Let's workshop the PVP crisis together!

2

Comments

  • Taganov
    Taganov Posts: 279 Mover and Shaker
    Points-based WITHOUT loss of progression
    Points based without loss of progression. This is all they had to do in the first place.
  • NMR252
    NMR252 Posts: 2 Just Dropped In
    Points-based WITHOUT loss of progression
    Couldn't they have two separate pvp arenas? If you can't/won't find a single compromise, this seems a natural solution.
  • CaptainFreaky
    CaptainFreaky Posts: 451 Mover and Shaker
    Uthgarprime said:
    I will tell you what system will be implemented. It will be the one that makes them the most money. Revenues must have been down significantly for them to end win based so soon.
    Certainly Shields were probably not used as much with Wins based system - and that means less HP utilization.  While HP is easier to get these days, it still requires resources to shield up all the time.
    Also, with Wins based, you can spread out your PVP play rather than cramming it into a small window (as some do with points system).  This lessens health pack utilization - again less resources consumed.

    I do believe however that simply less people played under the Wins system overall (cause 40 is a lot more than most people realized) so Demi had to go back to the drawing board.   They do want engagement ultimately, and PVP has been a mess for so long that many casual players just avoid it all together.  If they could show a reasonable path on progression (like Wins) that is not even more of a slog than PVE (unlike Wins) then that would be the best solution for the whole community.  
  • Punisher5784
    Punisher5784 Posts: 3,845 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited November 2017
    Points-based WITHOUT loss of progression
    Who are the *people* that chose Leave PvP as current point base 

    I noticed none of those players commented. We need a system that's fair to everyone and the current point system is a relic of that past that needed a change.. just not 40/72 wins!

    *Removed insult- Ducky
  • Spoit
    Spoit Posts: 3,441 Chairperson of the Boards
    Points-based WITHOUT loss of progression
    Starfury said:

    The open question for me is whether you should lose points if you retreat or lose (or lose connection - can't really get around that)

    If you don't, you'd probably incentivize people throwing matches to drop in score to have the potential for higher value matches. On the other hand you might question if that's much of a problem.

    I'm pretty sure it just let you reconnect when you get signal again? I used to play the 2* wave DDQ during the 5 minute stretch on the train where you didn't get signal, and it completed it as soon as it was past that part
  • Evil_Dude
    Evil_Dude Posts: 6 Just Dropped In
    Combine the systems.  900 points OR 40 wins gets 4* cover.  Everyone is happy, problem solved.
  • Tiggida
    Tiggida Posts: 64 Match Maker
    Other - I'll explain in the comments
    I posted this in another thread, but it seems like it's more relevant to this thread. 

    I think they should do checkpoints where you don't lose pts past a certain pt threshold. That way progression rewards  are not completely participation prizes and people may still need to hop to hit the next threshold. It also a has the added effect of almost forcing people to learn how to hop and use shields at lower levels if they can't quite hit a threshold in one run, which will help them at the more advanced levels when their rosters are ready to go for 1200. 

    Make 2 checkpoints at 350 and 700, or 300 and 600 pts, or 400 and 800, whatever the devs want the gate to be for the 4* cover. I think 350 and 700 are good spots to put them so that it's still a bit difficult and not just a given to the 4* cover. 200 pts to get to 900 should be no problem for rosters that are ready for the 4* cover, although it might take 2 or more hops for some depending on how deep their 3*-4*s are. 

    It will also put more targets out there for everyone (although mmr is weird and you sometimes get stuck in a loop even when you know there are targets at your roster level out there unshielded sometimes, so who knows lol). No checkpoints higher than the 2nd one since its obvious that they don't want the top cp progression available to everyone. 

    Only problem I can see with this is that it would create a lot of ties in placement. Maybe just make it the first person to cross the checkpoint is the tie breaker, or whoever had the highest score before getting knocked back down to the checkpoint (the latter may be too much of a programming nightmare.)
  • madsalad
    madsalad Posts: 815 Critical Contributor
    45 win? Please no.  For example, I was first in my Divine Champions bracket with 1600 points in 27 wins.  I didn't even bother trying to get to 40 because I would have had to play 33% longer than I already did.

