Next Season PvP

123457

Comments

  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    Beer40 said:
    The rockett said:
    Vaulting worked.  It was right time with some of the best 4* this game has seen. That was a major major impact. 
    Wait a minute here... 
    That statement + your passionate crusade to restore points based PVP...

    Fightmaster, is that you???

    just kidding  :D

    I almost spit out my coffee.  LOL
  • BoyWonder1914
    BoyWonder1914 Posts: 884 Critical Contributor
    broll said:
    shartattack said:
    broll said:
    Bowgentle said:

    Snark all you want.  I'm in the 600+ days and recently crossed the 5* threashold.  For the 600+ days before I had 2 5* champs I think I saw 60 or more points 4 times total in all those days playing every PvP.  50 was pretty rare also, usually the high point was 38-48.  Now that I have 2 5*s I see 70s and 75s all the time.  That fact that it's possible for you is because you're practically playing a different game then the people it's impossible for.  This is ultimately why PvP is so broken, there's so much variability in experience based on roster and changing SCLs does nothing to change that.  Super broken.
    not seeing those huge targets is a double edged sword for a 4* player.  Those huge targets are generally 5* players.  MMR hides them from you as a 4, but also hides you from them.  That is why 4* players can float higher than most 5* rosters.  If 5* players could target 3 or 4* rosters before breaking MMR, the forums would erupt with complaints.
    I recognize that.  Yet vets will continue to preach don't hit targets lower than 40 or 50 and talk about 75s when talking to people no where near 5*.  It's probably not intentional, but they don't know, remember, and/or care how different playing down there is and then get snarky about it.  It rubs me the wrong way and then I go and get snarky and we have blow up threads like this and others.
    Because 40+ point targets are available to anyone who's capable of q'ing a team that has scored drastically more points than them. If you're playing in the last 3-8 hours of an event, or the early hours of a slice opening, then of course these targets won't be as frequent because people have either not climbed all that much yet, or the people that have are shielded. 

    "If you can't find 40+ point targets and are in 4-star MMR, you are doing something wrong."

    Golden advice, yet people get up in arms and assume people are trying to be snarky and talk down to them. Honestly, what incentive is there for vets to NOT coach more people to be on their level? More people scoring higher means more points in the slice, which means more targets worth more points and less stressful climb/hop for you. People's unwillingness to get better at the system in place isn't on us, and these aren't secret "rules". It's enough people having similar experiences and talking to each other, and thus realizing that certain tips are just good advice for everyone to know. People share good advice from their playing experiences whether its LINE, GroupMe, or these here forums. It's definitely not vets only who give this advice either, so please stop claiming that it's always coming from people who don't know what it's like "down there". There have been more characters and changes to the meta, but the mechanics of scoring high in points-based PVP have not changed. If anything it should have gotten easier, as I recall the 4-star being at 1000 at one point. 
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,268 Chairperson of the Boards
    Of course now those of us who were playing down in SCL6 (and I know there was more than just me by my leaderboards with similar or better rosters) for better chance at placement in PvP as we struggled with 900 points progression are gonna have some fun locked in SCL7 achieveing neither! Mercy on our match 3's!

    Oh well, as they say: If you build it (your roster) they will come (the good progression rewards).
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker

    I'm still holding out eternal hope that there will be some kind of change. Hybrid system. No more points loss. Win-based but with better thresholds. ANYTHING. There were SO MANY good suggestions in my Workshop poll this season that would make both "sides" happy for the devs to just write it all off.

    I don't recall finding out that Wins-Based was removed until the first season events showed in the game, so... I've got my fingers crossed here.

  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    Sorry @NotBAMF they won't change it. They didn't even test a new system.  At least with Win based PVP they did 2 tests so we all knew at some point this could be coming.  With PVE they tested a few things as well. They did say there was no change for PVP in one thread and when they did roll back to Point based PVP they did announce it here.  The reason I know this is because I was at a hockey game on the night it was released, which was a Wednesday.  My phone was blowing up with messages and texts.  So I don't think there will be any change until they test a new system which would not be until the new year.  Plus I don't think they would want to go into the holiday with other things they have planed with this new system. 
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker
    Ah, well, yep. There it is with the CoverSquirrel event. Hopes are effectively dashed. 

    There are just... so so many systems they could implement that would make both sides happy.

    But nah. Let's just stick with this one that the devs previously admitted is failing and half the base hates. Great. 
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    granne said:
    broll said:
    shartattack said:
    broll said:
    Bowgentle said:

    Snark all you want.  I'm in the 600+ days and recently crossed the 5* threashold.  For the 600+ days before I had 2 5* champs I think I saw 60 or more points 4 times total in all those days playing every PvP.  50 was pretty rare also, usually the high point was 38-48.  Now that I have 2 5*s I see 70s and 75s all the time.  That fact that it's possible for you is because you're practically playing a different game then the people it's impossible for.  This is ultimately why PvP is so broken, there's so much variability in experience based on roster and changing SCLs does nothing to change that.  Super broken.
    not seeing those huge targets is a double edged sword for a 4* player.  Those huge targets are generally 5* players.  MMR hides them from you as a 4, but also hides you from them.  That is why 4* players can float higher than most 5* rosters.  If 5* players could target 3 or 4* rosters before breaking MMR, the forums would erupt with complaints.
    I recognize that.  Yet vets will continue to preach don't hit targets lower than 40 or 50 and talk about 75s when talking to people no where near 5*.  It's probably not intentional, but they don't know, remember, and/or care how different playing down there is and then get snarky about it.  It rubs me the wrong way and then I go and get snarky and we have blow up threads like this and others.
    I don't particularly want to wade back into this, or single you out, but this rubs me the wrong way and I'm likely to get snarky.

    I've played for less time than you. I have fewer 4* champs than you. I have no useable 5*s. We play in the same slice.

    I regularly queue 70+ point targets, and not just people I know or am in a BC with. I make 900+ every event, and rarely, if ever, miss 1200 when I try for it. I rarely shield before hitting 900.

    It's very hard to see your complaints as anything but troublemaking when our experiences should, until you champed 5*s, have been very similar.

    And if your complaints are made on behalf of others rather than yourself, I would politely request that you leave it to them to voice their own experiences, rather than muddy the waters with your ideas of their complaints.

    As I said earlier in the thread, I'm not particularly good at this game, so when I decided I wanted to play PvP I sought out advice and listened to it. I didn't put my hands over my ears and shout "la la la, I can't hear you, and if I could you'd be wrong".
    it's almost like different people have different experiences.  whoa!

    i am well into 5* land, and do not battle chat all all, and there are times when the queues are not there.  i just brute force my way up, because i can.  others are obviously not so lucky.

    maybe you are in a different time zone then broll.  maybe your life's schedule allows you to play at the right times.  you admit to using battle chat, so you may not be queuing up people in your chat, but odds are you are playing at a time when other people are as well, so you are possibly getting an unknown advantage.

    it's almost ironic how his post was that some people have one experience, and express frustration, and others come in and chime about how easy it is to get around that with their obviously different experience, and you basically come in and do just that! 
  • granne
    granne Posts: 852 Critical Contributor
    The points you make are fair, but Broll and I have hit each other often when climbing, sometimes for substantial amounts of points, sometimes not.

    The large value queues are not always there, but they're not never there either.

    I'm in the UK and I work split shifts. My playing time is neither consistent nor predictable, and there are events when all I do with Line is double-check I'm not hitting a friendly.

    I hit 900 before even installing Line.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    granne said:
    The points you make are fair, but Broll and I have hit each other often when climbing, sometimes for substantial amounts of points, sometimes not.

    The large value queues are not always there, but they're not never there either.

    I'm in the UK and I work split shifts. My playing time is neither consistent nor predictable, and there are events when all I do with Line is double-check I'm not hitting a friendly.

    I hit 900 before even installing Line.
    compare that to the number of people who have 4* rosters that say they have trouble climbing past 400-600.  and everyone suggesting to find float points.  and shield.  and etc.  there is no magic solution, what works for some may not work exactly for others.  

    acting like people are doing something wrong just because they werent as lucky as you doesnt mean you play the game better than them, it just means you lucked into a better MMR then them
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    OK Granne, let’s talk rosters. I don’t look at names when I PVP so I have no idea what your roster looks like. There’s more to consider than just champs. I’m going to guess while not as wide as mine your 4* roster is taller. My roster looks like Cartman from South Park, very wide and very short. While I have almost 75% of all 4*s champedI have 0 at or above 300. So all of these characters are baby champs within a 30 level range. I’m guessing that your roster has several champs higher than that allowing your MMR to let you see upper level 4* and low level 5* players that’s were invisible to me until I champed 5*s. Please let me know if that’s right or not and what your top 4*s look like. 

    Edit:  Also I was getting 900 with relative easy nearly every event for some time too, granted it usually took at least 2 if not 3 shields. Last season I made a decision to not shield at all and hit 900 nearly every time also (I think I missed one) but in neither case was it an enjoyable experience and it took me at least 1.5 years. Show me another game where it takes over a year of near obsessive level of play to get decent rewards? I want to see PvP changed because it’s a broken top heavy system doomed to eventual collapse as those at the top atrophy away faster than new players join. Despite the fact that I’m now on the top that doesn’t make me any less concerned for those suffering through the bad system I just fought through. 

    And call me troublesome all you want. Everyone who calls for change of an established system is called a troublemaker by this with the most to lose by change and increased competition, but that doesn’t mean it’s not also genuine...
  • Milk Jugz
    Milk Jugz Posts: 1,122 Chairperson of the Boards
    @NotBAMF

    Shield Simulator, play as you like, when you like.

    But, you definitely make a good point. Put the argument into a perspective I personally have never considered. I can understand a little better where you're coming from, but I still can't get behind wins based. There needs to be some other system that can work for everyone. I'm all for a hybrid system with the 15 cp at 1200 points only. Earn the 4* at 900 points or 40 wins kind of thing. Or maybe a choice when you join, choose your clearance level, choose your slice, choose your progression system.

    IDK what the answer is, but there is a reason from d3's end that points based has survived as long as it has and win based lasted one season. Be it hp spending, or possibly they felt they were simply just giving too many rewards to too many people that were willing to grind away. Have you looked at the CL9 Versus rewards? Clearly d3 covets 4* covers or more than t10 would earn them, and what does it take to play CL8? SR65? What is that, a 3* roster? Maybe they didn't want to be giving out 4* covers to 3* rosters for grinding. The truth is, we don't know why wins based was revoked. But it was, and quickly. Based on how fast it was pulled I don't believe we will see it again.
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    @NotBAMF you and I have had very similar experiences, both on the forums and in game. This week I even had some rando on LINE pm me out of the blue to tell me he thinks I’m a tinykitty crybaby.  But there have been several to offer helpful advise and/or mentoring. 

    I totally agree PvP as is not remotely fun for me and is more often stressful or frustrating, which is a step up from the impossible it was 6-9 months ago, I guess...
  • Daiches
    Daiches Posts: 1,252 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    @broll
    you don't look at names when you pvp? Start by doing that. Just learning who you play with and against. Who are the point makers and shard builders, the dumpers and snipers, the floaters. Just from looking at the names and leaderboards.
    Because just by paying attention to that, your 30 point Q may turn out to be a 75 point Q when you un# to hit it a few hours later, because the guy you Qd just rode a wave for 500 points and always finishes high.

    And of course look st names so you don't FF friends/alliance..
    Just this tiny change would improve your experience a lot. And not only because of better points, but because it is the start of treating this game as a social thing. 90% of the fun of this game IS the community, playing with friends and against each other. We help, we grief, we troll, we share experiences. And frankly if you willingly cut out that part of the game, you will have a bad experience. 

  • Milk Jugz
    Milk Jugz Posts: 1,122 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    mexus said:
    granne said:
    broll said:
    shartattack said:
    broll said:
    Bowgentle said:

    Snark all you want.  I'm in the 600+ days and recently crossed the 5* threashold.  For the 600+ days before I had 2 5* champs I think I saw 60 or more points 4 times total in all those days playing every PvP.  50 was pretty rare also, usually the high point was 38-48.  Now that I have 2 5*s I see 70s and 75s all the time.  That fact that it's possible for you is because you're practically playing a different game then the people it's impossible for.  This is ultimately why PvP is so broken, there's so much variability in experience based on roster and changing SCLs does nothing to change that.  Super broken.
    not seeing those huge targets is a double edged sword for a 4* player.  Those huge targets are generally 5* players.  MMR hides them from you as a 4, but also hides you from them.  That is why 4* players can float higher than most 5* rosters.  If 5* players could target 3 or 4* rosters before breaking MMR, the forums would erupt with complaints.
    I recognize that.  Yet vets will continue to preach don't hit targets lower than 40 or 50 and talk about 75s when talking to people no where near 5*.  It's probably not intentional, but they don't know, remember, and/or care how different playing down there is and then get snarky about it.  It rubs me the wrong way and then I go and get snarky and we have blow up threads like this and others.
    I don't particularly want to wade back into this, or single you out, but this rubs me the wrong way and I'm likely to get snarky.

    I've played for less time than you. I have fewer 4* champs than you. I have no useable 5*s. We play in the same slice.

    I regularly queue 70+ point targets, and not just people I know or am in a BC with. I make 900+ every event, and rarely, if ever, miss 1200 when I try for it. I rarely shield before hitting 900.

    It's very hard to see your complaints as anything but troublemaking when our experiences should, until you champed 5*s, have been very similar.

    And if your complaints are made on behalf of others rather than yourself, I would politely request that you leave it to them to voice their own experiences, rather than muddy the waters with your ideas of their complaints.

    As I said earlier in the thread, I'm not particularly good at this game, so when I decided I wanted to play PvP I sought out advice and listened to it. I didn't put my hands over my ears and shout "la la la, I can't hear you, and if I could you'd be wrong".
    I know you as a sane and good person and I hope we don't start snarking over this!
    We do, however, don't share the same experiences. And that's fine of course.

    I was just wondering, since I've asked this several times but no one really answered me, 
    how would you disadvantage from a progression system built around total numer of wins instead of points? There's still the score aspect for placement and all. I mean if they implemented win-based for real and tweaked it so that you needed a lower number of wins to get what you want - how would that take your advantage away?

    I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong!) that you wouldn't really disadvantage from it at all and it that's the case, why not let the game go that direction since it would clearly benefit a lot of other players (me) who don't feel good playing on scheduled times?
    As I said in my last post, perhaps it comes down to win based is overly beneficial to the player base. D3 clearly covets 4* covers*, based on their availability through placement. Maybe they were unsatisfied with the number of people just grinding out 40 wins. And then you talk of lowering the total? That would just make it even easier for people to attain. Rumor is, and I don't know if this is true or not but I've seen it posted more than once, they wanted the win count to be even higher than 40 for the 4* cover. IDK, but something made them withdraw win based in a hurry....

    *I feel I should explain my theory behind them coveting 4* covers. CL9 is clearly for the biggest rosters, the 5* rosters. I don't really use my 4* unless I want to screw around in Story and I'm not worried about placement as much or I'm just starting a Versus event and I like a/some boosted character/s that week. Yet only the t10 get 4* covers in Versus, that's only 2% of each bracket. That's a drop in the bucket and it gets lower as you drop down, t5 in CL8 or 1%. Really not sure on CL7 or 6 as I haven't played them in months (or at all in the case of 6). My point is if d3 really wanted lots of people getting 4* covers they would be more available through placement, as well as progression. Maybe, just maybe they were soured on win based by the sheer number of 4* covers earned.

    They need to balance keeping you progressing and preventing you from reaching the end to keep the game viable.
  • NotBAMF
    NotBAMF Posts: 408 Mover and Shaker
    edited December 2017
    @Milk Jugz

    Ha, well last season the Shield Simulator worked out for me (it was actually my second ever Shield Hopping experience when I mention how I made a topic about my third), but historically, before the last two seasons (one of which was wins-based), I'd never reached the 4* cover there, either.

    But here's the thing: I don't think there is a HUGE movement to go back to wins-based progression. I mean, I know it would benefit me--and I'd personally appreciate it on  selfish level--but I don't want a system that makes half the player base unhappy. Even if I'm in the "happy half", who wants people to feel unhappy, man? I don't want wins-based back, and that' not what I'm asking for. 

    My single biggest issue is there are SO MANY easy changes that could be made. I mean, god. Just so many. Dual systems or a hybrid. Some way to check progression points loss in the P-B system (either by making it so you don't fall below a progression reward checkpoint--like once you hit 575, you can never fall below 575 no matter how many L's you take--or by doing a simultaneous count of "gross points" to count towards progression rewards and "net points" to count towards placement). Go back to wins-based, but put the 15 CP back in the progression (that was the biggest issue with wins-based, if my interpretation as right). I mean, it would two bleeding seconds to implement a system that could make BOTH sides happy. But they just... don't. It's truly and honestly disheartening to those of us that despise this system, whether it be because we can't master it enough to do well or because we simply don't enjoy it (like me). 

