Speed and New Releases

135678

Comments

  • JHawkInc
    JHawkInc Posts: 2,605 Chairperson of the Boards
    Dormammu said:
    HoundofShadow said:
    We do know that you judge characters based on speed, damage/ap, cost of power etc but there are a large playerbase that don't care about speed.
    I don't want to care about speed, I'm forced to care about speed. I would love to take my near-champed Kingpin and Cable into PvP in the near future. But that would be suicide. Like taking a Plymouth to race a Ferrari.

    I think it's ridiculous that PvE even has placement or anything competitive about it at all. All those placement rewards should be shifted to progression. Player vs. computer. Not speed vs. speed.
    Except nobody is coming over to your house to force you to do anything.

    You don't have to care about speed. You can take Kingpin and Cable into PVP. 

    Sure, the game pressures you to play speed for the best rewards, but it's not forcing you to do anything. And there are plenty of people out there that simply ignore those pressures.

    I totally agree that part of the game should be progression only, and have difficulty shifted more on being able to "solve a puzzle" or best a computer opponent, and not have anything based on comparing to how other players are doing in the event.

    But the fact that the top end of placement is centered on speed doesn't change the fact that no one is forced to play that way, and that a huge chunk of players simply do not play that way (if they did, it would be super obvious because competition would be more stiff). Some people have no problem taking a Plymouth because their goal is to have a nice enjoyable drive, and they simply do not care if they're losing a race to a Ferrari in the process.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    Dormammu said:
    @Spudgutter

    Please don't take my comments from another thread, make them your own, and use them entirely out of context. If you think I'm a hypocrite don't mock me, just call me a hypocrite. I'm a big boy and can take it.
    I didn't have to make them my own, i just copy and pasted it, changed "event" or "supports" where applicable, and adjusted the language so it would make sense.  I thought the context fit in pretty well.  

    https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/77041/new-event-support-circuit-updated-1-28-19/p3

    I didn't like the look of the new support event, you suggested i don't have to play it.  fair criticism.  you don't like the new character(s), i suggested you don't have to chase after them.  also fair criticism.  we can debate the finer points all we want, it pretty much boils down to that.
  • Dormammu
    Dormammu Posts: 3,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    JHawkInc said:
    Dormammu said:
    HoundofShadow said:
    We do know that you judge characters based on speed, damage/ap, cost of power etc but there are a large playerbase that don't care about speed.
    I don't want to care about speed, I'm forced to care about speed. I would love to take my near-champed Kingpin and Cable into PvP in the near future. But that would be suicide. Like taking a Plymouth to race a Ferrari.

    I think it's ridiculous that PvE even has placement or anything competitive about it at all. All those placement rewards should be shifted to progression. Player vs. computer. Not speed vs. speed.
    Except nobody is coming over to your house to force you to do anything.

    You don't have to care about speed. You can take Kingpin and Cable into PVP. 
    Yeah. And lose to Grockitty and Thorokye every time. I struggle enough at PvP already... no thanks.
  • Dormammu
    Dormammu Posts: 3,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    Spudgutter said:

    I didn't like the look of the new support event, you suggested i don't have to play it.  fair criticism.  you don't like the new character(s), i suggested you don't have to chase after them.
    I don't. That's kind of the point of my original post. I'm just playing like I always do in Namor's release events.
  • bbigler
    bbigler Posts: 2,111 Chairperson of the Boards
    From the PVP teams I've seen used, even casual players gravitate towards the meta speed teams because they're just plain better. Why would someone purposely choose a team that's not the best? If you have the option, why choose the weaker team? Even if you don't care about placement rewards, you still want to win the match, and you would rather do it faster than slower using few health packs. 

    I appreciate playing for fun, but it's also fun getting more rewards and not spending hours on PVE subs. Even casual players are chasing after something, something they think will make the game more fun for them, and I bet those things are top tier characters. Perhaps my perspective is skewed because I'm competitive (I always have been).  Is there a casual player on this forum who can give their perspective on playing for speed? Meaning, do they want faster teams or are they happy in the slow lane with weaker teams? And does their slower progression make them lose their patience and quit? I know I would. 
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    I didn't say that my alliance represent the whole playerbase. I'm just sharing my experience, just like how the other poster shared his wife's experience.

    Objectively, competitiveness can be proven easily by looking at the points in PvP and PvE. The scores are very telling.  The scores between competitive players are non-competitive players are pretty wide. 

    Besides, those top tier characters might be the most used in the game. However, it's not broken down by usage per unique players or whatever metrics that are more representative of the total usage counts.