    Listen, I get WHY progression is attractive to lower tiered rosters. I'm sure I would have loved it too but it's short sighted. You are play FOREVER. PvP is meant to be a test of roster strength and at lower tiers, you just aren't there yet. But if you keep playing and keep trying, you will be.  I wasn't always hitting above 1.2k but I got there eventually. 
  • killerkoala
    killerkoala Posts: 1,185 Chairperson of the Boards
    Evil Dude said:
    Combine the systems.  900 points OR 40 wins gets 4* cover.  Everyone is happy, problem solved.

    in the win progression 40 win got u a 2nd 3* cover not a 4* , so that is the way it should stay
  • wymtime
    wymtime Posts: 3,758 Chairperson of the Boards
    Wins-based with 15CP reward and fewer wins required (basically opts 4+5 together)
    In an ideal world it would be either or 35 wins or 900 points for the 4*.  The problem is can they do the codeing to do so.  My suggestion is to also tie totL wins to SCL.  In the win based system with the CP going to top 10 many players were dropping to lower CL to get the 15 CP.  my suggestion is to have CP for progression only in CL8 and higher.  Have the CP at 35 wins in CL8 then make CL9 20 CP for 35 wins.  In CL 5-7 I would give 10 CP for top 10.  Just like in PVE you get more CP for being in higher CL as it should be in PVP.

    in reality I would like the number to be 30 but I feel the Devs really feel that is too low.  It will also encourage more players to play at their highest CL instead of dropping down to steal CP from lower CL players.  Also by keeping the CP out of progression in lower CL top progression for those players would be the 4*.
  • Tiggida
    Tiggida Posts: 64 Match Maker
    Other - I'll explain in the comments
    wymtime said:
    In an ideal world it would be either or 35 wins or 900 points for the 4*.  The problem is can they do the codeing to do so.  My suggestion is to also tie totL wins to SCL.  In the win based system with the CP going to top 10 many players were dropping to lower CL to get the 15 CP.  my suggestion is to have CP for progression only in CL8 and higher.  Have the CP at 35 wins in CL8 then make CL9 20 CP for 35 wins.  In CL 5-7 I would give 10 CP for top 10.  Just like in PVE you get more CP for being in higher CL as it should be in PVP.

    in reality I would like the number to be 30 but I feel the Devs really feel that is too low.  It will also encourage more players to play at their highest CL instead of dropping down to steal CP from lower CL players.  Also by keeping the CP out of progression in lower CL top progression for those players would be the 4*.
    An easier solution than that is to make it win based with no cp in progression up until CL6, and then have point based progression for CL7 and CL8. That would keep most of the big rosters in the top 2 CLs and still allow transitioning players to get the extra cp from placement in CL5 and CL6 without having to compete with the big dogs. If they introduce CL9 just shift all of this up one CL level. 
  • T_REZ5000
    T_REZ5000 Posts: 149 Tile Toppler
    Wins-based with fewer wins required per reward
    Why not just overlay the wins system on top of the current points system for progression?  Meaning you could achieve progression through either wins or points.
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    Welcome Death said:
         Both systems are broken.  The regular points based system is broken because the progression makes no sense, and high 3* guys can't get 4* covers. The 40 wins system is broken because it's guaranteed progression regardless of roster strength, and 2* guys can get 4* covers.  
         Pvp needs to be points based.  Otherwise improving your roster doesn't help you meet the next milestone of progression, just helps placement some.  Also, if progression has nothing to do with how many points you have, it makes getting points feel useless til the end.  However, progression and placement need to be fixed.
         Progression should be static in cl1-cl8.  It's practically that way in shield sim.  Still get 3s where they usually are, plus the 4* at 2k, even in cl1.  Just a couple 1* are replaced with 2*.  You can't score higher or do better points wise in pvp by picking a low CL, unlike pve.  So it doesn't make sense to have progression milestones change.  It REALLY doesn't make sense to have a moonstone or whatever at 1200 in cl1.  They're never going to hit 1200 in cl1 unless someone that plays 8 has been drinking and joins an event, then maybe.  To prevent sandbagging, placement rewards need a serious adjustment.  Pve is much better than pvp in this regard.  Out of 1000 people pve-ing in cl8, 200 get 3*.  Pvp?  Just 100 out of 1000.  The iso is marginally better but nothing to get excited about either.  Revamping placement awards to make stepping up be more appealing really needs to happen. 
    One more thing about progression.  I get that they moved the 3* from 900 to 800 and the 4* from 1000 to 900 when the cupcake nerf came in, but they also put a convenient offramp at 575.  That's the thing that's keeping 3* guys from hitting 900, more than any other reason.  If everyone at your roster strength hits that and gives up, you can' climb any higher.  It should go something like a 3* at 600, another at 800, first 10cp at 900, the 4* at 1k, and the rest of the cp at 1200.  Maybe put an event token or some hp at 1100 to bridge the gap a bit.  This way high 2* guys can get 3* covers, all 3* guys can get 2 3* covers, those that push can get cp and even a 4*, etc etc.  Milestones to push for, higher and higher til you can reliably get 1.2k.  
    Wow.  I can finally  agree with @Welcome Death on something LOL. Very well thought out post. 
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker
    Wins-based with fewer wins required per reward
    Welcome Death said:
         Both systems are broken.  The regular points based system is broken because the progression makes no sense, and high 3* guys can't get 4* covers. The 40 wins system is broken because it's guaranteed progression regardless of roster strength, and 2* guys can get 4* covers.  
         Pvp needs to be points based.  Otherwise improving your roster doesn't help you meet the next milestone of progression, just helps placement some.  Also, if progression has nothing to do with how many points you have, it makes getting points feel useless til the end.  However, progression and placement need to be fixed.
         Progression should be static in cl1-cl8.  It's practically that way in shield sim.  Still get 3s where they usually are, plus the 4* at 2k, even in cl1.  Just a couple 1* are replaced with 2*.  You can't score higher or do better points wise in pvp by picking a low CL, unlike pve.  So it doesn't make sense to have progression milestones change.  It REALLY doesn't make sense to have a moonstone or whatever at 1200 in cl1.  They're never going to hit 1200 in cl1 unless someone that plays 8 has been drinking and joins an event, then maybe.  To prevent sandbagging, placement rewards need a serious adjustment.  Pve is much better than pvp in this regard.  Out of 1000 people pve-ing in cl8, 200 get 3*.  Pvp?  Just 100 out of 1000.  The iso is marginally better but nothing to get excited about either.  Revamping placement awards to make stepping up be more appealing really needs to happen. 
    One more thing about progression.  I get that they moved the 3* from 900 to 800 and the 4* from 1000 to 900 when the cupcake nerf came in, but they also put a convenient offramp at 575.  That's the thing that's keeping 3* guys from hitting 900, more than any other reason.  If everyone at your roster strength hits that and gives up, you can' climb any higher.  It should go something like a 3* at 600, another at 800, first 10cp at 900, the 4* at 1k, and the rest of the cp at 1200.  Maybe put an event token or some hp at 1100 to bridge the gap a bit.  This way high 2* guys can get 3* covers, all 3* guys can get 2 3* covers, those that push can get cp and even a 4*, etc etc.  Milestones to push for, higher and higher til you can reliably get 1.2k.  
    I can't possibly be reading that right, and maybe it's the wall-o-text without any space breaks, so I am asking you to clarify for me, please. It seems like your solution is that rewards are... too easy to get? Your ideal system would be to keep points loss regression, but bump UP the rewards people actually want to higher levels (the 10 CP goes from 575 to 900!? The 4* that people already see as an impossible dream at 900 goes to 1000?)? 

