Progression suggestion: Overhaul DDQ
Comments
-
Understanding intent is central to understanding the sense that a person is using a word within. Compete has three distinct senses of use in the English Language: -entrailbucket said:Top 250? That means you're beating 750 other players, quite possibly other players who like to play and are competing, but can't do it optimally. Your intent is irrelevant, the irrefutable fact is that your play is taking rewards away from them. We're all competing for the same pool of rewards, and whatever you get is something someone else doesn't get. Those 750 other players exist, no matter how much you dismiss them as "casuals" or whatever.- strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others
- be able to rival another or others.
- take part in a contest
If they have no intent to compete - to strive are they really entering a contest? By the same token, if you win easily and it was a cake walk were no one could rival you - would it really be a competition? As one of the defining elements is the struggle to overcome.2 -
Ok then, let's assume for the sake of argument that you've solemnly vowed to never compete for placement in any form, and if you're in danger of earning a placement reward you'll purposely get out of the way so a competitive player can earn that reward.Roland113 said:
Its semantics.entrailbucket said:Top 250? That means you're beating 750 other players, quite possibly other players who like to play and are competing, but can't do it optimally. Your intent is irrelevant, the irrefutable fact is that your play is taking rewards away from them. We're all competing for the same pool of rewards, and whatever you get is something someone else doesn't get. Those 750 other players exist, no matter how much you dismiss them as "casuals" or whatever.
Your initial statement of "I think when a lot of people ask for more 5*, what they're really asking for is "give out more 5* to me (or players in my situation), but not to anybody else," " does not apply to many people and I'm simply giving a counterpoint explaining why more covers make my MPQ experience more enjoyable to me with no regard to where I place competitively.
In that case, I agree with your point. You getting more 5* doesn't affect me, or anybody else, in any way. But how many players do you think would be willing to sign that pledge? And how many will stick to it forever?0 -
You've misread my argument at some point (to be fair we've kind of bounced around all over the place). Awarding more 5* to everyone just pushes up the bar for everyone, it doesn't actually improve anyone's roster relative to the rest of the playerbase, which is the *only* thing that matters in a game where every mode is competitive and rewards are exclusive.BlackBoltRocks said:
Which is a rather poor assumption to make. People saying “give me more 5*” does not necessarily equate to “but also do not give more 5* to everyone else”. For some reason entrailbucket is behaving as though 5* are private goods: making them accessible to one person necessarily means depriving another person of them. Which isnt true at all. 5*, like almost everything in this game, should be public goods: making them accessible to one person does not deprive another person of them.Roland113 said:
Its semantics.entrailbucket said:Top 250? That means you're beating 750 other players, quite possibly other players who like to play and are competing, but can't do it optimally. Your intent is irrelevant, the irrefutable fact is that your play is taking rewards away from them. We're all competing for the same pool of rewards, and whatever you get is something someone else doesn't get. Those 750 other players exist, no matter how much you dismiss them as "casuals" or whatever.
Your initial statement of "I think when a lot of people ask for more 5*, what they're really asking for is "give out more 5* to me (or players in my situation), but not to anybody else," " does not apply to many people and I'm simply giving a counterpoint explaining why more covers make my MPQ experience more enjoyable to me with no regard to where I place competitively.
What is a private good, however, is placement (and by extension placement rewards). Oh, and PvP retaliation. Those are separate topics altogether.
So when I see people asking for more 5* for everyone, I often feel like they've not fully considered the implications of that request. And oftentimes when I keep asking, I find that what they really want is to improve their own position in the hierarchy. Hence "more 5* for me but not for anybody else."0 -
Can't say I agree with this. Anyone playing for a 4* cover on a regular basis can afford 1 slot for a 1*, and probably have the 2*s rostered anyways to farm. The ~7 minutes it takes to do those 3 nodes is hardly a high cost for what you get out of DDQ.Basepuzzler said:
Would be great if they added CL so higher tier players could skip the 1 and 2* nodes and have a 4 or 5* node to play for a 4* cover instead.Rockwell75 said:PVP and PVE players can't even get a 5* from top placement-- I highly doubt they'll be offered in any way in the DDQ. There should, however, be a way to get a 4* every day from DDQ. The event that gives you CP should instead give you a cover for the 4* hero you need to use (and instead offer the CP through progression). Also, requiring people with 4* rosters to use 1* and 2* characters is dumb and dare I say a little degrading.0 -
Ok then, let's assume for the sake of argument that you've solemnly vowed to never compete for placement in any form, and if you're in danger of earning a placement reward you'll purposely get out of the way so a competitive player can earn that reward.