    For example, competitive players might use R&G/Thanos/Dr Strange etc for an average of 9 - 10 nodes * 7 = 63 - 70 times per day in PvE. Non-competitive players use whatever they want to use, which means a wider variety of characters, compared to competitive players.

    For example, There are 47 3* characters in the game. 
    If 50 players are competitive players and they use Dr Strange for all 9 nodes, the usage will be 7*9*50 = 3150 times in a day. Non-competitive players rarely clear every nodes using 4+3 clears methods. Their engagement are lower. Even if all 950 players did 4 clears of all 9 nodes on average and we divide the rest of the 46 characters among them, the usage is only 34,200/46 = 743 usage per characters on average in a one day sub.






  • randomhero1090
    randomhero1090 Posts: 396 Mover and Shaker
    @Dogface What @KGB said.... join PVE on day 1 with only a couple hours to go. You will get into a new bracket. Will make t50 much easier. You will still get max progression. Maybe it's my team and roster, but I can "slow play" from the start and make t50. Slow play means join, play for a bit, take a break, come back. 4 full clears, green checks right before the close, repeat.
  • randomhero1090
    randomhero1090 Posts: 396 Mover and Shaker
    Again, as for the speed.... I think it boils down to the time commitment. Like many of you I am sure, I have a life besides MPQ. Wife, kids, job. I have to schedule out WHEN I play MPQ, which just feels wrong at times. Other games I play, I just play when I want... but more importantly, when I CAN. I'm fine with PVP being the competitive "fast" mode. It has progression for wins and allow you to play however you like. If you want to place, then you need to be fast and use shields. But for PVE..... Make it more about scoring versus being fast. Busting out Thano5, Groot & GotG in PVE and just tapping as fast as you can really isn't skill. Yes, it might be least turns possible, but your team also took a beating, and to me, that should factor into your score. Just thinking out loud here....
  • Straycat
    Straycat Posts: 963 Critical Contributor
    JHawkInc said:

    But the fact that the top end of placement is centered on speed doesn't change the fact that no one is forced to play that way, and that a huge chunk of players simply do not play that way (if they did, it would be super obvious because competition would be more stiff). Some people have no problem taking a Plymouth because their goal is to have a nice enjoyable drive, and they simply do not care if they're losing a race to a Ferrari in the process.
    Yes, but at the same time, no one is forced to hit max progression and/or 575 or 900 in pvp either. But we start there as a baseline. Then the question is, "Do I want to play pve for 1 or 2 hours? Is my MMR high enough that I only queue meta teams?" Even if you don't play for placement, there's enough time commitment that speed becomes important. And in pvp, you generally need meta teams to fight meta teams.
    The thing about MMO style games is that the "enjoyable" part of the game is not the drive. It should be part of it, of course, but in loot farming games the fun is in getting good loot.
  • fight4thedream
    fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,975 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited February 2019
    randomhero1090 said:
    Again, as for the speed.... I think it boils down to the time commitment. Like many of you I am sure, I have a life besides MPQ. Wife, kids, job. I have to schedule out WHEN I play MPQ, which just feels wrong at times. Other games I play, I just play when I want... but more importantly, when I CAN. I'm fine with PVP being the competitive "fast" mode. It has progression for wins and allow you to play however you like. If you want to place, then you need to be fast and use shields. But for PVE..... Make it more about scoring versus being fast. Busting out Thano5, Groot & GotG in PVE and just tapping as fast as you can really isn't skill. Yes, it might be least turns possible, but your team also took a beating, and to me, that should factor into your score. Just thinking out loud here....
    This is a brilliant idea! It would dethrone Thanos without actually having to nerf him. Factoring in the damage incurred during the match, either by the enemy or characters on your own team, would definitely shake the PvE meta up. 

    I stress damage incurred rather than overall health at the end of the match because if they factored in overall health points instead of damage incurred, it would give an insurmountable advantage to players with 550* characters. Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, it would finally give defensive abilities a much needed boost in terms of competitive value: shields, turning teammates invisible, AP denial, damage reduction now become something to take seriously rather than seen as fault with a character's skill set. 

    The only big issue I can foresee is that they would have to disable the interaction between 5* Kitty/4* Rocket and Groot. Otherwise, they would be the pre-requisite team for almost all nodes. For goon only nodes, add Medusa or 3* IF into the mix and finish the match quick with no damage. For Dark Avenger nodes, swap in Rogue and let the good times roll. There might be other potentially meta-dominating teams (Okoye/Thor/Medusa?) but that pairing would definitely fill the hegemonic role left by Thanos. 