    I've got to be missing something, haha. 
  • WelcomeDeath
    WelcomeDeath Posts: 349 Mover and Shaker
    Other - I'll explain in the comments
    NotBAMF said:
    Welcome Death said:
         Both systems are broken.  The regular points based system is broken because the progression makes no sense, and high 3* guys can't get 4* covers. The 40 wins system is broken because it's guaranteed progression regardless of roster strength, and 2* guys can get 4* covers.  
         Pvp needs to be points based.  Otherwise improving your roster doesn't help you meet the next milestone of progression, just helps placement some.  Also, if progression has nothing to do with how many points you have, it makes getting points feel useless til the end.  However, progression and placement need to be fixed.
         Progression should be static in cl1-cl8.  It's practically that way in shield sim.  Still get 3s where they usually are, plus the 4* at 2k, even in cl1.  Just a couple 1* are replaced with 2*.  You can't score higher or do better points wise in pvp by picking a low CL, unlike pve.  So it doesn't make sense to have progression milestones change.  It REALLY doesn't make sense to have a moonstone or whatever at 1200 in cl1.  They're never going to hit 1200 in cl1 unless someone that plays 8 has been drinking and joins an event, then maybe.  To prevent sandbagging, placement rewards need a serious adjustment.  Pve is much better than pvp in this regard.  Out of 1000 people pve-ing in cl8, 200 get 3*.  Pvp?  Just 100 out of 1000.  The iso is marginally better but nothing to get excited about either.  Revamping placement awards to make stepping up be more appealing really needs to happen. 
    One more thing about progression.  I get that they moved the 3* from 900 to 800 and the 4* from 1000 to 900 when the cupcake nerf came in, but they also put a convenient offramp at 575.  That's the thing that's keeping 3* guys from hitting 900, more than any other reason.  If everyone at your roster strength hits that and gives up, you can' climb any higher.  It should go something like a 3* at 600, another at 800, first 10cp at 900, the 4* at 1k, and the rest of the cp at 1200.  Maybe put an event token or some hp at 1100 to bridge the gap a bit.  This way high 2* guys can get 3* covers, all 3* guys can get 2 3* covers, those that push can get cp and even a 4*, etc etc.  Milestones to push for, higher and higher til you can reliably get 1.2k.  
    I can't possibly be reading that right, and maybe it's the wall-o-text without any space breaks, so I am asking you to clarify for me, please. It seems like your solution is that rewards are... too easy to get? Your ideal system would be to keep points loss regression, but bump UP the rewards people actually want to higher levels (the 10 CP goes from 575 to 900!? The 4* that people already see as an impossible dream at 900 goes to 1000?)? 

