Vhailorx said:Also, it's silly to suggest that this change lets you play whenever you want. That's only true if you only care about progression; placement still works on the same schedule. And if you really only care,about progression then PVP was already "play whenever you want" unless you got into shield hopping.
SnagglePuss said: Dear d3If you are going to wins based progression can you at least open up the mmr. Those lower roster players shouldn't complain now, about being hit multiple times in quick succession.Facing panthos 35 times and non-panthos a few times is..... Good for insomniacs? Thanks.
Vhailorx said: Jarvind said: Meander said: tiomono said So I'm copping out, and whiny? 70% of the replies in this topic have been whiny. I was not whining but expressing my happiness over a change. Let me be happy. Yes. Using your wife and kids as an excuse is a cop out. Holy smokes, dude. Did you like, read that after you typed it? That's some serious addict mentality. I don't think meander meant that responsibilities to family aren't important. Just that a player using family as a prop to justify something that is basically unrelated to family is inappropriate.
Jarvind said: Meander said: tiomono said So I'm copping out, and whiny? 70% of the replies in this topic have been whiny. I was not whining but expressing my happiness over a change. Let me be happy. Yes. Using your wife and kids as an excuse is a cop out. Holy smokes, dude. Did you like, read that after you typed it? That's some serious addict mentality.
Meander said: tiomono said So I'm copping out, and whiny? 70% of the replies in this topic have been whiny. I was not whining but expressing my happiness over a change. Let me be happy. Yes. Using your wife and kids as an excuse is a cop out.
tiomono said So I'm copping out, and whiny? 70% of the replies in this topic have been whiny. I was not whining but expressing my happiness over a change. Let me be happy.
scottee said: I'd just like to point out that this forum and this thread are both highly skewed with more high end, competitive players. That everyone has different experiences, and that some will like changes and some won't, should be obvious. This isn't a change that has an absolute better or worse.
Mustache1 said: @Brigby please pay attention to who is saying what. I recognize the folks saying noooo! As higher end players, thus the players who were likely paying d3's salary. I also notice the folks who are saying yay! Are people I've never seen before which likely means they are lower tier, newer players who aren't buying starks all the time. Can we rename Versus to Adv. Story mode? Maybe pve2?
Spudgutter said: Vhailorx said:Also, it's silly to suggest that this change lets you play whenever you want. That's only true if you only care about progression; placement still works on the same schedule. And if you really only care,about progression then PVP was already "play whenever you want" unless you got into shield hopping. First off, its not silly, it makes more sense then the current system, you just cant or wont see it.Ill give you a real world example. Event starts, you join, play a few matches. Put the kids to bed, play some more, hit maybe 400-600 points. Wake up in the morning, play match while brushing your teeth or drinking coffee. Play a match while at the gas station standing in line on the way to work. Play a match or two while on a break or in the restroom at work. Get home, and play some more.Now, in the current example, while at work during the day, you are flogged down 100-400 points, and never make that back up, and lose the progression. Some people dont feel like making that climb again, because they know the outcome is the same.In the new win based model, they are more then halfway to a 4*. Encouraged to keep playing, one could almost day.Too suggest that this game was already "play when you want for progression" is to be seriously detached from the casual player, no offense. And the casual playerbase, i think we can more than agree on, is way, way, way more people then those getting over 1200.
smkspy said: I kinda get why they remove it though. Takes 40 wins to get to 900 for the 4 star now, cp was at 1200. How many wins would the devs have put that? 20 wins per 100 points? That's 60 wins making it a 100 wins overall.Not saying they should have removed, but probably a major reason behind it.
Mustache1 said: Spudgutter said: Mustache1 said: @Brigby please pay attention to who is saying what. I recognize the folks saying noooo! As higher end players, thus the players who were likely paying d3's salary. I also notice the folks who are saying yay! Are people I've never seen before which likely means they are lower tier, newer players who aren't buying starks all the time. Can we rename Versus to Adv. Story mode? Maybe pve2? I'm a 1400 day player, recognize me? And we arent saying yay, we are saying that we understand the change, please stop conflating the two and making this a black and white issue, and come live in the gray with the rest of us. To be fair, i can't belive they didnt get your input before making this change. (Sarcasm/attempt at humor) Honey, if you didn't say yay then I wasn't talking to you. Go practice falling down, i'll be there in a minute.
Spudgutter said: Mustache1 said: @Brigby please pay attention to who is saying what. I recognize the folks saying noooo! As higher end players, thus the players who were likely paying d3's salary. I also notice the folks who are saying yay! Are people I've never seen before which likely means they are lower tier, newer players who aren't buying starks all the time. Can we rename Versus to Adv. Story mode? Maybe pve2? I'm a 1400 day player, recognize me? And we arent saying yay, we are saying that we understand the change, please stop conflating the two and making this a black and white issue, and come live in the gray with the rest of us. To be fair, i can't belive they didnt get your input before making this change. (Sarcasm/attempt at humor)
Spudgutter said: Mustache1 said: Spudgutter said: Mustache1 said: @Brigby please pay attention to who is saying what. I recognize the folks saying noooo! As higher end players, thus the players who were likely paying d3's salary. I also notice the folks who are saying yay! Are people I've never seen before which likely means they are lower tier, newer players who aren't buying starks all the time. Can we rename Versus to Adv. Story mode? Maybe pve2? I'm a 1400 day player, recognize me? And we arent saying yay, we are saying that we understand the change, please stop conflating the two and making this a black and white issue, and come live in the gray with the rest of us. To be fair, i can't belive they didnt get your input before making this change. (Sarcasm/attempt at humor) Honey, if you didn't say yay then I wasn't talking to you. Go practice falling down, i'll be there in a minute. Well, i like to think i was, in some way, so maybe you need some practice falling down? I dont even know what that is supposed to suggest. Is that suppised to be some sort of insult? Will we fall down together? Are you coming on to me?!?
