Let's fix the PvP progression rewards

Orion

The PvP progression rewards are an artifact of a much earlier time in the game.  They no longer reflect reality and need to be updated.  I don't want this thread to turn into a points-based vs wins-based system, since there's plenty of threads on that topic.  Instead I want to update the progression rewards based on what feasible for different rosters.

Here's what I posted in the other PvP thread to start us with:

25 - Standard Token
50 - 750 ISO
100 - Elite token (stop it with the boosts already)
200 - Event token
300 - 50 HP
400 - 3* cover - more realistic for lower rosters
500 - 750 ISO
575 - 10 CP
650 - Event token
725 - 4* cover - more realistic for 4* transitioners
800 - Event token
825 - 2500 ISO
900 - 100 HP
1000 - 3000 ISO - we need more rewards between 900 and 1200
1100 - Event token
1200 - 15 CP

Obviously, it's impossible for a 3* roster to reach 800 in a PvP event.  400 seems like a much better (and attainable) number.  The CP seemed to be at pretty reasonable numbers, but I tried to bridge the gap between the 900 and 1200 rewards.  Is 725 a realistic number for the 4* cover?  I don't want it to be too easy to get, but also don't want to place it out of reach of the players that need it.

Can I get some input from 3* and 4* players about what feasible for your rosters?  Let's fix this together.

Milk Jugz

@Orion

I like your idea here, but may I also suggest lower point thresholds for lower CLs? Nobody in CLs 1-3, maybe higher, have a realistic chance at scoring 1200 points. Maybe the threshold should cap at 600 with shorter intervals between rewards.

Orion

Milk Jugz said:

@Orion

I like your idea here, but may I also suggest lower point thresholds for lower CLs? Nobody in CLs 1-3, maybe higher, have a realistic chance at scoring 1200 points. Maybe the threshold should cap at 600 with shorter intervals between rewards.

Yeah, things need to be adjusted probably for lower CLs, but this was obviously based on CL8.  Once we get a good baseline for that one, it can be used to fix the lower CLs as well.

aa25

I totally agree with the proposed reward structure.

However, I would like to add another point.

The reason why 800 and 900 are difficult to reach currently is because of the point loss ratio is quite high around 8-900 hundred (which causes 575 to be the  'convenient 10 cp' stop mark).

This reward structure makes sense only if the point loss ratio is left intact.

The op doesn't suggest the change to the point loss ratio, but I want to put it out here, just in case the devs have this in mind.

Change BOTH reward structure AND point loss ratio such that players start to lose more point at lower point WON'T work.

ZeiramMR

A couple thoughts:
- @aa25 : The other problem with the span from 800 to 900 besides amount of point loss is that I believe 800 is where you become visible to much more people in the MMR.
- I like the Rainbow AP boost, as I use them when making a shield hop toward the 4* in the last 50-100 points to be unshielded for less time. That may not be relevant if an improved progression table reduces or eliminates the amount of shield hopping for desired goals, of course. But thought it worth mentioning for the counter-opinion.
- 800 is too high for a 3* cover currently, but 400 is too low for what I think D3/Demiurge would go for based on their other competitive progressions. A scheme that puts the 3* at 650 and the 4* at 800-850 is closer to what I see them doing at a revision or SCL 9.
- Other than the direct cover goals being too optimistic, the rest of this generally looks pretty good. I agree with added progression marks for the gulf b/w 900-1200.

aa25

ZeiramMR said:

A couple thoughts:
- @aa25 : The other problem with the span from 800 to 900 besides amount of point loss is that I believe 800 is where you become visible to much more people in the MMR

:snip:

Good point. MMR change is definitely another factor. Although, I think the threshold varies with time left, i.e. relative to the top scores. I'm not 100% sure about this though, it maybe a static threshold.

Orion

ZeiramMR said:

A couple thoughts:
- @aa25 : The other problem with the span from 800 to 900 besides amount of point loss is that I believe 800 is where you become visible to much more people in the MMR.
- I like the Rainbow AP boost, as I use them when making a shield hop toward the 4* in the last 50-100 points to be unshielded for less time. That may not be relevant if an improved progression table reduces or eliminates the amount of shield hopping for desired goals, of course. But thought it worth mentioning for the counter-opinion.
- 800 is too high for a 3* cover currently, but 400 is too low for what I think D3/Demiurge would go for based on their other competitive progressions. A scheme that puts the 3* at 650 and the 4* at 800-850 is closer to what I see them doing at a revision or SCL 9.
- Other than the direct cover goals being too optimistic, the rest of this generally looks pretty good. I agree with added progression marks for the gulf b/w 900-1200.

650 is absurdly high for a 3* cover.  I know what their usual rewards are like, but the point of this thread is that those rewards are hopelessly outdated.  The 3* covers needs to be at a level that's reachable for 3* teams.  They aren't getting to 650 in a PvP.  I don't even think they're getting to 500, so really 400 is the only place it can realistically go.

Kaibar

As someone in 3* land the change to points is very confusing.  I just started playing recently and win progression made sense to me.  Now I feel like I am stuck at around 1500 for season progression and keep getting beat back.  Now no way can I get the 4* cover unless I am doing something wrong? 

Anyway during the 2 day PvP events I can usually hit around 600 range before I get beat back.  Like I said the point system for progression system totally confuses me so I maybe doing something totally wrong.

broll

Fix them by going back to win based.  :-p

Kaibar

I guess why is the total progression able to be beat back?  Why doesn't it just take away from the placement points because that makes sense for competing?  Then I could take on high point fights to get my total progression rewards faster and not have to worry about being stuck at a certain point progress level like I am this season.  Want that nightcrawler 4* cover.  Last season I would have had it by now.  The current season I am trying to figure out how I am going to get it.

Phumade

broll said:

Fix them by going back to win based.  :-p

saying going back to win isn't helpful at all.  you need to specify targets.  Personally,  I think win target should be based on your MMR.

5* rosters have to fight longer matches relative to anyone else.  They should have a 10 win discount from the

4* rosters.

I'd be okay with

5* tier:  30 wins
4* tier: 40 wins
3* tier: 50 wins


At the end of the day,  we need to force players into more matches not less.  If you want 5* support for wins based, you need to show them a benefit.  I.e. having bigger roster takes less work to achieve more prizes

Kaibar

Phumade said:

broll said:

Fix them by going back to win based.  :-p

saying going back to win isn't helpful at all.  you need to specify targets.  Personally,  I think win target should be based on your MMR.

5* rosters have to fight longer matches relative to anyone else.  They should have a 10 win discount from the

4* rosters.

I'd be okay with

5* tier:  30 wins
4* tier: 40 wins
3* tier: 50 wins


At the end of the day,  we need to force players into more matches not less.  If you want 5* support for wins based, you need to show them a benefit.  I.e. having bigger roster takes less work to achieve more prizes

Now that makes sense that 5* fights take longer.  With that being the case I like your idea and I am totally cool with 3*(Where I am at currently) being set to 45-50 wins.

Orion

Kaibar said:

As someone in 3* land the change to points is very confusing.  I just started playing recently and win progression made sense to me.  Now I feel like I am stuck at around 1500 for season progression and keep getting beat back.  Now no way can I get the 4* cover unless I am doing something wrong? 

Anyway during the 2 day PvP events I can usually hit around 600 range before I get beat back.  Like I said the point system for progression system totally confuses me so I maybe doing something totally wrong.

You aren't necessarily doing anything wrong.  Hitting a target above your level usually involves shielding and then hopping up to your desired level.  There's numerous threads discussing how to shield hop.

I'm surprised that a 3* roster can routinely hit 600.  Maybe 400 is too low for the 3* cover and it should be at 500.

Punisher5784

You can start by dropping the useless Standard token

AdamMagus

I like the list, am all for it.

Right now I play to 575 and call it a day.  I'd be willing to fight a few more 4* Rocket/Gamora teams to get that 725 4* cover.  900? not doing it, don't have the patience nor the healthpacks.

CT1888

The 3* definitely needs to be at a lower position - it's a total anachronism from the 3* meta days. The position of the covers in this feels like it lines up better with the pve progression structure, which has a more realistic valuation of a 3* cover.

jamesh

broll said:

Fix them by going back to win based.  :-p

Or better yet, tie progression to points gained, so there's still an incentive to pick high point targets over low point targets.

Farmerbink

I like the idea. I’m unhappy with the points based “progression,” for a variety of reasons, most of which can be tied to the fact that top-tier rewards are simple unattainable for me. 

For it a while I just haven’t played pvp much, preferring something that resembles reliable expectations management. With the new hero, I thought I would dive into this event with gusto.

Played the event early (got to ~700 a day into it), and planned to shield hop the rest of the way about 12-15 hours out. Little did I know, lacking the boosted 4* champs means that’s just not an option. If I unshield long enough to get two measly wins (advertised at 45 points per- actual awards closer to 30 each), I get hit by 4 people with the boosted 4*s and drop 100. Now here I am at the end of the event, having scrambled my way to almost 800, spent 800 HP shield hopping, just to watch the 4* token fade slowly into the sunset (along with my hopes of finishing in the top 10).

SCL doesn’t matter at all, and top awards are a cruel carrot hanging perpetually just out of reach. One thing’s for sure: If they don’t change something, I’ll take the relatively easy 575 and leave every PVP event alone after that from now on.  

Phumade

Farmerbink said:

SCL doesn’t matter at all, and top awards are a cruel carrot hanging perpetually just out of reach. One thing’s for sure: If they don’t change something, I’ll take the relatively easy 575 and leave every PVP event alone after that from now on.  

Actually, This is wrong info.  SCL makes a difference.

Lets just assume you get 900 for the pvp event.  You actually get better rewards if you drop your SCL low enough to be Top 5.

Generally

SCL8  Top Scores are over 1200+
SCL7  Top Scores are over 1000+
Scl 6 Top Scores around 900
Scl 5 Top Scores around 800.

You need to find out the particular cutoff off your particular slice/bracket.  but dropping a scl will almost always guarantee you more rewards

Wonko33

I think lower CL should be capped for season totals too, lower CL can only earn up to 600 point for Season, Mid 1200, unlimited for for CL8. To discourage 5* rosters to play down there

wymtime

I did place this in suggestions and feedback but my idea is to completely scrap placement.  I would make progression wins based and plavemen rewards points based.  Lower CL would have lower point totals and lower rewards.   For example in CL8 1200 points would get you top 5 rewards. 1500 points would get you top 2 rewards.  For progression I would make 35 wins for the 4* and move CP to the 1200 point total like top 10 in the test.  For sim and season still keep them point total and placement and alliance rewards will be placement.