    I've got to be missing something, haha. 
             You're reading it right.  The 10 cp award at 575 has been there for just a year.  Before that it was very possible for all 3* players to get to 900+ before even finding the elusive cupcake teams.  It was put in progression as an "I'm sorry" by the devs for changing the way defensive teams work.

           The reason it became difficult had nothing to do with the game meta, as that had already moved well past 3* and 4* into the 5* realm.  The reason it became difficult was because of that award at 575.  Almost overnight, EVERYONE in the 3* tier used that as an offramp for pvp.  If everyone gives up, you can't climb higher.  With the 40 wins system, I personally saw several 3* guys 800-900+ in my brackets.  Keep in mind NOTHING changed about the way points worked and there were FEWER people shielding, it was 100% about engagement.  

          I've used this example over and over again, but 3* players hit 2000 points in shield sim every single season.  The breaking point (where getting hit means you lose 100% of points your attacker gained) is set at 2k there.  It's set at 1k in regular events.  So it's totally and completely possible.  But why on earth would you go past 575 and wade through a river of **** rewards to get to 800/900?  You wouldn't, so people dont. But if rewards got slowly but surely better instead of going up and down all over the place, people would.
  • madoctor
    madoctor Posts: 292 Mover and Shaker
    https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/68404/we-can-rebuild-pvp-we-have-the-technology-we-can-make-pvp-even-better-than-it-was-before/p1

    First post of the thread. I can live with that.

    There, done and dusted.
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker
    edited November 2017
    Wins-based with fewer wins required per reward
    Welcome Death said:
    NotBAMF said:
    Welcome Death said:
         Both systems are broken.  The regular points based system is broken because the progression makes no sense, and high 3* guys can't get 4* covers. The 40 wins system is broken because it's guaranteed progression regardless of roster strength, and 2* guys can get 4* covers.  
         Pvp needs to be points based.  Otherwise improving your roster doesn't help you meet the next milestone of progression, just helps placement some.  Also, if progression has nothing to do with how many points you have, it makes getting points feel useless til the end.  However, progression and placement need to be fixed.
         Progression should be static in cl1-cl8.  It's practically that way in shield sim.  Still get 3s where they usually are, plus the 4* at 2k, even in cl1.  Just a couple 1* are replaced with 2*.  You can't score higher or do better points wise in pvp by picking a low CL, unlike pve.  So it doesn't make sense to have progression milestones change.  It REALLY doesn't make sense to have a moonstone or whatever at 1200 in cl1.  They're never going to hit 1200 in cl1 unless someone that plays 8 has been drinking and joins an event, then maybe.  To prevent sandbagging, placement rewards need a serious adjustment.  Pve is much better than pvp in this regard.  Out of 1000 people pve-ing in cl8, 200 get 3*.  Pvp?  Just 100 out of 1000.  The iso is marginally better but nothing to get excited about either.  Revamping placement awards to make stepping up be more appealing really needs to happen. 
    One more thing about progression.  I get that they moved the 3* from 900 to 800 and the 4* from 1000 to 900 when the cupcake nerf came in, but they also put a convenient offramp at 575.  That's the thing that's keeping 3* guys from hitting 900, more than any other reason.  If everyone at your roster strength hits that and gives up, you can' climb any higher.  It should go something like a 3* at 600, another at 800, first 10cp at 900, the 4* at 1k, and the rest of the cp at 1200.  Maybe put an event token or some hp at 1100 to bridge the gap a bit.  This way high 2* guys can get 3* covers, all 3* guys can get 2 3* covers, those that push can get cp and even a 4*, etc etc.  Milestones to push for, higher and higher til you can reliably get 1.2k.  
    I can't possibly be reading that right, and maybe it's the wall-o-text without any space breaks, so I am asking you to clarify for me, please. It seems like your solution is that rewards are... too easy to get? Your ideal system would be to keep points loss regression, but bump UP the rewards people actually want to higher levels (the 10 CP goes from 575 to 900!? The 4* that people already see as an impossible dream at 900 goes to 1000?)? 

