Infinity Season *Updated (9/19/17)

Spudgutter

Gari said:

Its hopeless Vhairlox. I think people have to be prepared to quit pvp

And if you are the devs, what would you rather have?   100 high end pvp players, who rarely play pve, and get to 900 or 1200+ in as few matches as possible?  Or 1000 beginning and mid tier players, who play pve and only play pvp to 575, and dont have everyone rostered?  

If it were me, i would design a game that *encourages* playing more, not less.  The current pvp system of playing for a bit, then shielding, then play one or two match hops is bonkers to me.  That play style that has turned into the current meta may work for some, but obviously (obvious to some, not so obvious to others...) doesn't work for the vast majority of players.  

I am like several others that have my fingers crossed for a hybrid, but at the end of the day, it's a business, and they would probably rather have more people engaged.

And if I'm being completely honest, it would be nice if some of the people on here, trying to compare their 3 and 4 star transition (from back before there was even champing or clearance levels) would actually quit.  Then we would stop seeing all the comments about how it was tough for them, so it should be tough for those coming up.  But my guess is, they will be just as ingenious as before, and discover or create a new meta.  And this argument will become a memory, just like true healing and every other "game changing" hurdle through the years.

Gari

Spudgutter said:

Gari said:

Its hopeless Vhairlox. I think people have to be prepared to quit pvp

And if you are the devs, what would you rather have?   100 high end pvp players, who rarely play pve, and get to 900 or 120+ in as few matches as possible?  Or 1000 beginning and mid tier players, who play pve and only play pvp to 575, and dont have everyone rostered?  

If it were me, i would design a game that *encourages* playing more, not less.  The current pvp system of playing for a bit, then shielding, then play one or two match hops is bonkers to me.  That play style that has turned into the current meta may work for some, but obviously (obvious to some, not so obvious to others...) doesn't work for the vast majority of players.  

I am like several others that have my fingers crossed for a hybrid, but at the end of the day, it's a business, and they would probably rather have more people engaged.

And if I'm being completely honest, it would be nice if some of the people on here, trying to compare their 3 and 4 star transition (from back before there was even champing or clearance levels) would actually quit.  Then we would stop seeing all the comments about how it was tough for them, so it should be tough for those coming up.  But my guess is, they will be just as ingenious as before, and discover or create a new meta.  And this argument will become a memory, just like true healing and every other "game changing" hurdle through the years.

If you had an alliance who would you want? 575 scorers who can never win anything? Or we get 900 scorers who can push for that t100 prize.? Yes you will be playing more, thats what they want. Youd be playing for THE SAME PRIZES! And i thought slavery was dead. The old system, you can simply snipe for t10 even with a weak roster. For many thats their ladder. Win based will kill it for them, but is anyone arguing that? And who says less people are playing? I have new people who transited in 6 to 9 months, and they could do it. Now youd be spending at least double the time, with lousy ranking. How is that a win?

Spudgutter

Gari said:

Spudgutter said:

Gari said:

Its hopeless Vhairlox. I think people have to be prepared to quit pvp

And if you are the devs, what would you rather have?   100 high end pvp players, who rarely play pve, and get to 900 or 120+ in as few matches as possible?  Or 1000 beginning and mid tier players, who play pve and only play pvp to 575, and dont have everyone rostered?  

If it were me, i would design a game that *encourages* playing more, not less.  The current pvp system of playing for a bit, then shielding, then play one or two match hops is bonkers to me.  That play style that has turned into the current meta may work for some, but obviously (obvious to some, not so obvious to others...) doesn't work for the vast majority of players.  

I am like several others that have my fingers crossed for a hybrid, but at the end of the day, it's a business, and they would probably rather have more people engaged.

And if I'm being completely honest, it would be nice if some of the people on here, trying to compare their 3 and 4 star transition (from back before there was even champing or clearance levels) would actually quit.  Then we would stop seeing all the comments about how it was tough for them, so it should be tough for those coming up.  But my guess is, they will be just as ingenious as before, and discover or create a new meta.  And this argument will become a memory, just like true healing and every other "game changing" hurdle through the years.

If you had an alliance who would you want? 575 scorers who can never win anything? Or we get 900 scorers who can push for that t100 prize.? Yes you will be playing more, thats what they want. Youd be playing for THE SAME PRIZES! And i thought slavery was dead. The old system, you can simply snipe for t10 even with a weak roster. For many thats their ladder. Win based will kill it for them, but is anyone arguing that? And who says less people are playing? I have new people who transited in 6 to 9 months, and they could do it. Now youd be spending at least double the time, with lousy ranking. How is that a win?

Oh, i am not dismissing what we would like, quite the contrary. I'm just trying to be a realist.  Would i want a person that can accomplish that? Sure. Everyone would, so it doesn't make sense to argue in agreement for what we all want!

As mentioned previously in this thread, and the others on the same topic, there are plenty of people already playing 20+ matches and barely getting past 575, and pretty discouraged from pushing any farther. And we all know forum goers are a literal minority of the playerbase.

And before you suggest that everyone should just come to the forum and learn the meta, please don't. We get it, there is a way to do it currently, and for some, it works.  For too many others, it doesn't.  

As i mentioned, i would love if there were still true healing. I'd love a 4* daily ddq.  

