 -
1) 5* territory is its own beast. I'm not there yet, but from what I've gathered from other forumites and alliance mates, if you champ just one or two (especially two that don't "play" nice together) your asking for a world of hurt in Versus. I'm only taking about 4* for now. I do have a high levelish Phoenix (420 3/3/5), but I don't use her since I have so many champ 4s now, she basically carried me through the 3* and is 95% of the reason why my Versus experience at that time was not great. With a solid roster of champ 4s you can hit 900 consistently. With two 5s that play well together 1200, again only what I've gathered from alliance mates. It is possible to hit 1200 with a 4* roster but that seems to require coordination outside the game, not my cup of tea.Lucifier said:Milk Jugz said:
1- I don't agree with your conclusion that when you hit 4* land you won't be able to get the better progression rewards.
2- With a 3* roster the threshold was lower, 600 ish, I didn't play as much then.
3- To your last note, 10 CP is clearly more valuable than 1 3* cover. Why the cover is @ 800 and the CP @575 I don't understand, they should be swapped. Or put the 3* cover @ 575. 10 CP @ 725, and the 50 HP @ 800.
1- i've read before in forum, advising not to open the legendary token or spend the command point, to avoid getting 5* cover, because it will cause high scaling (and they were talking about PVP not just PVE).
someone said before he got 5* char and then he can hit like 650 in PVP (or something close) while before that he can hit 900+
so i don't know how the matching works in PVP, i have 10 legendary and 670 CP, i am not using them right now.
2- well then how come the 800 point reward is 3* char!!!!
3- i agree with you, even i do not agree about 50HP, 50HP is not much of prize (a one 3* char better than 50HP at least for me).
2) Agree completely, the 3* cover SHOULD be lower than 800.
3) I agree with your assessment of the value of the HP, but I feel a lot of people will be upset about the 10 CP going to 800, so 725 seems a good plateau. And people stopping at 575 weren't getting the HP anyway. So asking them to score 150 more, while receiving a 3* cover and an additional event token to get the 10 CP seems easier than asking them to score another 225 points and getting the previous mentioned extras and 50 HP.
I know what 5* discussion you're referring to and you are taking it out of context.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.8K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.3K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.6K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 504 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 421 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 298 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.6K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements