PVP changes

elvy75

Well, i suppose devs are doing the final test before implementing the new PVP structure. However this changes PVP into grind in order to get to 40 wins. We were already saying that for 5* roster it takes max 25 wins to get to 1200 points, and that the new system if comes in play as it is right now will significantly increase play time. So how this could be solved in order to make everyone happy? I have two ideas: 
1. opening MMR, and allowing us to queue almost everyone, starting from 3* to 4* and eventually 5* teams after something like 25 wins
2. on the screen where we already choose clearance level and slice to play, have another choice that will allow you to choose points based or win based progression

Option #1 while it sounds great will surely not be appreciated by the player base that would again accuse higher rosters of bulling them. But option #2 is the one that would satisfy entire player base in my opinion. If you can get 900 points without any problems you choose that, if it is hard to do that for you then choose win based system until the roster is mature enough to bring you to 900 reliably.

Also since CL9 is introduced for PVE, i would like if someone from developers team ( @Brigby ) would let us know if they know when is it planned for it to go live for PVP as well. And also another question: why do we have command points as progression rewards in PVE, but can only compete for them in PVP?

RunningMan

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

D4Ni13

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

I actually like it. Kudos.

elvy75

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

This is something i was thinking about, but its too much work for the server as i was told. If you would choose if you want to go win based or points based it would be easier for server to register it. And still everyone can decide how they want to play. They already have a way of making selections, so i was thinking this could be an easy solution to the issue that could make everyone happy.

Beer40

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

Or here's an idea. According to OP, its 25 wins for 1,200 points. So why should certain players get 15 CP for nearly half the matches that other players get a 4* cover for...that doesn't add up to me, nor do I think its fair. Everyone needs CP, not just the "points only PVP" players. So I have two counter solutions to your solution:

1) Make CP wins based only. 52 wins gets 15 CP. 

or , maybe, just maybe, you think that CP should be fair to all, instead of what you are currently advocating. Then we could have solution 2.

2) 15 CP at 52 wins or 1,200 points.

See what I did there? I made CP available for anyone who can/will play to it. Your idea will have lots of us saying, "Why should those people only get CP?" and we'll advocate for wins-only PVP, instead of a hybrid...or we'll advocate for something that only favors us in regards to CP, just like you are doing.

Spudgutter

elvy75 said:

1. opening MMR, and allowing us to queue almost everyone, starting from 3* to 4* and eventually 5* teams after something like 25 wins


Option #1 while it sounds great will surely not be appreciated by the player base that would again accuse higher rosters of bulling them. 

For what it's worth, weaker rosters don't care if they are getting smacked around for this. I don't blame anyone for not reading the full thread on the infinity season, but from the looks of it, a lot of people that posted that they were finally able to get the 4* cover repeatedly say that they didn't mind all of the losses.  

And since creating a hybrid system is the best solution, and also the most technically difficult, it is the least likely to happen.  

RunningMan

Beer40 said:

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

Or here's an idea. According to OP, its 25 wins for 1,200 points. So why should certain players get 15 CP for nearly half the matches that other players get a 4* cover for...that doesn't add up to me, nor do I think its fair. Everyone needs CP, not just the "points only PVP" players. So I have two counter solutions to your solution:

1) Make CP wins based only. 52 wins gets 15 CP. 

or , maybe, just maybe, you think that CP should be fair to all, instead of what you are currently advocating. Then we could have solution 2.

2) 15 CP at 52 wins or 1,200 points.

See what I did there? I made CP available for anyone who can/will play to it. Your idea will have lots of us saying, "Why should those people only get CP?" and we'll advocate for wins-only PVP, instead of a hybrid...or we'll advocate for something that only favors us in regards to CP, just like you are doing.

Because the developers are obviously trying to gate the amount of CP that gets awarded per event.  That's why, in the win based pvp events, there is no top tier progression CP reward and instead been moved to placement reward.  They don't want everyone to be able to get the CP.  I'm just making a suggestion that fits within their parameters, so they don't outright dismiss the idea.

Beer40

RunningMan said:

Beer40 said:

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

Or here's an idea. According to OP, its 25 wins for 1,200 points. So why should certain players get 15 CP for nearly half the matches that other players get a 4* cover for...that doesn't add up to me, nor do I think its fair. Everyone needs CP, not just the "points only PVP" players. So I have two counter solutions to your solution:

1) Make CP wins based only. 52 wins gets 15 CP. 

or , maybe, just maybe, you think that CP should be fair to all, instead of what you are currently advocating. Then we could have solution 2.

2) 15 CP at 52 wins or 1,200 points.

See what I did there? I made CP available for anyone who can/will play to it. Your idea will have lots of us saying, "Why should those people only get CP?" and we'll advocate for wins-only PVP, instead of a hybrid...or we'll advocate for something that only favors us in regards to CP, just like you are doing.

Because the developers are obviously trying to gate the amount of CP that gets awarded per event.  That's why, in the win based pvp events, there is no top tier progression CP reward and instead been moved to placement reward.  They don't want everyone to be able to get the CP.  I'm just making a suggestion that fits within their parameters, so they don't outright dismiss the idea.

Fair enough. This leads me to wonder if that's a major reason for wins based PVP in general, to slow down higher level rosters from all rewards. 

elvy75

Beer40 said:

RunningMan said:

In another thread on suggestions and feedback, I made the following suggestion:  

I'd prefer a hybrid system where it uses both points and wins for the same reward, but it rewards you based on whichever you hit first.  I can't remember all the point values for rewards, so will just use the ones I remember from CL7. 

575pts or 16 wins : 10cp
800pts or 28 wins : 3* cover
900pts or 40 wins : 4* cover
1200pts                : 15cp

This way, the transitioning rosters can reach their desired covers by grinding out wins while the stronger rosters can reach the rewards through points in likely fewer wins.  The existing CP for max progression would remain points only.

So for example, a 3*-4* transitioner could:
  - hit 575 points in 12 wins and get the 10cp
  - They might decide to stop there, or continue on and hit 800 points for the 3* cover in 25 wins
  - However, at that high, they often get beat back down as fast (or faster) than they can get points, so they decide to grind out another 15 wins to get the 4* cover, and end the event with 625 pts after all is said and done.

Or here's an idea. According to OP, its 25 wins for 1,200 points. So why should certain players get 15 CP for nearly half the matches that other players get a 4* cover for...that doesn't add up to me, nor do I think its fair. Everyone needs CP, not just the "points only PVP" players. So I have two counter solutions to your solution:

1) Make CP wins based only. 52 wins gets 15 CP. 

or , maybe, just maybe, you think that CP should be fair to all, instead of what you are currently advocating. Then we could have solution 2.

2) 15 CP at 52 wins or 1,200 points.

See what I did there? I made CP available for anyone who can/will play to it. Your idea will have lots of us saying, "Why should those people only get CP?" and we'll advocate for wins-only PVP, instead of a hybrid...or we'll advocate for something that only favors us in regards to CP, just like you are doing.

Someone needs to improve their reading skills. Nowhere in the OP I said who should get CP, i said let us choose weather you want to achieve top progression by win counts or by points. What I suggested was additional screen where you will choose the way you want to play. You don't have roster that can compete for points based system, you select wins, you have the roster that can achieve progression given in points you select points. Just like you select time slice in which you play and clearance level. This post was not about what max progression should look like, but how you achieve it. and it wasn't about two different progression rewards, just different methods of getting the same stuffs in the manner that will be easier for client server communication. 

smkspy

As someone that use to just snipe brackets and play to only 650 or so, sometimes 900 depending on my run, I love this system.

I start at the beginning of the event, win ten rounds or so, take a break, come back later to win a few more rounds. I get hit a few times and keep going hitting the 40 wins with like a day left or so.

Boil it down, this will be a method to get more players in pvp. Just like scl based scaling got more 5 star players to come back to pve. I get 5 star/high level players being upset over the change, but there has to be some give and take for all players. Pve was great for higher end rosters but hurt lower end rosters, this flips it for pvp.

Some of you guys just need to adapt, and you will, that's the game.

Milk Jugz

Well I certainly don't want to HAVE to win 40 matches, with 30 of them against Panthos teams. Or I'm hitting the same 4 people upwards of 10 times each- not fair to them and I truly don't care about double or triple tapping people. I did it just 5 minutes ago against someone who hit me on my climb in Rags event with a weaker roster. I can get behind an open MMR to make my wins a bit easier.

But, that still doesn't fix the fact that the score based system requires strategy and savvy that a 40 win mindless grind just can never imitate. The fact that you are risking your points, thus progression and placement, to battle makes it fun. You don't go to Vegas and bet the house money and take home the winnings, do you? No! You bet with your money, sometimes you lose, sometimes you win. The more skill you have, the better your odds are. If you invest the time (or money) to improve your roster you start stacking the deck in your favor, thus improving your odds. It takes time to build your roster and learn the strategy behind Versus.

I hardly played Versus until January of this year, usually just got the 10-pack each season. Around the beginning of this year I started hitting Versus a little harder as my roster improved. After about 3 or 4 seasons I started figuring out the strategy behind it and what worked for me. After a couple more seasons I perfected it. Now I have no trouble hitting the progression I want (90% I stop at 9xx), I know when to start, when to shield, when to climb, when to hop, and when to shield out. It takes trial and error to find what works for you.

Win based doesn't utilize any of that. I don't even need to worry about placement in win based- just shield out when I hit 40 wins. The amount of points I've scored in each test event are records for me. I don't usually have the time to go for 1200 in the score based system. 9xx is good enough for top 25, with the occasional t10 if I catch a good bracket. In Nefarious Foes I actually finished in the t10 in my bracket because my score was so high after hitting 40 wins- Don't remember the exact number. In BFF I scored more points than in any other Versus event I've ever played besides Sim- almost 1300. I missed top 10 on that one (and not by much, disappointing), but still got the top 25 I care about.

There is, literally, nothing for me to adjust to except having to find MORE time in my schedule to devote to this game for the EXACT SAME rewards. If this goes live as is, that's it- Literally, more time, same rewards. Not even the little bump in rewards Story got when I had to devote more time. No, just more time, same $H!T!!!!!!!!!

It's easy for people to say:

smkspy said:

Some of you guys just need to adapt, and you will, that's the game.

But, we won't always have the time in our schedule.................

Spudgutter

Milk Jugz said:

But, we won't always have the time in our schedule.................

Some of us want to play when we have time in our schedule.

I have "X" amount of time for playing on my phone in a given day.  I can either jump in and play a match here or there on MPQ, all day long, as i have the time, or i play for short periods (almost literally dictated by when others are climbing if we are talking just about pvp) and then shield so that i dont play.  And so i do something else on my phone.

We get it, i am ok with a win based system, you are against it.  But we both agree that 40 wins is way too much, that MMR should be opened up so that if we have to fight more matches, they could be easier, that CP should still be in progression. 

Can't you at least agree that letting people play when they TRULY want to play isn't the worst thing they have done?  That as a developer of mobile content, it isn't exactly crazy that they want to maximize engagement? 

Pants1000

Milk Jugz said:

The fact that you are risking your points, thus progression and placement, to battle makes it fun. 

We have different definitions of fun.  

Milk Jugz

@Spudgutter

I'm all for more engagement, but not at the sacrifice of more of my own time, especially if I'm not going to be compensated for spending more time. Isn't that the goal for everyone? Maximize reward vs effort? And by the logical process of games, the more you put in- the more you should get out. I've put the time into the game to develop my roster to compete at this level. Why should I have to suffer now to make it easier for other people? There are plenty of good ideas that have been thrown out in the forums, my favorite is actually to be able to choose win or score based. If they do something to make this not double my time/effort I can get behind it. But, if it goes live as is in the tests. Absolutely not, that format does not work for me. Nothing anyone says will make me feel better about double effort for the same rewards, that is an extreme nerf to what has become my favorite part of the game.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pants1000 said:

Milk Jugz said:

The fact that you are risking your points, thus progression and placement, to battle makes it fun. 

We have different definitions of fun.  

And, you know what, that is absolutely fine. There are 2 other modes for fun in this game that don't involve risking your points- Story and DDQ. Why should I have to sit by while my favorite mode is turned into more of the same??

Spudgutter

Milk Jugz said:

@Spudgutter

I'm all for more engagement, but not at the sacrifice of more of my own time, especially if I'm not going to be compensated for spending more time. Isn't that the goal for everyone? Maximize reward vs effort? And by the logical process of games, the more you put in- the more you should get out. I've put the time into the game to develop my roster to compete at this level. Why should I have to suffer now to make it easier for other people? There are plenty of good ideas that have been thrown out in the forums, my favorite is actually to be able to choose win or score based. If they do something to make this not double my time/effort I can get behind it. But, if it goes live as is in the tests. Absolutely not, that format does not work for me. Nothing anyone says will make me feel better about double effort for the same rewards, that is an extreme nerf to what has become my favorite part of the game.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pants1000 said:

Milk Jugz said:

The fact that you are risking your points, thus progression and placement, to battle makes it fun. 

We have different definitions of fun.  

And, you know what, that is absolutely fine. There are 2 other modes for fun in this game that don't involve risking your points- Story and DDQ. Why should I have to sit by while my favorite mode is turned into more of the same??

If they do implement this, it will be just like 5* scaling in pve. Sucks for some, benefits others. Or better put, you can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time.  

Just like with all other changes in this game, the goalposts will move from time to time.  True healing.  Character nerfs.  Character health pools.  Cupcakes.  Increased clears in pve.  This list is long, and yet, here we are at almost 4 years.  

"There are 2 other modes for fun in this game that don't involve risking your points- Story and DDQ. Why should I have to sit by while my favorite mode is turned into more of the same?"

Leaving aside the weird notion that ddq is a mode of it's own, let me answer your question with a similar question.  Why should I sit by while my favorite mode has the potential to be improved?

You are right, no one is going to change your mind.

Milk Jugz

@Spudgutter

I could agree with you, if it was an improvement. But adding to my, already considerable, time spent playing is simply not an improvement. 

Kozza123

I like the new changes to the PVP I do think the 40 wins award could be better but all in all it is much better to play and a more fair to play to. I would be happy for this to be a permanent change.