why there is progression rewards till 1200 points in low Level in PVP-VERSUS mode

Lucifier

aesthetocyst said:

aesthetocyst said:

Lucifier said:

from my understanding the 1200 is for players with at least 2 good 5* champed (i might be wrong tho).

The meta shifts all the time. The effort and resources (time, money, connections) required for a particular roster to reach a higher point in the range of scores being posted is proportional to that roster strength, in relation to the range of possible rosters at the time.

The only constant over time is that it takes more and more for a player starting out to building the strongest possible roster.


For instances....
In mid 2014 maxed 3* rosters were hitting up to 2000 in pvp. 
In early 2015 4* teams were regularly exceeding 2000 and determined 3* players could still do so.
In spring 2015 scores were depressed by cooldowns and nerfs but quickly recovered. It was still possible for 3* players to run with 4* players, up to and over 2000.
Release of 5*s in Sept 2015 and champing in Jan 2016 greatly expanded the spectrum of possible roster strength. Still it took time for the changes to permeate. In early 2016 it was still possible for 3* players to hit 2000.
Then the cupcake meta blossomed. Over the course of 2016, even while 4* and 5* champs were becoming increasingly popular, it became easier and easier for rosters that were becoming relatively weaker to score higher, as increasingly stronger strongest rosters scored higher and higher.
The story of 2017 had been life post-cake, and more 5* champs, and highly leveled 4* champs, with a steeper slope to climb for ambitious, newer players.

Once upon a time a new player could go from start to the top of pvp in several months and or a couple hundred bucks. Now its more, much more. And still more tomorrow.

exactly that is one of reasons why i consider PVP-VERSUS reward system should change, according to the current system, it increasing the gap between low players and high players (true stronger players and smarter players deserve better rewards).

BUT between PVP-Versus and PVE- story, 3 of these rewards are for stronger (more competitive) players and only PVE-story progression rewards is for all players, plus as example (low SCL PVP progression rewards, are just not logical not possible, even tho its value is very small).

my thought or my hope, is for example:
i am playing at SCL2 (now i can get all SCL2 progression reward), i am thinking of moving to SCL3 (for better progression rewards and placement rewards), i try:
* if i can, good, maybe after one month i will move to SCL4.
* if i can not, then i might stay more time in SCL2, till maybe after 2 more weeks.
**** bottom line  i can evaluate myself and decide if i want to move up or not yet ****
and in this scenario the progression rewards is better at higher SCL.

TetsujinOni

Lucifer, I wanted to see a real suggestion here (before the flagging moves this entire thread to Feedback & Suggestions where it belongs), but....

You've been given the explanation of why all progression rewards are on the same point thresholds, it was pointed out that the wins-based progression test moved things from points to "other", and your latest revised statement of "what is wrong" doesn't even make sense to me now...

If you can't offer "what is wrong", "what I think should change", and "how would that change improve the game", you don't really have a suggestion that can have anything useful done with it.

Lucifier

TetsujinOni said:
If you can't offer "what is wrong", "what I think should change", and "how would that change improve the game", you don't really have a suggestion that can have anything useful done with it.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
you obviously did not understood or read anything in this thread.

it contains "what is wrong", also contain "what I think should change", also contain "how would that change improve the game"

Rod5

Having a prog reward at 1.2 makes little sense at lower CL levels, I'll admit that. But at those levels it's more about placement. Increasing progression rewards will deny those who need the placement rewards.

At lower levels, placement rewards are better than prog rewards, you can see/understand this surely? A 3* player can easily earn 3* covers in PvP , so I don't really see your point on that either.

Lucifier

@Rod5  exactly, the top placement rewards in low SCL is better, then what is the point of progression rewards (that also you can not reach half of it), because you are still in weak roaster even tho you play in low SCL.

Note: not exactly better, because for example in SCL4-PVP progression rewards, totally you can get 15cp till 1200 points, which i believe better than 3* cover from placement (but it is unreachable).

 A 3* player can easily earn 3* covers in PvP , so I don't really see your point on that either.

Note2: if i can get 3* cover from placement, does not mean i should not ask about progression rewards (when i see something wrong with it), well i am getting 4* cover from PVE-story mode, does that mean i should not play PVP at all.

CT1888

I appreciate that it could be a significant amount of coding to rejig everything, but the scores and prizes for lower levels are a joke, so what's the point of trying?
With such weak prizes, why not squash the progression prizes into a smaller point range, then spread the range up as you go up through the CLs.
This would give lower level rosters prizes they could strive for in progression, encouraging pvp play, and as their roster strengthens, they are insentivised to move into the next CL by better prizes. By stepping it up, it creates a progression curve in playing PvP to get deep into the rewards, so once they reach CL7, 900 isn't a scary amount to hit for the 4* cover.

