time trial tournament

Options
Unknown
Unknown
edited January 2014 in MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
Basically how this would work is...
There are a set of missions (PVE mission) layed out (20ish) increasing in dificulty , each mission is timed.
places are decide by: highest stage complete/lowest combind time/lowest time on futhest stage
Alongside that progression rewards are still given for missions completed, I.e. 1,2,5...20
Stage may/may not be repeated be to reduce previous time

Comments

  • mischiefmaker
    mischiefmaker Posts: 932
    Options
    I like this idea -- it's one way that you could structure a tournament such that someone who plays 10-15 min every few hours could still be competitive by being strategic about what team they use, while hardcore grinders would still have a small advantage in that they could repeatedly play every level trying to get lucky with cascades.

    One thing you have to design for is to make sure that people aren't just using the same team in every fight, else the time trial becomes somewhat meaningless. Easy enough problem to solve, though.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    I'm not sure if this is possible, but the could the cpu could have specific boosts on different missions to discourage people using the same teams.
  • mischiefmaker
    mischiefmaker Posts: 932
    Options
    Would be easier and arguably better to just have different opponents in every mission, so that you can't use your version when you're going up against them.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    I didn't think of that icon_e_confused.gif
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    Sounds like a pretty badass idea.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    Why not instead of actual time passing (which can get frustrating if there's a Bullseye/Daken/etc), you can rank players by how many turns they took to win?
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    grimeon wrote:
    Why not instead of actual time passing (which can get frustrating if there's a Bullseye/Daken/etc), you can rank players by how many turns they took to win?

    You'd kinda have to do it that way. Because otherwise people using older devices don't have a chance. An iPhone 5S is at least 10x faster than an iPhone 4 in this game for matches, and significantly faster on power animations as well.

    And that was before they increased all the bling on matches.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    grimeon wrote:
    Why not instead of actual time passing (which can get frustrating if there's a Bullseye/Daken/etc), you can rank players by how many turns they took to win?
    Everyone would be fighting the same opponents so everyone goes through the same thing.
    Also the problem with ranking by turns is that a lot of people will end up in tied positions and end up losing out on rewards that they would of got otherwise.
    You'd kinda have to do it that way. Because otherwise people using older devices don't have a chance. An iPhone 5S is at least 10x faster than an iPhone 4 in this game for matches, and significantly faster on power animations as well.
    People would go through the same problem with lightning rounds and I have never seen any complaints.
  • mischiefmaker
    mischiefmaker Posts: 932
    Options
    You could rank by turns taken, and tiebreak on time, which might be a bit more fair for people with older devices.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    bongo king wrote:
    grimeon wrote:
    Why not instead of actual time passing (which can get frustrating if there's a Bullseye/Daken/etc), you can rank players by how many turns they took to win?
    Everyone would be fighting the same opponents so everyone goes through the same thing.
    Also the problem with ranking by turns is that a lot of people will end up in tied positions and end up losing out on rewards that they would of got otherwise.
    You'd kinda have to do it that way. Because otherwise people using older devices don't have a chance. An iPhone 5S is at least 10x faster than an iPhone 4 in this game for matches, and significantly faster on power animations as well.
    People would go through the same problem with lightning rounds and I have never seen any complaints.

    I meant it would effectively ruin the hopes of Bullseye/Daken players.

    As far as Lightning rounds go it's not really the same situation, you might miss a couple rounds if you play for 90 minutes straight. But if a game took you 30s longer than someone with a better device you would basically be screwed.

Categories