    What is most upsetting, though, is that I don't think there's so much of a "It needs to be wins-based!" vs "It needs to be points-based!" war of sentiment as there is "It needs to be something different that is better for everyone" vs "It needs to be points-based!". I hate to generalize, and I apologize for doing little more than that here, but it seems the people who liked wins-based just want a BETTER system, something that fits everyone, while a lot of folk who have no issue with the points-based system have no interest in compromise and just want to force everyone into accepting the current system. I made a poll at the start of last season to workshop ideas on how to improve PVP, and among the many options were "Just go back to wins-based forever" and "Keep the current points-based system forever".

    Literally NO ONE voted for the old wins-based system, but a couple of people actually voted to keep the current system forever. With SO MANY people openly hating this system... man, how far past your own front door do those people refuse to see? 

    I mean, I literally see peoples' arguments being "Well it's been points-basedfor 1200 days! That's just the way it always has been!". That is just... a terrible argument. Hell, to compare this to another game I played way too competitively for years, Pokemon had a system in place for 3 generations of the game--almost a decade--where all moves of a certain type were either "Special" or "Physical" based solely on that typing. And then in generation four, they finally decided "Wait, this is awful and dumb. We should change it". And they did! And it was better. How long has this game been around? Has it been a decade yet? Darn it, I apparently have a long wait yet!

    So I don't know. I'm rambling on about something you didn't even ask, haha. Don't mind me. 
  • slabag
    slabag Posts: 12 Just Dropped In
    edited December 2017
    So, let’s be generous and say they decided to pull the plug on wins based halfway through that season, that’s roughly six weeks ago. Is that a realistic time frame to revamp an entire game mode? I don’t think so, and I don’t think it’s a realistic expectation for something like that to happen so quickly. Things take time.

    The UI change for wins based happened a few events before the first test, and there were rumblings about the change we’ll before that. Again, things take time.

     I think at this point the whole forum understands the perspectives and frustrations regarding pvp that some feel.

    At this point, reading about this stuff is like being on a long car trip with my kids asking “When are we going to get there?”

    Every five minutes. While they are also bickering with each other, and or crying. Maybe one got car sick and threw up.

    No no matter how frustrated or upset I get, I can’t make the trip shorter. Sure there could be short cuts, but for all I know they could make the trip even worse.
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited December 2017
    Good and well through out reply @granne.  I understand your frustration on "My frustration came from the fact that the voices of people who can't and don't are often drowned out by those of people who can, but seek to speak on behalf of those who can't."  That's a big part of my frustration as well as people that have been playing at 5* level for a long time tell people that can't their concerns are not valid.  

    Only point I really challenge is this:

    "The point I was trying (and apparently failing) to make is that I see you throughout my climb, and, because you have hit me as often as I have hit you, I assume you see me too. That, to me, suggests that our MMR is similar. That, to me, made your assertion of having only rarely seen 60+ point targets disingenuous at best."

    There are tons of factors that go into why we may have different experiences in MMR.  My suspicion was that your average roster level was higher and so for me you were on the high end and I was on the low end of your range.  While it sounds like your average probably was higher, it doesn't sound like it was significantly so.  There are tons of other factors that fall in as well.  When do you play, how frequently do you play, do you join early or late, etc. etc.  I don't want to go back and forth sharing experiences all I want to say is my statement was genuine and if anything this only solidifies my opinion that PvP is a wreck because two people with such similar rosters can have such a difference of experience.

    I intend to bow out of this thread and debate after this.  I've said my peace on this topic and then some and acted in ways I'm not proud of in a few places.  All I would really be doing by belaboring further is repeating ideas I've thrown out over and over and being a bother to everyone.  I do hope @Brigby shares some of the high points of this discussion (from all vantages) with he development team and hopefully we at least see some tests before the seasons out or early next.  All I want is an experience that a wider group of players can enjoy and that's hopefully more balanced across all roster and play styles.  

Categories