Best we can hope for is that when they do make changes, that we try to guide them in a direction we all benefit (hybrid point/win based) from.  Sticking your head in the sand not only doesn't help yourself, it doesn't help anyone else, either.

Merrick

The developers want whichever will bring in the most cash. If that means fewer people playing but using multiple shields, then that's how it will go. 

If a million free players play, but spend nothing, it doesn't help their bottom line. 

From the last test, I got frustrated at several of my real life friends, because they played. And made progression and over 900 points. Something they had never done before. Obviously it was within their ability, but they didn't think they could make it so they'd always stopped before. Now that they realized that it is possible, they are still going to 900. Haven't made it every time, but have made it most of the time. 

Gari

20Plus matches and not 600? Then they should just quit. Honestly, it must be a very special group of people that can fail so badly. Hands up who has seen them. I do not think they are the majority. And the realist says they are not cut out for it. If no decent alliance will take you youre done

Milk Jugz

Son of a tinykitty!!! Preview is up for Nefarious Foes..... 40 mother tinykitty wins for the 4* cover. TWICE as much tinykitty work for the SAME tinykitty rewards. Words do not describe how beyond pissed off I am....... And the tinykitty 15 CP is out of progression too. This is tinykitty...... 

sinnerjfl

Preview is up... guess what, its the exact same thing as last time they ran this test.

40 wins for the 4*, last CP prize is for top10 only. It's a good thing they read our feedback and caBAHAHAH, right

What exactly are they testing?

Kahmon

I thought they were lowering the wins needed to 32 or so, but I guess the only change will be the addition of the mini-season rewards which aren't up yet. They will probably show at 8am EST when the first Nefarious foes starts.

The lack of change is a little disapointing, but still greatly preferred to the current system.

I figure hit the 10 seeds right away then 10 fights a day whenever it's convenient. Easy peasy and no stress of giving a **** if I get attacked.

Orion

bluewolf said:

Can we at least wait until the preview is up, with rewards tables, before we decide whether we like it?

Hey look, the reward table is up, and it's just as stupid as it was before.  The ONLY thing I care about is the CP, and it's tied to placement again.  What a horrible idea. Let's see, I can drop all the way down to CL5 and still get 10 CP in win progression and 15 CP in placement.  I guess those 2*->3* transitioners are out of luck, because the 5* rosters are going to be dropping down.

A system that actively encourages people to play in a lower CL is a bad system.  This system is even worse than most, because it allows CL8 people to drop down to CL5 or 6 and still get the 25 CP they're looking for.

bluewolf

Yeah, this is disappointing.  Was hoping for less than 40 wins.
Edit:  It is possible that they are running the same win total test to see how SCL scaling affects play, as that was not in place last test.  40 is a lot, so I hope they will consider changing it.

j0nats

Alsmir said:

j0nats said:

maybe the win based progression only applies to season rewards?   i still prefer the current system.  there is a reason pvp is not called pve.  and its because its not pve 

gating the 15 cp from progression and keeping it in top 10 placement will directly impact those of us trying to transition into 5 star land, but not strong enough to be in top 10.    

also, for those that keep whining about being hammered in pvp blah blah...  guess what.? we went thru that too.   but instead of whining, we clawed, scratched (sometimes bought) our way to improving our rosters.

 

Yes, let's continue this endless cycle of stupidity. It sucked for you? So it must suck for everyone else. A perfect attitude to never make any improvement.

im all for improvement.  but win based progression is not an improvement.

fmftint

Aren't you supposed to change a few variables from test to test? This looks exactly the same as the first "test"

Anyone believe they are listening?

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/55284/we-are-listening

jackstar0

Not thrilled to see no changes thus far...

jgomes32

I'll just quote myself from the last test thread: 40 wins for 4* cover and movinng CP to placement are a big mistake.

broll

jackstar0 said:

Not thrilled to see no changes thus far...

Agreed. Cp still in placement. No adjustments to number of wins and/or hybrid system. So it's just the same test with adding season data in. It's still IMO better than current PvP but it's frustrating to see them not listen at all to any of the problems and suggested solutions after the last test. 

Daiches

Hmm.. CP only for t10, 40 wins for 4star. 

But wouldn't want to want to be a Negative Nancy. So here's the upside: now we can deny people cp progression more easily by scoring high! #SilverLining

alphabeta

40 wins and CP for placement ......

is there really any point testing this again when you haven't addressed the two biggest concerns raised from the previous test?

oh well - whatever - you'll see in the long run if you go down this route how many people who currently spend the money that pays your wages decide to stick with it 

Moon Roach

My gripe with this format hasn't changed.  The number of different opponents I see late on in the event is still only about 5, which means triple-tapping or worse, if I want the 40 wins.

They may not lose progression, but they'll lose points and possibly placement and I might antagonise a member of the wrong alliance.  I've heard they can be worse than our mods used to be. :wrysmileit'sajokepleasedon'tbanmeemoji:

There must be some method of opening up available opponents.  How about adding in the 5 players either side of me in the table, but only if currently shielded.

Arix90

This shows the first test was a success the only thing they are testing this time is the season aspect doubt they will change number of wins or cp in progression

Daiches

67 wins for 20 HP.. 

I would laugh if it wasn't so sad.