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

Brigby

Pico said:

No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.
 
Brigby
Is there a chance that you can suggest a different  10×3* that we have in rotation for the last three years? 

Hmm those haven't really changed much huh? Good suggestion! I'll pass it along to the team to see what we can do.

Jaedenkaal

Brigby said:

Pico said:

No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.
 
Brigby
Is there a chance that you can suggest a different  10×3* that we have in rotation for the last three years? 

Hmm those haven't really changed much huh? Good suggestion! I'll pass it along to the team to see what we can do.

Yeah I think the most recent character in there is... Mystique?

GrimSkald

Brigby said:

Pico said:

No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.
 
Brigby
Is there a chance that you can suggest a different  10×3* that we have in rotation for the last three years? 

Hmm those haven't really changed much huh? Good suggestion! I'll pass it along to the team to see what we can do.

Yes please!  The LRs haven't changed since they had the rotating seasonal 3*s in packs.  You've tinkered with them a bit by throwing out different types from time to time, but the basic LRs have been the same.  Throw in the Sakaar Arena again!  Try out the 4* 20 person bracket ones.  Any of these will make a nice change, really.

As far as the basic change goes - seems like a good compromise to me.  The problem with the wins-based system was that it forced people who were capable of making the old numbers to play a lot more to get the same rewards as before.  Less, really, since the CP was moved to placement.  The new system sidesteps that fairly well, I think.

Wumpushunter

I guess once it starts and a few events occur we can have a new thread on how many people really benefited and by how much.  Maybe I will change my mind, maybe all the cheering for this is coming from those that just wanted the win based people to shut up. Time will tell.

killercool

Magic said:

Maybe my MMR is better Bowgentle but I can still see non-gambit team around 900 points (i don't go further) but they are not worth the points (maybe around 15-20 at best). And I never bothered with them. Fighting Gambit with Gambit is easy enough to actually pick a 50+ worth enemies (the exception would be Gambolt pair - the only one I would skip). The 900 to 1200 might be a different conversation. But that is clearly past the 8 matches. 

I am surprised to see someone say they skip Gambolt, I always thought these were as close to cupcakes as we get these days.  Black Bolt is a gift for human players using their own Gambit, and so nice for the enemy team to be the one gifting you charged tiles.  I can not remember ever skipping a Gambolt team that was worth any amount of reasonable points.

Tensuun

Magic may have reasons of their own, but here's mine. My Gambit was 0/0/3 for a super long time, and has a single purple cover only because I favorited him and then opened a really big (well, for me 40 is really big) pile of LL tokens when the Saved Covers feature was announced. This is to say, I do not have "my own Gambit" to use against the many many Gambolt teams I encounter in PVP. Powered-Up Lockjaw is disappointingly bad as a counter here, plus people seem to like attacking me more if I use Lockjaw in PVP.

For that matter, I usually skip most Gambit and Powered-Up Cap'n Carol teams; it's too easy to end up losing ~10 points and 3 health packs if I get unlucky with the board and/or cascades. But...we'll see.

Wish I'd kept track of how many points I scored in each event and what progression/placement prizes I was getting; would make for interesting comparison to the new system. Would be even better if I tracked how many PVP matches I skipped/entered/won, but I had no reason to look at this. I assume d3go! keeps an event-log of this information, though.

zodiac339

Brigby said:

Pico said:

No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.
 
Brigby
Is there a chance that you can suggest a different  10×3* that we have in rotation for the last three years? 

Hmm those haven't really changed much huh? Good suggestion! I'll pass it along to the team to see what we can do.

Potential LR themes.
Real Men of Genius: Black Panther, Beast, Doctor Octopus, Doctor Strange, Iron Man
Mutant May-hem (run this in May): Psylocke, Angel, Gambit, Cyclops, Storm, Beast, Colossus, Deadpool, Mystique, Quicksilver. There are enough for 2 groups of 5. If Scarlt Witch still counts as a Mutant, she could replace Mystique.

Tensuun

zodiac339 said:

Brigby said:

Pico said:

No changes to lightning round rewards either - we want those to stay just as fast and cut-throat.
 
Brigby
Is there a chance that you can suggest a different  10×3* that we have in rotation for the last three years? 

Hmm those haven't really changed much huh? Good suggestion! I'll pass it along to the team to see what we can do.

Potential LR themes.
Real Men of Genius: Black Panther, Beast, Doctor Octopus, Doctor Strange, Iron Man

You say "Real Men of Genius", but all five of the men on this list are imbeciles, obviously inferior to the intellect and skill of DOOM!

—Ahem.

The Marvel Rising brand is getting ready for take-off soon, and Spider-Gwen, Squirrel Girl, Quake, Ms. Marvel, Cap'n Marvel, and America Chavez are all already here. So that's interesting, I suppose.

Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Elektra, Daredevil, and Punisher all have three-star versions now, and Street Smarts seems a suitably pithy name for this bunch. If there were room for a sixth, Blade seems a reasonable choice.