Obviously the rewards need to be kept balanced to prevent sandbagging.

Example top progression score
CL1 400
CL2 500
CL3 600
CL4 800
CL5 1000
CL6+ 1200

GurlBYE

There's a lot of talking.

I just want to say,

No you can't get all progression rewards from lower SCLs in pve (2-6) because they don't reward the required 4.

You're missing 5 clears of the highest point node for every day of the pve and the 6th clear doesn't add up in every pve. 

You can certainly overgrind and optimally time and hopefully hit final progression depending on the event but its in no way consistent, nor something that should be expected of anew player

Lucifier

GurlBYE said:

There's a lot of talking.

I just want to say,

No you can't get all progression rewards from lower SCLs in pve (2-6) because they don't reward the required 4.

You're missing 5 clears of the highest point node for every day of the pve and the 6th clear doesn't add up in every pve. 

You can certainly overgrind and optimally time and hopefully hit final progression depending on the event but its in no way consistent, nor something that should be expected of anew player

we are talking about PVP-VERSUS not PVE-story

although i believe you can get all the progression rewards in PVE even if you are missing the required 4* cover for the whole event. and the 4* essential is not the highest node score (it is the 2nd highest node score i think), the hardest node (non-essential) is the highest point rewarding node.


in PVE:
no player miss the nodes in main event
no player miss the easy and hard nodes (which is usually or always 6 nodes).
we may miss essential node (depends on our roaster)
no player miss the other node (the one with only one fight, it also gives points).

I think (not sure, but most likely) if you miss the 4* char for whole event and you miss the 3* char at start event (which i believe you will miss it for one day only, next day you get it from progression rewards), then you can make full progression. (although i did not do math, it is just what i think).

animaniactoo

A couple of quick hits to cover the back and forth:

The reason for the points being where they are has to do with alliances and alliance rewards. 3 players from the same alliance have similar but different enough rosters that they fall into top end of SCL 4, mid 5, and low 6 respectively. If personal progression rewards sit in a different place for the person in SCL4 than the one in SCL6, then one of two things happen (and possibly both):

1) SCL4 person puts in a lesser amount of "work" but gets comparatively (to their roster) better rewards.
2) SCL4 person puts in the same amount of "work" but their alliance gets fewer points and is penalized for having a lower ranking person in their roster.

The ONLY real solution to this issue is to make the SCL levels and brackets *mean* something in terms of MMR.

Currently they don't, but the solution has to be found at that end; rather than adjusting the points at the other end which would throw off the balance further instead of bringing it closer to where it needs to be.

Lucifier

animaniactoo said:

animaniactoo said:

A couple of quick hits to cover the back and forth:

The reason for the points being where they are has to do with alliances and alliance rewards. 3 players from the same alliance have similar but different enough rosters that they fall into top end of SCL 4, mid 5, and low 6 respectively. If personal progression rewards sit in a different place for the person in SCL4 than the one in SCL6, then one of two things happen (and possibly both):

1) SCL4 person puts in a lesser amount of "work" but gets comparatively (to their roster) better rewards.
2) SCL4 person puts in the same amount of "work" but their alliance gets fewer points and is penalized for having a lower ranking person in their roster.

The ONLY real solution to this issue is to make the SCL levels and brackets *mean* something in terms of MMR.

Currently they don't, but the solution has to be found at that end; rather than adjusting the points at the other end which would throw off the balance further instead of bringing it closer to where it needs to be.

well the player who is in an alliance who are really seeking "alliance placement" they will try to do their best, if they can hit 1200, they do not stop at 1200 they go more (true helps player placement plus alliance placement).

and it might work better, because right now many players get the 575 reward (10 cp) and stop and probably they do not shield too (that what i read in the forum), and they will drop below 575 too.
plus whoever go to lower SCL like SCL4, that's mean he/she can not do good from before, if he/she can do better they probably will go to SCL5 or higher (which will have higher max point requirements).

also it is about alliances, many alliance do not require high PVP placement and who require high alliance placement probably will not have player with weak or mid roasters, or they will not accept the player who just do enough for himself/herself.

so it will be a matter of choice and planning.

animaniactoo

aesthetocyst said:

animaniactoo said:

The ONLY real solution to this issue is to make the SCL levels and brackets *mean* something in terms of MMR.

Oh? Say on, sir, say on. What would you have them mean?

That I could grind iso at the allyoucaneat 1pt buffet in SCL 1, beating up brand new players for free while "chasing" 1* rewards? Sweet!

If you want to exacerbate slumming .... turn PvP into a giant shantytown... Youre on the right track.

Reductio ad absurdum much?