Catalyst wrote: im all in favor of decoupling reward progression from ladder ranking
Regalis wrote: Unless the system is radically changed, you have to keep the skip option. I don't think you can determine who is a weaker opponent than you. I see several players with higher scores than me who have "weaker" teams than my own. I see several players with lower scores than me who have much, much stronger teams than my own. Imagine losing to a "stronger" team, only to get paired against a "weaker" 110 Rag. There just simply isn't a good system at the moment for determining who is weaker and stronger. Leave that to the human element, and skip as desired. And if they start charging ISO to skip like someone previously suggested, well then that would end the game for me. I've read suggestions about a shield option and I think this would be a good idea. Maybe once you lose 10% of your points since you've last won a match, the shields get activated, and players can only win 1% of your point total from there or something along these lines until you've recovered a percentage of the points lost. 90 minutes ago I was at 930 points. Now I'm down to just under 800. Most mornings I wake up to between 250-350 point losses. I don't care about my rankings, but I do try to get certain prize thresholds. To me, these are just carrots on a stick and no matter how long your play, or how close you get, there is always the beatdown that is guaranteed to occur to keep you from reaching it. Yeah, once you retaliate, the war should be over for at least 24 hours. I don't like the 3 tries option as is. I think it could be refined several ones. 1) You get one try period. 2) You get 3 tries, but the opponents health resets with each attempt. 3) You win points when the opponent can't defeat you on the first try. For example, if he's up for 20 points and beats me on the first try, he gets all 20. If he beats me on the second try, maybe he gets 10, but then I should also get 10 (either a net 10 gain or maybe simply break even and not lose any points). I dunno, there should be some reward for me if you can't beat me on the first try, and the reward should not be losing 30 points instead of losing 40. Maybe YOU should lose points if you can't beat me on the first go around. Just some ideas, but I think it leans to a one-and-done for me. I think the devs have heard these complaints by now. I guess we just have to wait to see if, and how, they address it.
Regalis wrote: I've read suggestions about a shield option and I think this would be a good idea. Maybe once you lose 10% of your points since you've last won a match, the shields get activated, and players can only win 1% of your point total from there or something along these lines until you've recovered a percentage of the points lost.
Regalis wrote: Yeah, once you retaliate, the war should be over for at least 24 hours.
Regalis wrote: 2) You get 3 tries, but the opponents health resets with each attempt.
Regalis wrote: I think the devs have heard these complaints by now. I guess we just have to wait to see if, and how, they address it.
Zathrus wrote: I still prefer the idea of "you cannot lose more points than your last reward" to this. I could also accept a separation of points system, but I think that has the potential for more point inflation than a "ratcheting" system.
Regalis wrote: Zathrus wrote: I still prefer the idea of "you cannot lose more points than your last reward" to this. I could also accept a separation of points system, but I think that has the potential for more point inflation than a "ratcheting" system. This would be my preferred option as well.
Regalis wrote: 3) You win points when the opponent can't defeat you on the first try.
Polkio wrote: Regalis wrote: Zathrus wrote: I still prefer the idea of "you cannot lose more points than your last reward" to this. I could also accept a separation of points system, but I think that has the potential for more point inflation than a "ratcheting" system. This would be my preferred option as well. I got many times oponent match with 0 or 1 point. So fight with oponent 0 and then not lose more points then 0. Cool
Regalis wrote: Zathrus wrote: I still prefer the idea of "you cannot lose more points than your last reward" to this. I could also accept a separation of points system, but I think that has the potential for more point inflation than a "ratcheting" system. This would be my preferred option as well. It's the "who wants to be a millionaire" concept. Once you reach certain thresholds, you can't fall below that line. Maybe you could still attack me and win points, but I could not lose points. I appreciate that there may be some balance issues the devs are trying to achieve. I think the bottom line is that people play games because they want to "win." When you play a game where you constantly feel defeated, even when you're "winning," it just isn't a very fun game.
forgrim wrote: another thing that's hilarious is if ur matchmaking rating is high and some high level player decides not to play til the last day of the tournament, he'll constantly appear on ur list as a 0-5 point target. constantly had like 5 ppl on my matchmaking list appear over and over and clearly they didn't care about the tournament, or just plain out waiting to the end.