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

Brigby

*Please keep all comments on the topic of the update to versus tournament reward structure.

If you wish to discuss versus tournament strategies or the rewards themselves, then please start a separate thread or join an existing one for that. Thank you!

Borstock

jackstar0 said:

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).

I don't disagree with much of this. I just didn't understand why he felt selling his 5*s was useless. But I think I was just nitpicking his word choice in the end. I misunderstood and wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

Rod5

Brigby said:

LifeofAgony said:

Kudos for giving participation trophies?  There is already a mechanic in game (pve) that allows you to get the big time rewards without having to truly compete.

Did pvp really need the same treatment?

The intention of this hybrid system is to allow a greater number of players the opportunity to experience Versus Tournaments, while still allowing the veterans to take advantage of their optimized play-style.

We understand that one of the biggest concerns with the old Wins-Based system was that it came at the expense of the veteran experience, and so this hybrid system is designed to avoid that.

TL;DR: You do you, and they'll do them. Everyone's happy!

Want to give this more than one like. Thank you for listening!

Bloody_Marvel

I'm too lazy to go back through old threads, but I seem to recall that you only needed 40 wins before (though that may have been to 900, which means that hasn't changed). 75 wins to reach 1200 seems excessive though.

Bowgentle

40 was for 900 yeah.

HoundofShadow

Previously, they shifted CP to placement and 40 wins net you the final reward (4* cover).

1200/75= 16 points/win on average. It's a lot only if you can reach 1200 within <40 wins. With this hybrid system, it doesn't make sense to complain that it's a lot if you can reach 1200 easily.

If you can't even reach 725/800/850/900 reliably before the new system, then it's not a lot. Besides, unlike hitting 1200, you do not need to put up any shield at all to reach 75 wins. After factoring in defensive loss at the higher range of PvP without any shielding, I guess it averages out to 16 points per win for those with trouble reaching 1200. It's a fair system.

Jabrony_Geoff

I welcome the change but have you lot forgotten the first run of this?
40 wins is grindy as hell.
75 wins is grindy on a whole new level.
I specifically remember at the time asking the devs to reduce the number of wins.

However, the majority on here seem happy so I'll offer some advice.

Start as soon as the pvp begins.
Pvps run for 3 days so spread the grinding out.
Especially if taking part in PVE at the same time.

13 wins per day X 3 = 39 = 4* cover.
25 wins per day X 3 = 75 = 15 command points.

Achievable but grindy, all the best. 

HoundofShadow

It's not perfect but it seems pretty fair to me. 

1) Guaranteed rewards usually have a higher price tag. In this case, more wins needed.

2) Getting the 15cp is as good as hitting an LT for the PvP. (10 CP at 575  and 15CP at 1200). LT is the top prize or the most valuable token in the game. It make sense to make it slightly challenging for non-top players to reach the top prize. If you can't achieve it with skill, you make it up with effort or hard work.

The rockett

OJSP said:

HoundofShadow said:

If you can't achieve it with skill, you make it up with effort or hard work.

It’s a good attitude in life and people are free to do whatever they want with their time. I just hope players don’t feel obliged to chase those 75 wins every event and get burned out.

They won’t.  Not for a 10 event grind of a season.  In my Win based threads and data collection, even the people got win based gave up the 40 wins. They said it was too much for the 4* cover.  So I would expect 75 wins be the same way but it is there.  

Bowgentle

The rockett said:

OJSP said:

HoundofShadow said:

If you can't achieve it with skill, you make it up with effort or hard work.

It’s a good attitude in life and people are free to do whatever they want with their time. I just hope players don’t feel obliged to chase those 75 wins every event and get burned out.

They won’t.  Not for a 10 event grind of a season.  In my Win based threads and data collection, even the people got win based gave up the 40 wins. They said it was too much for the 4* cover.  So I would expect 75 wins be the same way but it is there.  

People will try for a couple of pvps, trying to put bad teams on defense.
Then realize they have no idea how to manipulate MMR and give up.

75 wins is INSANE, I'm glad it doesn't apply to us.

The rockett

Bowgentle said:

The rockett said:

OJSP said:

HoundofShadow said:

If you can't achieve it with skill, you make it up with effort or hard work.

It’s a good attitude in life and people are free to do whatever they want with their time. I just hope players don’t feel obliged to chase those 75 wins every event and get burned out.

They won’t.  Not for a 10 event grind of a season.  In my Win based threads and data collection, even the people got win based gave up the 40 wins. They said it was too much for the 4* cover.  So I would expect 75 wins be the same way but it is there.  

People will try for a couple of pvps, trying to put bad teams on defense.
Then realize they have no idea how to manipulate MMR and give up.

75 wins is INSANE, I'm glad it doesn't apply to us.

Exactly. Not our fight. 

Phumade

OJSP said:

HoundofShadow said:

After factoring in defensive loss at the higher range of PvP without any shielding, I guess it averages out to 16 points per win for those with trouble reaching 1200. It's a fair system.

Except MMR would make it harder for some people than others to grind 75 wins and not in a sensible way. I think 1* and 2* players will grind 75 wins faster than 4* or 5* players. Not only that, players who grind that many matches would be burned out pretty quick. Even if we assume an average of 3 minutes per match, that is almost 4 hours worth of matches to play. Even if we spread it to 2 1/2 days, that’s more than an hour per day.

I'm not so sure about your assessment on mmr.

4*/5* rosters will almost inevitably get to 1200 long before 75 wins and or their last 30 wins will come when the 3*/4* rosters have climbed to 700.
      ---  The most likely outcomes are either they can get to 1200 in less than 20 wins or they purposely don't shield/ float and can churn their 75 wins against easier rosters, but at the expense of waiting for float points to rise.

If your a lower tier roster,  knowing the float ranges of the various tiers makes getting to 75 wins pretty trivial.

Phumade

In fact, if your going to acknowledge or create a system where you can win by scroing 1200 or 75 wins.  You might as well bring back

Unlimited cupcakes as a strategy for weaker rosters to build out 75 wins.  Def wins still don't count,  so even even 2* rosters who CC grill still have to grind out 75 retals.

Ultimately  placement rightly belongs to the biggest and most experienced rosters who can employ a wide range of point building and destroying tactics.

But progression can and should be easily achieved by rosters who can blow by 1200 without hits or by rosters who know how grill and setup easy banks of wins.

Phumade

OJSP said:

Phumade said:

I'm not so sure about your assessment on mmr.

4*/5* rosters will almost inevitably get to 1200 long before 75 wins and or their last 30 wins will come when the 3*/4* rosters have climbed to 700.
      ---  The most likely outcomes are either they can get to 1200 in less than 20 wins or they purposely don't shield/ float and can churn their 75 wins against easier rosters, but at the expense of waiting for float points to rise.

If your a lower tier roster,  knowing the float ranges of the various tiers makes getting to 75 wins pretty trivial.

Yes, I agree that those who are able to get 1200 probably won’t have a problem. However, not every player knows this though. I can see some players struggling to climb against similar teams and decide just to slog through these matches 75 times. The effects of floaters, players hitting each other with small teams and probable increase in player participation are still unclear, because there is less incentive to get t10 for the CPs now compared to our previous win based system. It could actually make it harder to break MMR.

1* or 2* players slogging through 1* or 2* teams will go through their matches faster than 3* or 4* players facing similar tier opponents. The worst affected players would be the 4*-5* transitioners actually, if they want to get that 75 wins.

I’m gladly to be proven wrong. If this change means more targets to hit instead of the same players I usually queue, than I have no problem with that. However, if this puts off players from trying or makes them float low with small teams and hit each other for 75 wins, then it’s not a particularly good change. It’s great for players who could do this, but not so much for everyone else.

I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

The reality of the typical player will be similar to this

Climb to 900.  run out of healtpacks.  float don't shield
get clobbered to 400.  long string of reds.

Regardless of the reds.  your new mmr will be at 400 and you will almost inevitably see lower tiered rosters who have escaped their float ranges.