Gambit, Punisher, Hawkeye, Bullseye, and The Hood have something in common, too: they Aim to Misbehave. I just hope the phrase isn't protected by some arcane IP regulation-thingy.

Moon Roach

I've nothing negative to say about this change, but from a purely selfish perspective, it won't help me, because the core problem I face hasn't changed.

I have 14 championed 5*, none above level 459.  My Gambit is 1/3/0.  My float point in PVP is something like -100 because I keep getting hit by teams with a mighty championed Gambit.  After the seed teams (if I get them) I skip >90% of available matches because they are teams with a mighty championed Gambit.  It's unusual for me to play more than 5-10 matches per event, or peak at more than 300 points, and that's been the case for a while now.

Maybe I'm just a rubbish player of PVP, and others with the same roster would do a lot better.  Maybe I don't walk the same Escher staircase that some groups have in place to keep climbing.  Maybe...

But I don't see that I'll want to spend the ISO skipping, skipping, skipping to find someone I think I have a chance of beating.  Certainly not 75 times.

:edit: And of course, how many of those non-Gambit teams would be distinct?  If it's like last time, it will be limited to the same 5 or so.  I think I'll track that when it's implemented.

Gods, I hate 5* Gambit.  (Oh look, it's the politics of envy.)

Kahmon

Moon Roach said:

But I don't see that I'll want to spend the ISO skipping, skipping, skipping to find someone I think I have a chance of beating.  Certainly not 75 times.

Each time you close out and reload you get 4 more free skips.

Borstock

veny said:

Bowgentle said:

Magic said:

I sense that this will also mean the nerf to Gambit as he can plow through non-gambit 20 points team with ease on the way to 40-75 wins. 

Anyone running Gambit will run out of non-Gambit teams after 8 wins.
Which is why we complained about the number of wins - 5* players see nothing but other champed 5s from 0 points, so to grind out 40 wins against those teams was madness.

I literally never won against maxed 5* Gambit no matter what team i used. I have champed 5* OML and Phoenix and then only champed 4*s so its not surprising, but advices like "sell them" or "get Gambit too" are useless, since PvP is broken after you enter 5* land. Why? Because fighting against 5*s requires either many 5*s (which normal player dont and cant have) or tons of heals.

75 wins during 3 days is way too much and for lower tiers (up to 575 points) we dont even need win-based system.

Why is "sell them" useless? You don't stay in 5* land. You'd fall back into 4's. I can totally understand not wanting to, but it isn't useless. It has a use.

veny

Borstock said:

veny said:

Bowgentle said:

Magic said:

I sense that this will also mean the nerf to Gambit as he can plow through non-gambit 20 points team with ease on the way to 40-75 wins. 

Anyone running Gambit will run out of non-Gambit teams after 8 wins.
Which is why we complained about the number of wins - 5* players see nothing but other champed 5s from 0 points, so to grind out 40 wins against those teams was madness.

I literally never won against maxed 5* Gambit no matter what team i used. I have champed 5* OML and Phoenix and then only champed 4*s so its not surprising, but advices like "sell them" or "get Gambit too" are useless, since PvP is broken after you enter 5* land. Why? Because fighting against 5*s requires either many 5*s (which normal player dont and cant have) or tons of heals.

75 wins during 3 days is way too much and for lower tiers (up to 575 points) we dont even need win-based system.

Why is "sell them" useless? You don't stay in 5* land. You'd fall back into 4's. I can totally understand not wanting to, but it isn't useless. It has a use.

Yeah, i can sell 5*s and uninstall the game... why play it if there is nothing more to collect, all 4*s i already champed.
If i need to sell 5*s to enjoy PvP, there is something wrong with this feature.

Magic

killercool said:

Magic said:

Maybe my MMR is better Bowgentle but I can still see non-gambit team around 900 points (i don't go further) but they are not worth the points (maybe around 15-20 at best). And I never bothered with them. Fighting Gambit with Gambit is easy enough to actually pick a 50+ worth enemies (the exception would be Gambolt pair - the only one I would skip). The 900 to 1200 might be a different conversation. But that is clearly past the 8 matches. 

I am surprised to see someone say they skip Gambolt, I always thought these were as close to cupcakes as we get these days.  Black Bolt is a gift for human players using their own Gambit, and so nice for the enemy team to be the one gifting you charged tiles.  I can not remember ever skipping a Gambolt team that was worth any amount of reasonable points.

My reason is that the opposing Gambit usually gets to fire the red power in full power-mode at least once when they have Bolt. And also you take some extra damage from Bolt passive. When I fight another Gambit without Bolt (I never take mine to such a fight) i will wait for the opp to fire Red on an empty board and then finish him off in the next round. With Bolt on the opposite team I have to start to shoot Red first. So I fight them only on a hop (boost some red AP and when I don't care about the packs) but I skip on the climb.

ZeroKarma

I'm interested to see how this will work. It does seem to make everyone happy that wanted win-based back without upsetting the people that hated it. 

Couple of potential consequences that I see

Pro: Cl9 is going to fill more rapidly than before in all slices. If you don't normally get placement in cl7 but you qualify for cl9, then it would make sense to go there and get improved iso and riso rewards. 

Pro/Con: If I were someone who didn't care about placement at all, and enjoyed simply hitting people to keep scores low....well, now I never need to shield and I can keep my score artificially low to make my hits hurt more without risk of missing progression. Long live the sniper! The enforcer role is dead.

Con for D3: I'm sure there is a relatively large segment of the player population that has not been going for placement, but has used shields to get progression. No longer! That group won't need to spend hp on shields anymore. Good for them, bad for revenue.

I am guessing that the reasoning behind this is to improve PvP engagement metrics, and I expect they will be successful. It is ultimately good for the game to get engagement up overall, regardless of spending on shields and health packs. 

fmftint

Now that this is done how about revisit PvP REWARDS! Especially with the surge in 4 star versus events rewards need to be increased

Bowgentle

fmftint said:

Now that this is done how about revisit PvP REWARDS! Especially with the surge in 4 star versus events rewards need to be increased

Don't worry, they'll expand 3* covers to t250 in cl9.
And give t1 an additional 4* cover.

Cause heaven forbid they actually give out 4s in meaningful quantities, like t50 in cl9, like in PVE.
Or at least t25.

Borstock

veny said:

Borstock said:

veny said:

Bowgentle said:

Magic said:

I sense that this will also mean the nerf to Gambit as he can plow through non-gambit 20 points team with ease on the way to 40-75 wins. 

Anyone running Gambit will run out of non-Gambit teams after 8 wins.
Which is why we complained about the number of wins - 5* players see nothing but other champed 5s from 0 points, so to grind out 40 wins against those teams was madness.

I literally never won against maxed 5* Gambit no matter what team i used. I have champed 5* OML and Phoenix and then only champed 4*s so its not surprising, but advices like "sell them" or "get Gambit too" are useless, since PvP is broken after you enter 5* land. Why? Because fighting against 5*s requires either many 5*s (which normal player dont and cant have) or tons of heals.

75 wins during 3 days is way too much and for lower tiers (up to 575 points) we dont even need win-based system.

Why is "sell them" useless? You don't stay in 5* land. You'd fall back into 4's. I can totally understand not wanting to, but it isn't useless. It has a use.

Yeah, i can sell 5*s and uninstall the game... why play it if there is nothing more to collect, all 4*s i already champed.
If i need to sell 5*s to enjoy PvP, there is something wrong with this feature.

You can still collect 5*s though and just not champ them.

cschwinge

Yes, the PvE comparison is not bad, although a 3-day PvE event has 84 clears of non-trivial nodes (3 days, 6 nodes, 4 matches is pretty much enough for full progression if you 5-6x the trivial ones). But 25-30 wins/day in PvP depends highly on your getting knocked down. Otherwise you end up fighting some very hard matches to get your wins.

It might be time to use some teams that have well know terrible AI, so you appear to be an attractive target.

The rockett

fmftint said:

Now that this is done how about revisit PvP REWARDS! Especially with the surge in 4 star versus events rewards need to be increased

This needs to be addressed.   There was some very interesting information shared on Discord......yea not here, that also needs to be taken into consideration. The PVE rewards are soooooo much better than PVP.  If you want to grow PVP players then make it worth their time.  Better rewards could equal more players since this would  entice them. Also add in the Season and SIM rewards as well.  

jackstar0

Borstock said:

veny said:

Borstock said:

veny said:

Bowgentle said:

Magic said:

I sense that this will also mean the nerf to Gambit as he can plow through non-gambit 20 points team with ease on the way to 40-75 wins. 

Anyone running Gambit will run out of non-Gambit teams after 8 wins.
Which is why we complained about the number of wins - 5* players see nothing but other champed 5s from 0 points, so to grind out 40 wins against those teams was madness.

I literally never won against maxed 5* Gambit no matter what team i used. I have champed 5* OML and Phoenix and then only champed 4*s so its not surprising, but advices like "sell them" or "get Gambit too" are useless, since PvP is broken after you enter 5* land. Why? Because fighting against 5*s requires either many 5*s (which normal player dont and cant have) or tons of heals.

75 wins during 3 days is way too much and for lower tiers (up to 575 points) we dont even need win-based system.

Why is "sell them" useless? You don't stay in 5* land. You'd fall back into 4's. I can totally understand not wanting to, but it isn't useless. It has a use.

Yeah, i can sell 5*s and uninstall the game... why play it if there is nothing more to collect, all 4*s i already champed.
If i need to sell 5*s to enjoy PvP, there is something wrong with this feature.

You can still collect 5*s though and just not champ them.

This is true, but they're not wrong to be frustrated that having the "wrong" 5*s that you've put resources into doesn't net you viable play in the 5* game. Sure there's always going to be a "best" and "worst" of each tier, but the delta between them shouldn't be Gambit to Banner/Ock. That's the absurdity that the "nerf Gambit" crowd has been trying to fight since the first "nerf" of Gambit (which I think we've seen was actually a buff).