Update to Versus Reward Structure (6/20/18)

Warbringa

This is a change that I think is really good by the MPQ team. It allows players to choose how they wish to gain the rewards, either through points (like the current system) or simply wins.  I think there are players from both sides of the ledger and I am not sure why a hybrid system wouldn't work.  In fact, I would think that if the win based system draws in more players to play PvP, then that should also help the point based players by providing more points as whole in a bracket.

veny

Brigby said:

We’ll also be using this system in the S.H.I.E.L.D. Simulator that runs with each season. We won’t be using it for the season’s progression rewards though - we want those to reward consistent competition over the course of the season, and that doesn’t work if you can grind out a zillion wins to get all the rewards in just one event. No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.

Details:

• Each progression reward has a points goal and a wins goal.
• Once you reach either goal, you get the reward.
• No changes have been made to the rewards available in progression, and the points goals are the same as they were.
• Thresholds for the top progression rewards:
• 40 wins or 900 points for the 16th reward
• 50 wins or 1,000 points for the 17th reward
• 75 wins or 1,200 points for the 18th reward

Known Issues:

• When viewing rewards in the Player Awards screen, placement rewards are displayed first instead of second.

1st - NO WAY 75 wins is equal to 1200 points. NO WAY! Same for the difference between 900 and 1000 points and 40 and 50 wins. 1 win is the equivalent of 10 points? Really?
2nd - I may sound negative, but the only thing this system changes is the frustration of endless grinding caused by situation when player is losing points faster than gaining them from games won.
Main problem (unballanced teams, very difficult teams, cruel requirements with poor rewards) remain and number of wins is way too big, compared with points gained per average match.
3rd - Lets be honest and constructive - PvE is easier with roster growing. PvP? Exactly the opposite. Grinding is way too cruel and rewards are pathetic compared to PvE... at least for players like me who spend 2 hours in game every day.

My suggestion is very simple (it also doesnt entirely fix PvP, but gives your change much better impact people may appreciate) :
1) Instead of wins, call it Kills
2) Kills required will be 2 times amount of wins. F.e. instead of 75 wins or 1200 points, you need 150 kills or 1200 points. What kills? Kills of opponents characters. With up to 3 killed opponents per match "win" amount is reduced by 33%. The pain of loss will also partially dissapear since killed enemies also count, not only games won

OR, Kills required will be 3 times amount of wins (225 kills instead of 75 wins) and characters killed while defending will also count.

Think about that - dont want to sound intimidating or so, but this your change doesnt change much for most players and i this simply wont make me come back to PvP.
Before posting this, i tried one match - took me 3 minutes against two maxed 2*s (I have OML and Phoenix so...). Without America Chaves being required character, it would take longer and result wouldnt be that positive. I managed to win, but my team lost half hitpoints. I am sure 75 wins in 2 days is not doable for me. And i dont even want to double the amount of time spent.
Oh and i was figting some weakling anyway, since i had only 200 points - since 700 points, true OP combos come in, like 5* Gambit etc.

Punisher5784

Thank you for taking the time to listen to our suggestions on having a hybrid reward model. I hope this opens the door for more player's input during tests before they are implemented.

JHawkInc

Wins or points? So competitive players keep getting rewards, and everyone else can brute force it if they are capable of winning matches (but not managing the PVP metagame with shield hopping)? And no shenaniganery like moving the top CP reward?

I'm gonna need two things. Put in a couple more support tokens (I don't care if it's a Basic each event at the 1100 point and equivalent win point, anything guaranteed would be rad), and then hook me up with one of those surveys where I can put down how likely I am to recommend MPQ so I can rate it higher than I did last time.

BearVenger

We should all strive to be like WannaBSkrull, a vintage player who's had a horrible streak of luck, but has never thrown in the towel.

DyingLegend

This is what I'm talking about! This is awesome! 

Twysta

Best of both worlds?
Great change... I'm just waiting for the catch. 

Jaedenkaal

veny said:

Brigby said:

....