    The key would be to balance speed and damage reduction in determining a player's score. Additionally, with such a meta, the grind can be greatly reduced as now players won't simply be tapping away through most nodes but carefully considering the best options t maximize points.

    Obviously, over time a new meta will reveal itself and top players will find ideal team combinations for most of the challenges provided. But at least it will increase the value of non-offensive abilities and open up new options and encourage new competitive play styles. 

    I really like this idea!
  • randomhero1090
    randomhero1090 Posts: 396 Mover and Shaker
    @fight4thedream

    Thanks! 

    And yes, I agree.  Damage incurred.  And IMHO, I wouldn't let any type of "heal" recover points as people would just stall the game out and heal back.

    And yes, it would change the meta.  Each PVE would be "figured out" however you would still have to take a little caution as you play to watch the board.  Letting big nukes go off would crush your score, forcing you to deal with them.  Going invisible, shield play, tile removal, creating cascades....  it would all come into play.

    The other potential issue is people playing down with monster rosters just to speed clear and now worry about countdowns.  But then again, I see plenty of 5* players in CL7 right now anyway.
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,966 Chairperson of the Boards
    HoundofShadow said:
    I didn't say that my alliance represent the whole playerbase. I'm just sharing my experience, just like how the other poster shared his wife's experience.

    Objectively, competitiveness can be proven easily by looking at the points in PvP and PvE. The scores are very telling.  The scores between competitive players are non-competitive players are pretty wide. 

    Besides, those top tier characters might be the most used in the game. However, it's not broken down by usage per unique players or whatever metrics that are more representative of the total usage counts.

    For example, competitive players might use R&G/Thanos/Dr Strange etc for an average of 9 - 10 nodes * 7 = 63 - 70 times per day in PvE. Non-competitive players use whatever they want to use, which means a wider variety of characters, compared to competitive players.

    For example, There are 47 3* characters in the game. 
    If 50 players are competitive players and they use Dr Strange for all 9 nodes, the usage will be 7*9*50 = 3150 times in a day. Non-competitive players rarely clear every nodes using 4+3 clears methods. Their engagement are lower. Even if all 950 players did 4 clears of all 9 nodes on average and we divide the rest of the 46 characters among them, the usage is only 34,200/46 = 743 usage per characters on average in a one day sub.

    You said "competitive players occupy top 5-10% of the total playerbase".  If you did not get that figure from your alliance's playstyle (where you also shared that 5-10% are competitive), then can I ask where you got your metrics from?

    Using points is an awful way to determine how competitive a player is.  For some players, top 100 is the best they can do with their roster or because of real life demands.  So If I know that I will get T100 prizes whether I do everything as optimally as I can or by playing less, I'd probably choose the latter.  Ranking 56th and 84th nets the same rewards, so that my "competitive" is going to look different in the rankings than someone whom the slices don't work for who has more real life demands.  I still don't know how to hit 1200 points, but I know I'm competitive. 

    Also, if your argument is that the minuscule percentage of competitive players (in your mind) are shifting the metrics to the point that they warp the usage statistics, I really don't know what to say.  When OML debuted you'd expect every single 5* player who had him to use him every match.  So obviously those players would bump his usage statistics based on available options alone.  But he wasn't nerfed because 5* players were using him.  It was because anyone with a yellow cover (even 2* players) were using him.  They know not just how many matches a character is used in, but they also know who is doing the using.

    I understand you have your beliefs and are entitled to them, but I think that way more of the playerbase is competitive than you think and those that aren't still will gravitate to faster teams to reach their point/win/progression/placement goals.
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited February 2019
    I'm curious where those players get the ideas that majority of the playerbase are playing for speed, want to clear all the nodes as fast possible and want characters with high damage/ap or low ap cost with each new release.  :p

    Those 5 characters of each tier that has the higher usage count in battles are not really a good way to tell whether the majority of the playerbase are playing for speed. However, if the dev says that we have 100,000 players (3* land and above) in the game, Dr Strange/R4G/Thanos are used by about 80,000 players in the game each day, then I agree that most players are playing for speed. Competitive players will influence the usage counts of characters because they use the same set of characters in virtually every node.

    I didn't use my alliance as a yardstick to measure competitiveness in the game. I based it on my experience and observartion as a competitive player in PvEs and PvPs. 5% to 10% calculation comes from top 50 or top 100 placements out of 1000. 