In that case, I agree with your point. You getting more 5* doesn't affect me, or anybody else, in any way. But how many players do you think would be willing to sign that pledge? And how many will stick to it forever?
[...]
You've misread my argument at some point (to be fair we've kind of bounced around all over the place). Awarding more 5* to everyone just pushes up the bar for everyone, it doesn't actually improve anyone's roster relative to the rest of the playerbase, which is the *only* thing that matters in a game where every mode is competitive and rewards are exclusive.
So when I see people asking for more 5* for everyone, I often feel like they've not fully considered the implications of that request. And oftentimes when I keep asking, I find that what they really want is to improve their own position in the hierarchy. Hence "more 5* for me but not for anybody else."
I don't agree with the premise that my roster relative to the rest of the playerbase is the only thing that matters. PVE and PVP are both partially competitive (in that a leaderboard exists), but not all rewards are exclusive (if I hit a progression tier and get the reward from it, that doesn't influence anyone else's ability to get the same prizes).
I don't need to solemnly vow anything; behavioral conditioning is sufficient. If I play enough to score a good number of Progression points, I'm rewarded with a cover for a somewhat-rare (4-star) character in a game I enjoy playing. If I force myself to stay up past midnight grinding on a match-3 game, I'm sometimes rewarded with top-50 placement rewards that are slightly better than the top-200 placement rewards I'd otherwise have gotten, but I'm also consistently punished when I wake up sleep-deprived and miserable. Even top-200 is only marginally better than top-500, so if suddenly a whole 20% of MPQ players started caring about placement, I'd still probably just try to hit progression, maybe hit a couple more nodes to try to help out my Alliance's placement, and then call it.
I'm not "getting out of the way", but I'm not getting in the way either. If I had stronger characters (5* champs) on my roster, I might go to SCL9 occasionally for the challenge/fun of it, but on weeks when I had other stuff going on I'd probably stay in SCL8 and just reach the progression target a little faster. Other people with 5* champs would reach the progression target a little faster, too, and then if they wanted to place higher than me on the leaderboard, they could clear the 4-star Essential node again or something.
This is not too different from what happens right now; some days, I just don't have more than 30 minutes to give to MPQ: if I spent another 15 minutes playing a video game, I'd miss the opportunity to run a 90-minute errand (or spend that 90-minute block on another activity I enjoy) in the gap between other commitments. So I join an SCL7 slice in PVE, Rocket&Thanos my way through everything, collect progression, and.... that's it.
Alliance Events are...special. I generally enjoy fighting the bosses and side-nodes more than I enjoy fighting 2* Bullseye, Moonstone, Ultron Sentries, etc. (though since Ultron side-nodes are just non-stop Sentries, those are kinda boring). So, I'm more willing to give up what would otherwise be a weekend Diablo/PoE grind with friends, spend gym time on a treadmill instead of the squat rack, maybe let the weeds get a little taller, etc. in order to play a (semi-)interesting MPQ event and help my Alliance members get more four-star covers.
0 -
Great, you've convinced me, fantastic job. You don't play MPQ competitively, and thus none of the rest of this has anything to do with you.For players who play the game competitively at all (and I think this is most players, including the people who PvP a little, or try for alliance placement, PvE placement, etc), relative roster strength is the only thing that's important. Asking for more 5* for everyone will have no impact on your relative roster strength, so your PvP experience and placement in PvE will be basically the same.0
-
Interesting, so let's say I join a CL5 PvP bracket somehow, with no intent to compete with those players, just to get 1200 points for progression. If I finish the event in 1st place, does the game psychically read my lack of intention to compete and award the 1st place prizes to the #2 finisher?JDFiend said:
Understanding intent is central to understanding the sense that a person is using a word within. Compete has three distinct senses of use in the English Language: -entrailbucket said:Top 250? That means you're beating 750 other players, quite possibly other players who like to play and are competing, but can't do it optimally. Your intent is irrelevant, the irrefutable fact is that your play is taking rewards away from them. We're all competing for the same pool of rewards, and whatever you get is something someone else doesn't get. Those 750 other players exist, no matter how much you dismiss them as "casuals" or whatever.- strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others
- be able to rival another or others.