    I've got to be missing something, haha. 
             You're reading it right.  The 10 cp award at 575 has been there for just a year.  Before that it was very possible for all 3* players to get to 900+ before even finding the elusive cupcake teams.  It was put in progression as an "I'm sorry" by the devs for changing the way defensive teams work.

           The reason it became difficult had nothing to do with the game meta, as that had already moved well past 3* and 4* into the 5* realm.  The reason it became difficult was because of that award at 575.  Almost overnight, EVERYONE in the 3* tier used that as an offramp for pvp.  If everyone gives up, you can't climb higher.  With the 40 wins system, I personally saw several 3* guys 800-900+ in my brackets.  Keep in mind NOTHING changed about the way points worked and there were FEWER people shielding, it was 100% about engagement.  

          I've used this example over and over again, but 3* players hit 2000 points in shield sim every single season.  The breaking point (where getting hit means you lose 100% of points your attacker gained) is set at 2k there.  It's set at 1k in regular events.  So it's totally and completely possible.  But why on earth would you go past 575 and wade through a river of tinykitty rewards to get to 800/900?  You wouldn't, so people dont. But if rewards got slowly but surely better instead of going up and down all over the place, people would.
    Okay. I mean, that's... okay. I guess. I mean, personally? If THAT was their idea to fix the Versus system, I'd never touch PVP again, but hey. And thanks for contributing to the thread; I do appreciate your time to give your thoughts on the matter. Does that sound sarcastic? It's not meant to be; I am being genuine. I thank you for your clearly involved idea, it's just one I would absolutely never ever support, haha.

    I can say my experience under the wins-based system--and several people here have agreed with this in the hundred thousand or so posts and topics since last season started--is that I was getting to 40 wins without ever getting anywhere near 900 points. I was getting my 40 wins between 700 and 800. I never once during the wins-based season hit 900. My score was still CONSTANTLY getting smacked down the ladder. Just playing MORE wasn't the solution; I was still hemorrhaging points after a while.

    And besides that, it seems like a lot of folks' problems with the W-B system was that it turned the whole affair into a "slog". I never found that to be the case, but a common complaint was that the W-B system just forced them to play and play and play more than they would want to, and the idea proposed here is literally "Well if you just play and play and play more than you want to, you'll get things". That was the wins system! Except there was no danger of losing ground along the way.
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker
    Wins-based with fewer wins required per reward

    aesthetocyst said:
    Punisher5784 said:
    Who are the *people* that chose Leave PvP as current point base 

    I noticed none of those players commented. We need a system that's fair to everyone and the current point system is a relic of that past that needed a change.. just not 40/72 wins!

    *Removed insult- Ducky
    Commented.

    Leaving as-is is better than saddling us with something worse.

    Plenty of suggestions made.

    Let the time-tested system roll as-is, while running test-events on the side.


    I am genuinely curious that you see that a LOT of people are unhappy with the points-based system, and when given a chance to propose an idea--ANY IDEA--that would improve the system to make as many people happy as possible, your proposal is... "No, nuts to the people who are unhappy"? It's just an idea proposal. It doesn't have to be any from the OP, you could suggest literally anything because the points-based system is awful and a fair chunk of the player base hates it. 
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,736 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited November 2017
    Other - I'll explain in the comments
    First, who likes wins based best? FTP or near FTP rosters (this is fine.  No judgements.). Whales and spenders like points based with CP because they have the rosters that benefit from this system most.  (Also, high playing FTP may like points based more).

    A big problem with a Versus system and a 4 year old game is that you have FTP vets with champed 5’s down to FTP that have champed 3’s and want to jump into PVP.  And they are all competing, so 3’s that get to a certain score become targets to anyone with better rosters below their score.  When I was there(3’s), I found 575 attainable and that was about it.

    Now the devs gave a bunch of folks a taste of “keep playing for a guaranteed 4*” and took it away.  Of course they are mad.  They should be!

    If you paid close attention, an unannounced change was made to PVP.  If you joined the season first, your roster was limited in the SCL you could choose.  Ex: I am rank 122 and could only choose 6-8.

    Here is my hope:  they plan to have different reward systems for different SCL’s.  implement wins based pvp for lower SCL’s (maybe 1-6?) and keep points for higher (7-9?).  Let 6 have a 4* at 40 wins.  Keep 1200 points=CP for high SCL’s. Done.

Categories