Alsmir said:PvP under the old systemTop spots for season (even in CL6) - 5 star rosters with a couple of 4* players.900 points in any event almost impossible for anyone without 4* characters, 1200 points pretty much only for developed 4* rosters and above. Similar story for placement. 3* players or lower, transitioners can just suck it and either whale or play for a couple more years to compete. No events, no place in PvP for weaker rosters who want to compete against fairly matched opponents, while receiving decent rewards. CL5? Lower? Doesn't matter, mmr doesn't care and as long as you have enough points you will get clubbed by stronger rosters.In the meantime, comments from vets were: l2p, git gud, it's fair.PvE used to be kinda fair, then we received CL based lvl scaling. Reward structure was untouched. Suddenly owners of developed rosters could cut their clear times in half or more. Lousy improvements in CL8 over CL 7, meant that they now face 20 minut clears in CL7 while receiving same rewards as before + easier placement. Again, anyone with weaker roster can forget about placement. Then the 5* essentials were introduced, that give another edge if you aim for placement. Implementing those nodes as low as in CL7 is absurd.During release events you have 5* rosters even in CL6.
Meander said: smkspy said: I kinda get why they remove it though. Takes 40 wins to get to 900 for the 4 star now, cp was at 1200. How many wins would the devs have put that? 20 wins per 100 points? That's 60 wins making it a 100 wins overall.Not saying they should have removed, but probably a major reason behind it. I get that option, but put it at 100. People will gladly do it. It's seriously a better option than opening a scl5 bracket in the last hour and rushing to 16 wins and t5. I've done that twice in tests. How is that fair to players that played day 1? How is that fair to people that should be in scl5? This format sounds good to lower level players at first because they may luck into t5. When it's the norm, vets will spread out and take all the ranking. Then there will be complaints of "why can this guy use 5* in scl5?"
dude awesome said: SnagglePuss said: Dear d3If you are going to wins based progression can you at least open up the mmr. Those lower roster players shouldn't complain now, about being hit multiple times in quick succession.Facing panthos 35 times and non-panthos a few times is..... Good for insomniacs? Thanks. I wish I could upvote this 1000 x's. If we're going to have to endure playing 40 matches, let's make it easier to get q's. Playing the same 5 people over and over again to get the wins is definitely no fun.
sinnerjfl said: scottee said: I'd just like to point out that this forum and this thread are both highly skewed with more high end, competitive players. That everyone has different experiences, and that some will like changes and some won't, should be obvious. This isn't a change that has an absolute better or worse. More play for less rewards definitively is WORSE in my book.
Vhailorx said: Spudgutter said: Vhailorx said:Also, it's silly to suggest that this change lets you play whenever you want. That's only true if you only care about progression; placement still works on the same schedule. And if you really only care,about progression then PVP was already "play whenever you want" unless you got into shield hopping. First off, its not silly, it makes more sense then the current system, you just cant or wont see it.Ill give you a real world example. Event starts, you join, play a few matches. Put the kids to bed, play some more, hit maybe 400-600 points. Wake up in the morning, play match while brushing your teeth or drinking coffee. Play a match while at the gas station standing in line on the way to work. Play a match or two while on a break or in the restroom at work. Get home, and play some more.Now, in the current example, while at work during the day, you are flogged down 100-400 points, and never make that back up, and lose the progression. Some people dont feel like making that climb again, because they know the outcome is the same.In the new win based model, they are more then halfway to a 4*. Encouraged to keep playing, one could almost day.Too suggest that this game was already "play when you want for progression" is to be seriously detached from the casual player, no offense. And the casual playerbase, i think we can more than agree on, is way, way, way more people then those getting over 1200. If you only care about progression. I.e. playing to 900 points for the 4* and then putting the game down, then pvp was already basically play when you want. It's pretty unusal to take hits below 500-600 or so. So the first part of any climb is absolutely play when you want. Spend 30ish minutes at your convenience climbing to 600ish. The riskier part of climbing to 900 is 600-900. Getting 300-ish points takes 5-6 matches (unless you punch down with futile 20 point matches). 5 or 6 matches takes about 20-25 minutes. So that is basically the only requirement for 900 in the old system: at some point during last 48 hours of an event (preferrably not during the last couple of hours) you must spent 20-25 minutes to rush from 600 to 900. That does't seem like an particularly strict schedule to me. Especially not compared to an alternative that is: at any time the 60 hours of each pvp event you must spent approximately 140 minutes playing 40 matches.It's not some vast quality of life improvement for players. It's a modest-to-significant improvement for some players and a modest-to-significant steo backwards for others.
IamTheBiggs said: This really does weaken the team play aspect. This element had become something of an integral part of my raison d'être for playing, as I'm sure is the same for many others. Once you have yours, there's less incentive to help the team score.After nearly 4 years, I may be out.