- take part in a contest
If they have no intent to compete - to strive are they really entering a contest? By the same token, if you win easily and it was a cake walk were no one could rival you - would it really be a competition? As one of the defining elements is the struggle to overcome.0 -
It doesn't matter. What matters is how you perceive it. Would you feel like it was a competion? That you achieved a great victory? Or guilty? Or disappointed? I think that is what is important.entrailbucket said:
Interesting, so let's say I join a CL5 PvP bracket somehow, with no intent to compete with those players, just to get 1200 points for progression. If I finish the event in 1st place, does the game psychically read my lack of intention to compete and award the 1st place prizes to the #2 finisher?JDFiend said:
Understanding intent is central to understanding the sense that a person is using a word within. Compete has three distinct senses of use in the English Language: -entrailbucket said:Top 250? That means you're beating 750 other players, quite possibly other players who like to play and are competing, but can't do it optimally. Your intent is irrelevant, the irrefutable fact is that your play is taking rewards away from them. We're all competing for the same pool of rewards, and whatever you get is something someone else doesn't get. Those 750 other players exist, no matter how much you dismiss them as "casuals" or whatever.- strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others
- be able to rival another or others.
- take part in a contest
If they have no intent to compete - to strive are they really entering a contest? By the same token, if you win easily and it was a cake walk were no one could rival you - would it really be a competition? As one of the defining elements is the struggle to overcome.
The truth isn't always universal but often personal and depends on our conceptualisation of language. The truth isn't mutually exclusive, Roland doesn't perceive it to be a struggle - a fight for place. To them it is not a competition. You do, so to you it is.
Plants are green because they contain a molecule called chlorophyll. This substance absorbs blue and red light but reflects green light. So are the plants green or do we only perceive them to be green? I be been sat down reading for the last hour, during which time the Earth has rotated and orbited the Sun. Have I moved or haven't I? Facts are usually just limited perceptions.
Ever read any Sapir and Whorf's research into how the concept of words warp peoples perceptions? They worked with highly qualified engineers in petrol based industries. They put 'empty' barrels near a smoking area. As it the barrels were labelled empty it over rode their training and industry knowledge that would still be flammable liquid inside and even flicked the butts at the barrels. They all knew they was empty in the traditional sense but the connotion of the word changed thier perception of reality. If your kind interested Gestalt theory is kind of interesting when coupled with this.
Ancient Greeks often described the sea as being green. Would you agree? Or say it was blue? We're they lying or has there been a change in how the concept of blue has changed over time? Weirdly it's neither as lexical tokens are just internal concepts they often misaligned with colours person to person. See the purple/pink debate. The same is true of any word. What is the true thing that defines the concept of compete? Is merely taken part and quitting be competive? Or do have to struggle and overcome something? That is the real question you ignored.
0 -
Ah, I understand. So in my hypothetical, all that matters is whether or not I think I was involved in a competition. If I don't think I'm competing, or I'm not trying to, the 2nd place player will indeed receive the first place rewards, because I'm not interested in them.0
-
Where is competing defined as receiving rewards?
My supermarket rewards me for shopping there regularly, am I competing?0 -
Brief and simple.
I want more rewards.
I'm ok if everyone else gets more rewards also.5 -
Glad to hear I've done a fantastic job of convincing you, but I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from. The level of detail seemed necessary to me; a Pledge to lose points on purpose so someone else can get placement is a pretty high bar, and I wanted to prove rigorously that other more common attitudes could have a comparable effect. I would have written less, but I didn't have the time.
I only hope this means we may now discuss the viability of features that may affect the distribution of heretofore-rare in-game resources, without it being implied that those in favor of raising the supply for non-competitive players are dirty rotten hypocrites.
--Anyway, what's this about the discussion having nothing to do with me? Is this not the DDQ thread, discussing basically the one shining oasis of MPQ in which no competition occurs?1 -
JDFiend said:Where is competing defined as receiving rewards?
My supermarket rewards me for shopping there regularly, am I competing?
Since you're just going to ignore my hypothetical case and debate the meaning of the word "compete" instead of anything related to Marvel Puzzle Quest:
"Supermarket" has two meanings --"a large retail market that sells food and other household goods and that is usually operated on a self-service basis" and "any business or company offering an unusually wide range of goods or services."
