Lost Points

Options
MissoesRicRose
MissoesRicRose Posts: 258 Mover and Shaker
in MPQ General Discussion
How can we compete with a points system still ridiculous. Where we presume to face numerous battles to achieve a score in vs and with only 2 losses you lose practically all the score obtained.

Comments

  • dudethtsawesome
    dudethtsawesome Posts: 165 Tile Toppler
    Options
    Shhh, if you keep talking about it, they'll think the wins based progression was good and bring it back. Ain't nobody got time for that. 
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    @Bowgentle that's my line....that I got from you. LOL
  • DirtyDank
    DirtyDank Posts: 5 Just Dropped In
    Options
    As a player who consistently hits the 900 point reward in about 20 matches, win-based was awful because I would have to invest twice the time and twice the resources to secure mediocre rewards.  Now, if it was tied to clearance levels and included the removed CP it may not have been so bad.  Having levels 5-6 need 40 wins for max progression with an increase in value of other rewards in level 6, 7 needs 30 wins and 8 needs 20.  Now you can play to progression based on your roster strength and also get the sharks out of the kiddie pool so the lower tiered rosters can develope a bit faster since they would be able to actually rank in an event as well.  Also, as your roster gets stronger and you find yourself hitting point thresholds in less matches you can just move up a level.  But what do I know, I’m a high school dropout.
  • acescracked
    acescracked Posts: 1,197 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited November 2017
    Options
    Dragon_Nexus said:
    dude awesome said:
    Shhh, if you keep talking about it, they'll think the wins based progression was good and bring it back. Ain't nobody got time for that. 
    But it was good. Just poorly implimented.

    This board has a strange notion that something that's a good idea done poorly is fundamentally bad throughout and can never be improved upon. It's just like Boss Rush how no-one ever ever wanted it back because the first run was the hottest garbage.
    No, it was fundamentally bad. There is zero reason to improve your roster with wins based.

    That game mode *never* gets easier! New roster? - 40 wins, Avg roster? - 40 wins, good roster? - 40 wins. Awesome roster? - 40 wins.

    There is nothing to modify there. Win count multiplier based upon team you face, maybe? That would confound placement and imagine the rules that have to be set.

    Modify points based PvP and keep it.


  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    Options
    acescracked said:
    Dragon_Nexus said:
    dude awesome said:
    Shhh, if you keep talking about it, they'll think the wins based progression was good and bring it back. Ain't nobody got time for that. 
    But it was good. Just poorly implimented.

    This board has a strange notion that something that's a good idea done poorly is fundamentally bad throughout and can never be improved upon. It's just like Boss Rush how no-one ever ever wanted it back because the first run was the hottest garbage.
    No, it was fundamentally bad. There is zero reason to improve your roster with wins based.

    That game mode *never* gets easier! New roster? - 40 wins, Avg roster? - 40 wins, good roster? - 40 wins. Awesome roster? - 40 wins.

    There is nothing to modify there. Win count multiplier based upon team you face, maybe? That would confound placement and imagine the rules that have to be set.

    Modify points based PvP and keep it.


    It isn't fundamentally bad, you just look at it from the perspective of someone who is already "there."  The appeal of win based is two fold: help newer players catch up slightly quicker, and try to force people to play an entire event, rather than the last few hours. 

    It's like putting Usain Bolt in the last few hundred yards of a marathon, and saying he beat everyone because he did those yards the fastest. 

    I agree that their implementation was poor, but so is the current pvp.  Any game that disincentivizes playing (shields) is weird to me.  So is the notion that just because you have played more in the past, you should play less in the future.  We set that precedent, and you can't blame the devs when they ran with it.

Categories