1st - NO WAY 75 wins is equal to 1200 points. NO WAY! Same for the difference between 900 and 1000 points and 40 and 50 wins. 1 win is the equivalent of 10 points? Really?
2nd - I may sound negative, but the only thing this system changes is the frustration of endless grinding caused by situation when player is losing points faster than gaining them from games won.
Main problem (unballanced teams, very difficult teams, cruel requirements with poor rewards) remain and number of wins is way too big, compared with points gained per average match.
3rd - Lets be honest and constructive - PvE is easier with roster growing. PvP? Exactly the opposite. Grinding is way too cruel and rewards are pathetic compared to PvE... at least for players like me who spend 2 hours in game every day.

My suggestion is very simple (it also doesnt entirely fix PvP, but gives your change much better impact people may appreciate) :
1) Instead of wins, call it Kills
2) Kills required will be 2 times amount of wins. F.e. instead of 75 wins or 1200 points, you need 150 kills or 1200 points. What kills? Kills of opponents characters. With up to 3 killed opponents per match "win" amount is reduced by 33%. The pain of loss will also partially dissapear since killed enemies also count, not only games won

OR, Kills required will be 3 times amount of wins (225 kills instead of 75 wins) and characters killed while defending will also count.

Think about that - dont want to sound intimidating or so, but this your change doesnt change much for most players.
Before posting this, i tried one match - took me 3 minutes against two maxed 2*s (I have OML and Phoenix so...). Without America Chaves being required character, it would take longer and result wouldnt be that positive. I managed to win, but my team lost half hitpoints. I am sure 75 wins in 2 days is not doable for me. And i dont even want to double the amount of time spent.
Oh and i was figting some weakling anyway, since i had only 200 points - since 700 points, true OP combos come in, like 5* Gambit etc.

Were you here when wins-based PVP was tested? Did you try it? This is that, OR the current system. Whichever you like. The better of both, at the same time, even. I'd say that changes quite a bit for a lot of players. Not the ones who can get 1200 points easily enough already, but this doesn't seem to be a penalty for them, either.

Kills-based scoring sounds too abusable to me. Grab a match, kill the loaner, retreat (or force-close). Repeat as often as you like. Which characters you pick hardly matters since you only have to do 1/3 of the match.

Player1575

I know I usually complain about changes made as they're 1 step forward and 2 steps backwards, but this change sure seems like 3 steps forward to me. No complaints here for once. 

veny

Jaedenkaal said:

veny said:

Brigby said:

....

1st - NO WAY 75 wins is equal to 1200 points. NO WAY! Same for the difference between 900 and 1000 points and 40 and 50 wins. 1 win is the equivalent of 10 points? Really?
2nd - I may sound negative, but the only thing this system changes is the frustration of endless grinding caused by situation when player is losing points faster than gaining them from games won.
Main problem (unballanced teams, very difficult teams, cruel requirements with poor rewards) remain and number of wins is way too big, compared with points gained per average match.
3rd - Lets be honest and constructive - PvE is easier with roster growing. PvP? Exactly the opposite. Grinding is way too cruel and rewards are pathetic compared to PvE... at least for players like me who spend 2 hours in game every day.

My suggestion is very simple (it also doesnt entirely fix PvP, but gives your change much better impact people may appreciate) :
1) Instead of wins, call it Kills
2) Kills required will be 2 times amount of wins. F.e. instead of 75 wins or 1200 points, you need 150 kills or 1200 points. What kills? Kills of opponents characters. With up to 3 killed opponents per match "win" amount is reduced by 33%. The pain of loss will also partially dissapear since killed enemies also count, not only games won

OR, Kills required will be 3 times amount of wins (225 kills instead of 75 wins) and characters killed while defending will also count.

Think about that - dont want to sound intimidating or so, but this your change doesnt change much for most players.
Before posting this, i tried one match - took me 3 minutes against two maxed 2*s (I have OML and Phoenix so...). Without America Chaves being required character, it would take longer and result wouldnt be that positive. I managed to win, but my team lost half hitpoints. I am sure 75 wins in 2 days is not doable for me. And i dont even want to double the amount of time spent.
Oh and i was figting some weakling anyway, since i had only 200 points - since 700 points, true OP combos come in, like 5* Gambit etc.