    The bare minimum a competitive player does is the standard 4+3 clearing method in PvE. If you do fewer than that for more than 2/3 days, it's pretty obvious that you are not going for the top for that event. 

    As for PvP in SCL 7 and above, the points are jacked up by those group of players who want to take the top spots. Beyond 750 points is where the challenge usually begins. This is where more difficult opponents are being presented to you. Any player can easily walk their way into top 100 in PvP if they want to with just 600+points (SCL 9). 

    If points are an awful way to determine how competitive a player is, then how do you determine that majority of the playerbase are playing for speed and clearing PvE nodes as fast as possible? Points are used to determine the top players of the game in PvEs and in PvPs (up to SCL 6).

    On a side note, the idea about determining placement based on points and damage taken in PvE is a unique way to re-boot PvE playstyles. But Gritty is going to be the new replacement instead. You can't ban those players from using them but the devs can introduce those new conditions in the next new PvE, which I think should be Captain Marvel's own PvE. New conditions such as:

    1) a counter to track total damage taken, regardless of whether it's self damage, enemy damage or damage from retreatinf. 
    2) True heal and burst healing can't "hide" those damages.
    3) Goons that can steal player's special tiles or deal additional damage to players whenever any of their special tiles are removed, matched or destroyed.



  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,966 Chairperson of the Boards
    If you want to ignore the metrics, just look at all the Grockmordusa (4*) Kitty/Grocket (4/5*) and Thorkoye (5*) teams popping up on defense in PVP.  Literally all I see having just champed 5*s is Thorkoye/Gritty with a couple other stragglers sprinkled in. Some Jessicas, Thanosi (is that the plural of Thanos?), etc. but there is a laundry list of characters I have never ever seen and most are super popular like Cap and Iron Man. I guess it’s hard to compete with the popularity of that fan favorite character Okoye. 

    There are a handful of characters you see repeatedly in each tier and they all have that speed thing in common. Maybe I’m just queuing that 5% of the playerbase over and over again in each tier. 
  • Dogface
    Dogface Posts: 999 Critical Contributor
    The plural of Thanos would be Thanoi.
  • Jormagund
    Jormagund Posts: 175 Tile Toppler
    Are you sure?

    *clicks fingers*
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    We are going to focus on PvP (SCL 7 and above) now since you have shifted the focus to PvP. I believe this has to do with MMR. 

    The general rule of thumb in PvP is:

    The upper bound on how difficult a team you are being matched with gradually increases as it becomes harder to find good matches for you, so you can still expect matches to get harder as you climb higher in the PvP.

    As you climb higher, you are fighting with competitive players. Competitive players use the standard set of teams to climb faster. PvP in SCL 7 and above is different from SCL 6 and below because points are being inflated by many group of players who coordinate using LINE. You will never see 1800 or even 1200 points in SCL 6 or below. The highest is ~900, which can be reached without coordination and is considered rare. Why do I know? Because I used to place top 1, 5 or top 10 frequently in SCL 6 in different slices with just 700+ points (top 10) and 800+ points (top 1 or 5). Now that I can't participate in SCL 6 anymore, I can get into top 50 (best results) in SCL 7 to 9.

    Since I'm in 4 star land now, the meta team in 4* land is still R4G and Medusa/Gamora/Kitty Pryde etc. I see many different teams that do not consist of them most of the time from 0 to ~700 points. Once I start climbing beyond 700 points, I start seeing these meta teams most of the time. 

    So, PvP opponents has to do with MMR, your points, timing and slices, which I think you would know? Players complain about PvP (defensive loss aside) when they reach  certain points in PvP because they are being matched with the same set of opponents or teams again and again. I'm sure there are 5* players who use non-meta 5 stars to reach certain PvP points before switching to the meta teams.

  • abmoraz
    abmoraz Posts: 712 Critical Contributor
    edited February 2019
    Remove placement awards and you solve the problem.  Your awards are then entirely progress driven based on "what you do", not "what you do in comparison to everyone else."  Speed then only becomes a factor in how much time you spend playing each day.
  • Vhailorx
    Vhailorx Posts: 6,085 Chairperson of the Boards

    abmoraz said:
    Remove placement awards and you solve the problem.  Your awards are then entirely progress driven based on "what you do", not "what you do in comparison to everyone else."  Speed then only becomes a factor in how much time you spend playing each day.
    True, but effectively irrelevant because Demi has clearly indicated through its economy choices over many years that pure progression results in "too many" rewards going out the door.

    Competition is the justification they use to restrict truly value rewards to 1-10% of the playerbase.

Categories