This already happens in current pvp.  Its exactly what happens on the first day when big rosters run out to 900 to pickup the 4* cover.  They get hit back to the 400s and when the player starts their real climb to shield,  usually they get faced off against lower tier rosters who have escaped float ranges.  and we aren't even talking about tactics to actually manipulate defensive teams.


I would agree if you tried to hero mode 75 wins in one session that its tedious AF.  but most players will play until out of health packs float/get beat down and recycle.

It will be more time for sure,  but its not like its 75 hits of all 480 Gamthors.

limonade

Great news! I can't wait to try it out!

Spudgutter

OJSP said:

Phumade said:

I'm not so sure about your assessment on mmr.

4*/5* rosters will almost inevitably get to 1200 long before 75 wins and or their last 30 wins will come when the 3*/4* rosters have climbed to 700.
      ---  The most likely outcomes are either they can get to 1200 in less than 20 wins or they purposely don't shield/ float and can churn their 75 wins against easier rosters, but at the expense of waiting for float points to rise.

If your a lower tier roster,  knowing the float ranges of the various tiers makes getting to 75 wins pretty trivial.

Yes, I agree that those who are able to get 1200 probably won’t have a problem. However, not every player knows this though. I can see some players struggling to climb against similar teams and decide just to slog through these matches 75 times. The effects of floaters, players hitting each other with small teams and probable increase in player participation are still unclear, because there is less incentive to get t10 for the CPs now compared to our previous win based system. It could actually make it harder to break MMR.

1* or 2* players slogging through 1* or 2* teams will go through their matches faster than 3* or 4* players facing similar tier opponents. The worst affected players would be the 4*-5* transitioners actually, if they want to get that 75 wins.

I’m gladly to be proven wrong. If this change means more targets to hit instead of the same players I usually queue, than I have no problem with that. However, if this puts off players from trying or makes them float low with small teams and hit each other for 75 wins, then it’s not a particularly good change. It’s great for players who could do this, but not so much for everyone else.

I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

curious as well. 

if i were giving advice to 1* and 2* players, i wouldn't even tell them to go for the 40, let alone the 75. 

my perception of the change is that people at lower tiers will be able to get 1 or 2 rewards higher then they normally would.  someone who only goes for 300 right now might find the climb to 575 not as bad, with minimal extra effort.  same for someone who could easily hit 575, getting 800 might not be so bad.  

i think we (vets) are focusing way more on the 75 wins, when some people will just be happy to finally get the 4*.  remains to be seen, so it's all just speculation at this point.

AlexR

Spudgutter said:curious as well. 

if i were giving advice to 1* and 2* players, i wouldn't even tell them to go for the 40, let alone the 75. 

my perception of the change is that people at lower tiers will be able to get 1 or 2 rewards higher then they normally would.  someone who only goes for 300 right now might find the climb to 575 not as bad, with minimal extra effort.  same for someone who could easily hit 575, getting 800 might not be so bad. 

For 1* and 2* player, the interesting reward that opens up now is at 25 wins, the second 50 HP reward. Because at lower levels, the hunt for HP is desperate and getting 2x 50 HP is actually really valuable.

Daredevil217

Alliance mate informed me that when you hit the point thresholds, it automatically bumps your wins up accordingly. Can anyone confirm if this is true? If so, it’s pretty huge. I can get to 900 in one push. If that automatically bumps me to 40 wins, 35 more for the CP is doable. 

iron-n-wine

Daredevil217 said:

Alliance mate informed me that when you hit the point thresholds, it automatically bumps your wins up accordingly. Can anyone confirm if this is true? If so, it’s pretty huge. I can get to 900 in one push. If that automatically bumps me to 40 wins, 35 more for the CP is doable. 

wow that sounds very cool if true

Daredevil217

iron-n-wine said:

Daredevil217 said:

Alliance mate informed me that when you hit the point thresholds, it automatically bumps your wins up accordingly. Can anyone confirm if this is true? If so, it’s pretty huge. I can get to 900 in one push. If that automatically bumps me to 40 wins, 35 more for the CP is doable. 

wow that sounds very cool if true

Apparently it’s not. Someone on line tried it and it did not work. My bad.