Were you here when wins-based PVP was tested? Did you try it? This is that, OR the current system. Whichever you like. The better of both, at the same time, even. I'd say that changes quite a bit for a lot of players. Not the ones who can get 1200 points easily enough already, but this doesn't seem to be a penalty for them, either.

Kills-based scoring sounds too abusable to me. Grab a match, kill the loaner, retreat (or force-close). Repeat as often as you like. Which characters you pick hardly matters since you only have to do 1/3 of the match.

I was trying win-based system and it was way worse than point based system.
Win-based system starts to pay off later, when other players start defeating you, which usually happens around 400-500 points (after 700 or 800 it goes to extremes when it is impossible to go up and gain points fastent than losing them). On the other side, the amount of wins makes PvP even more grindy (but yeah, with guaranteed result, but question is, how much health pack will you need).
I never had nerves to go above 575 points and with win-based system, i never tried, since it took way longer than with point based system.

PvP has much more serious issues than flaws of ranking system - some of us simply cant win a match cuz every opponent has some OP 5* i simply cannot get.

Kill-based system cannot be abused by any sane person, because:
- retreating also damages your team
- killing 1 character will damage your team approx. 1/3 compared to killing whole team
I see no way how to abuse this system. Unless your definition of abuse is "i send weaklings on suicide run to kill at least one enemy"

On the other side, with kill based system, you could use characters/teams you would never use with points/wins based system, cuz you would lose.
Sending 3*s or non-powered 4*s against maxed 5*s is extremely risky or even foolish, but with kill-based system, you could at least kill one or two characters resulting in small (but some) progress.
Now you send only the most powerful characters (in 5* land, you dont have so many of them who cant compete with 5*s, unless you have own army of 5*s) and rest of roster is completely useless.

ZootSax

I like the sound of it.  They even showed the 15CP target to stop that potential complaint before it could start, as that was probably the second biggest complaint I heard about win-based PVP.

Spudgutter

@veny

Mmr is broken, and this is a decent compromise.  Yes, pvp and pve are different, and this still keeps it that way.  If you are growing your roster and playing pve as optimally as you can, you spend a couple hours playing at the end of one sub and beginning of the next.  That leaves you the rest of the day to play pvp.  If they want to play pvp during a lunch break, or standing in line at the grocery store, or while their infant child is eating, etc, the list is endless.  They can play a match here or there, work toward the goal without losing progress, or spending hp they need for roster slots on shields.  

I pointed it out during the wins based test season, i was hitting 1500-1600 getting my 40 wins (i normally shield out at 1200).  More engagement means scores will rise, and the number of people that hit 900/1200 should go up, while their number of matches goes down. 

tiomono

I want to find you and hug you @brigby. Pass on my virtual hugs to the dev team.

 Don't change this in 3 days though or the virtual hug may turn into a virtual hunt. Dun dun duhhhhn!

Seriously though thanks.

Heartbreaksoup

This sounds wonderful.  I am really looking forward to trying this out...

*Especially* since once I reached my 4000-point goal in Soul Season, I switched over to silly and fun teams and other players have been kicking them stupid ever since...   If I were trying to keep progression points, I'd never, ever get any further, but if I can win a few more matches with my fun crew, I might get some more rewards for it now.

thedarkphoenix

This is a good change

It'll be interesting to see how the pvp meta develops with this also.

dlegendary0ne

How will this affect alliance rewards? Will they remain points based? 

tiomono

thedarkphoenix said:

This is a good change

It'll be interesting to see how the pvp meta develops with this also.

Speaking for myself I like wins based. So once my a-team is down my b-team is rolling in then c squad. I will use nearly my whole roster till I get tired of playing.

IceIX

dlegendary0ne said:

How will this affect alliance rewards? Will they remain points based? 

It will have no effect on Alliance rewards, that will stay placement based.

Jaedenkaal

veny said:

Jaedenkaal said:

veny said:

Brigby said:

....

1st - NO WAY 75 wins is equal to 1200 points. NO WAY! Same for the difference between 900 and 1000 points and 40 and 50 wins. 1 win is the equivalent of 10 points? Really?
2nd - I may sound negative, but the only thing this system changes is the frustration of endless grinding caused by situation when player is losing points faster than gaining them from games won.
Main problem (unballanced teams, very difficult teams, cruel requirements with poor rewards) remain and number of wins is way too big, compared with points gained per average match.
3rd - Lets be honest and constructive - PvE is easier with roster growing. PvP? Exactly the opposite. Grinding is way too cruel and rewards are pathetic compared to PvE... at least for players like me who spend 2 hours in game every day.

My suggestion is very simple (it also doesnt entirely fix PvP, but gives your change much better impact people may appreciate) :
1) Instead of wins, call it Kills
2) Kills required will be 2 times amount of wins. F.e. instead of 75 wins or 1200 points, you need 150 kills or 1200 points. What kills? Kills of opponents characters. With up to 3 killed opponents per match "win" amount is reduced by 33%. The pain of loss will also partially dissapear since killed enemies also count, not only games won

OR, Kills required will be 3 times amount of wins (225 kills instead of 75 wins) and characters killed while defending will also count.

Think about that - dont want to sound intimidating or so, but this your change doesnt change much for most players.
Before posting this, i tried one match - took me 3 minutes against two maxed 2*s (I have OML and Phoenix so...). Without America Chaves being required character, it would take longer and result wouldnt be that positive. I managed to win, but my team lost half hitpoints. I am sure 75 wins in 2 days is not doable for me. And i dont even want to double the amount of time spent.
Oh and i was figting some weakling anyway, since i had only 200 points - since 700 points, true OP combos come in, like 5* Gambit etc.

Were you here when wins-based PVP was tested? Did you try it? This is that, OR the current system. Whichever you like. The better of both, at the same time, even. I'd say that changes quite a bit for a lot of players. Not the ones who can get 1200 points easily enough already, but this doesn't seem to be a penalty for them, either.

Kills-based scoring sounds too abusable to me. Grab a match, kill the loaner, retreat (or force-close). Repeat as often as you like. Which characters you pick hardly matters since you only have to do 1/3 of the match.

I was trying win-based system and it was way worse than point based system.
Win-based system starts to pay off later, when other players start defeating you, which usually happens around 400-500 points (after 700 or 800 it goes to extremes when it is impossible to go up and gain points fastent than losing them). On the other side, the amount of wins makes PvP even more grindy (but yeah, with guaranteed result, but question is, how much health pack will you need).
I never had nerves to go above 575 points and with win-based system, i never tried, since it took way longer than with point based system.

PvP has much more serious issues than flaws of ranking system - some of us simply cant win a match cuz every opponent has some OP 5* i simply cannot get.

Kill-based system cannot be abused by any sane person, because:
- retreating also damages your team
- killing 1 character will damage your team approx. 1/3 compared to killing whole team
I see no way how to abuse this system. Unless your definition of abuse is "i send weaklings on suicide run to kill at least one enemy"

On the other side, with kill based system, you could use characters/teams you would never use with points/wins based system, cuz you would lose.
Sending 3*s or non-powered 4*s against maxed 5*s is extremely risky or even foolish, but with kill-based system, you could at least kill one or two characters resulting in small (but some) progress.
Now you send only the most powerful characters (in 5* land, you dont have so many of them who cant compete with 5*s, unless you have own army of 5*s) and rest of roster is completely useless.

Hm. I don't think I've ever seen a maxed out 5* in PVP, let alone two. I agree this won't solve that problem, but it certainly doesn't make it any worse.

Dragon_Nexus

Minor complaint that I'll never find the time or patience to grind 75 wins to get the top CP reward, but other than that if the wins aren't drastically different, then this sounds like a good hybrid system.

I still might have preferred a checkpoint system like Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, but this new idea already sounds a lot better than what we currently have,