Which one of those says anything about giving rewards? Are you sure you're shopping at a supermarket? The Ancient Romans didn't have supermarkets. Did they really exist? What about dinosaurs? What color were they?-1 -
What was the topic again?0
-
There's no hostility, perhaps a bit of frustration. I'm also not trying to argue that increased rewards are bad, or undesirable. The point I was trying to make is that they're *irrelevant*, for competitive players who are seeking an edge over others.Tensuun said:Glad to hear I've done a fantastic job of convincing you, but I'm not sure where the hostility is coming from. The level of detail seemed necessary to me; a Pledge to lose points on purpose so someone else can get placement is a pretty high bar, and I wanted to prove rigorously that other more common attitudes could have a comparable effect. I would have written less, but I didn't have the time.
I only hope this means we may now discuss the viability of features that may affect the distribution of heretofore-rare in-game resources, without it being implied that those in favor of raising the supply for non-competitive players are dirty rotten hypocrites.
--Anyway, what's this about the discussion having nothing to do with me? Is this not the DDQ thread, discussing basically the one shining oasis of MPQ in which no competition occurs?
They are decidedly not irrelevant for players who do not compete. I think most players of this game do compete, though, despite the presence of at least one player who most definitely does not.0 -
Neither. I have never said rewards were central to the concept of a supermarket. I wouldn't put the as a central component of competing either but you keep coming back to. As if the two are intrinsic. Every response almost. It is kind of interesting. Even though they have explained their intent as they maybe competing in a competition but they are not doing so in a competive spirit.entrailbucket said:JDFiend said:Where is competing defined as receiving rewards?
My supermarket rewards me for shopping there regularly, am I competing?
Since you're just going to ignore my hypothetical case and debate the meaning of the word "compete" instead of anything related to Marvel Puzzle Quest:
"Supermarket" has two meanings --"a large retail market that sells food and other household goods and that is usually operated on a self-service basis" and "any business or company offering an unusually wide range of goods or services."
Which one of those says anything about giving rewards? Are you sure you're shopping at a supermarket? The Ancient Romans didn't have supermarkets. Did they really exist? What about dinosaurs? What color were they?
I'd define most Tescos as a supermarket, and it is how they market themselves. However, context is important they do have smaller drop in metro stores, catalogues, banking services, mobile networks, broadband - so their is room for debate around that defintion. Context is the key mostly.
Did what really exist Ancient Romans or Supermarkets? Pronoun could be interpreted either way. I'd say ancient Romans didn't - generally they were just Romans as there isn't a modern day equivalent like Greeks. Am sure there are theories out there somewhere the entire Roman society is a hoax.
Dinosaurs. Again I'd say yes they existed. Others wouldn't, but I wouldn't try to change or disrepect thier belief or tell them they are wrong as I think differently.
Think the colour of dinosaurs are still hotly contested subject. Though Barney conclusive proves it is purple and yellow.0 -
I would like to sincerely thank you for reminding me why I stopped visiting this forum years ago.JDFiend said:
Neither. I have never said rewards were central to the concept of a supermarket. I wouldn't put the as a central component of competing either but you keep coming back to. As if the two are intrinsic. Every response almost. It is kind of interesting. Even though they have explained their intent as they maybe competing in a competition but they are not doing so in a competive spirit.
I'd define most Tescos as a supermarket, and it is how they market themselves. However, context is important they do have smaller drop in metro stores, catalogues, banking services, mobile networks, broadband - so their is room for debate around that defintion. Context is the key mostly.
Did what really exist Ancient Romans or Supermarkets? Pronoun could be interpreted either way. I'd say ancient Romans didn't - generally they were just Romans as there isn't a modern day equivalent like Greeks. Am sure there are theories out there somewhere the entire Roman society is a hoax.
Dinosaurs. Again I'd say yes they existed. Others wouldn't, but I wouldn't try to change or disrepect thier belief or tell them they are wrong as I think differently.
Think the colour of dinosaurs are still hotly contested subject. Though Barney conclusive proves it is purple and yellow.
Let's get this topic back on track: how should rewards for DDQ be increased?0 -
No, no. Please keep arguing about how competitive you aren't on a thread about the least competitive regular part of MPQ.3
-
I would quite like DDQ to reward coupons to spend in the supermarket, that would be very useful!
3
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.8K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.3K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.6K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 504 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 421 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 298 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.6K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements