Bowgentle said: turbomoose said: Seem to recall a massive negative opinion on the forums about vaulting that was in place for a few months then removed suddenly, if enough players dislike this change they might change it again at a later date personally I like the win structure as I rarely get past 575 points dispite having most 4*s champed i would also like to see the numbers for the feedback on this as I’m sure there are more people in favour of a win based structure than people think Of course the 575 and out crowd is ecstatic about this.These are also the people claiming there were more varied teams in the PVP tests.To which I say "sure, if you're a 4* player".Open up MMR, let me hit 4* players and I'll give you 800 wins per PVP, you guys don't care about hits anyway.Bad thing for the devs: the 575 and out crowd doesn't pay the bills, while the 5* crowd does.
turbomoose said: Seem to recall a massive negative opinion on the forums about vaulting that was in place for a few months then removed suddenly, if enough players dislike this change they might change it again at a later date personally I like the win structure as I rarely get past 575 points dispite having most 4*s champed i would also like to see the numbers for the feedback on this as I’m sure there are more people in favour of a win based structure than people think
Lucifier said: @sinnerjfl not it matter, but did they run the test 3 times or 2 times?I remember the last one contain 2 pvp based on wins, and one time before it (is this why it consider as 3 times, or it was actually 3 separate times)?it is just i can not remember.
D4Ni13 said: Good structure does not equal same rewards. I really doubt they would give everybody 20 HP for the final reward in the tree. So leave me the right to disagree with your exact structure.
D4Ni13 said: sinnerjfl said: D4Ni13 said: rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise... They didn't said if they changed the number or not, just that the PvP based on wins will be starting from next season. Why so ready to jump to conclusions ? The rockett said: They've run this test 3 times with the exact same structure... what makes you think they'll change anything?This is what its gonna be: 40 wins, last CP in progression moved to top10.And reread this quote, its not explicit but you can read between the lines:"Based on this information, we have determined that the previous iteration of Progression Rewards Based on Wins was ultimately a good structure that offered players flexibility in play-time, while still providing the elements necessary to drive competitive spirit." Good structure does not equal same rewards. I really doubt they would give everybody 20 HP for the final reward in the tree. So leave me the right to disagree with your exact structure.
sinnerjfl said: D4Ni13 said: rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise... They didn't said if they changed the number or not, just that the PvP based on wins will be starting from next season. Why so ready to jump to conclusions ? The rockett said: They've run this test 3 times with the exact same structure... what makes you think they'll change anything?This is what its gonna be: 40 wins, last CP in progression moved to top10.And reread this quote, its not explicit but you can read between the lines:"Based on this information, we have determined that the previous iteration of Progression Rewards Based on Wins was ultimately a good structure that offered players flexibility in play-time, while still providing the elements necessary to drive competitive spirit."
D4Ni13 said: rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise... They didn't said if they changed the number or not, just that the PvP based on wins will be starting from next season. Why so ready to jump to conclusions ? The rockett said:
rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise...
The season was a fifth as long as normal so they gave 20% of the rewards. It was the exact same structure
Guess we were lucky they didn't find a way to award partial tokens and covers.
Starfury said: D4Ni13 said: sinnerjfl said: D4Ni13 said: rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise... They didn't said if they changed the number or not, just that the PvP based on wins will be starting from next season. Why so ready to jump to conclusions ? The rockett said: They've run this test 3 times with the exact same structure... what makes you think they'll change anything?This is what its gonna be: 40 wins, last CP in progression moved to top10.And reread this quote, its not explicit but you can read between the lines:"Based on this information, we have determined that the previous iteration of Progression Rewards Based on Wins was ultimately a good structure that offered players flexibility in play-time, while still providing the elements necessary to drive competitive spirit." Good structure does not equal same rewards. I really doubt they would give everybody 20 HP for the final reward in the tree. So leave me the right to disagree with your exact structure. The season was a fifth as long as normal so they gave 20% of the rewards. It was the exact same structureGuess we were lucky they didn't find a way to award partial tokens and covers.
Richyyy said: If a 4* cover that used to be at 900 translates to 40 wins, just how many are they going to expect us to grind through in a Shield Simulator that used to go up to 2000?
SpiderKev said: These new PVP changes just made me update my Facebook status to #metoo
Bowgentle said: Of course the 575 and out crowd is ecstatic about this.These are also the people claiming there were more varied teams in the PVP tests.To which I say "sure, if you're a 4* player".Open up MMR, let me hit 4* players and I'll give you 800 wins per PVP, you guys don't care about hits anyway.Bad thing for the devs: the 575 and out crowd doesn't pay the bills, while the 5* crowd does.
As to the wins progression system…. I don’t know anyone who prefers it. I know there are a few voices on this thread who are thumbs up but the vast majority of players I know hate the idea. These are players who are in decent alliances who constantly play, use line and express opinions regularly on the forum. Active engaged players who readily play and put time into the game. It seems double time consuming and the rewards have basically been nerfed for anyone outside of the top 10.
If they change the rewards to include the CP that anyone outside of the top 10 will now lose out on and the amount of wins required for progression then it would be something that could be gotten used to. 40 wins for me at an average of 37 a pop is 1,480 score. Its too much.
Please can you show the data that was acquired and how it was compiled to show how D3 came to this decision. If its in black and white then maybe it would be more easily acceptable. For me personally the game seems to be going backwards.
Tony Foot said: Bowgentle said: Of course the 575 and out crowd is ecstatic about this.These are also the people claiming there were more varied teams in the PVP tests.To which I say "sure, if you're a 4* player".Open up MMR, let me hit 4* players and I'll give you 800 wins per PVP, you guys don't care about hits anyway.Bad thing for the devs: the 575 and out crowd doesn't pay the bills, while the 5* crowd does. In the anniversary thread you stated:Yes, I started PVP early, went to 900+ 3 times, then dumped to re-climb.It's been fun.Why can't you repeat that fun again?Of course I'm joking, I know season placement is everything.
acescracked said: Alsmir said: Interesting. For once the vets are unhappy. I guess they really got used to being treated better than anyone else. The threats, the drama - quite amusing. Random spewed thoughts are interesting but care to put some substance behind your accusations? How are vets treated better exactly? @Alsmir, what is exactly the criteria of a veteran player; number of days, roster, something else?@Alsmir, are you a veteran mpq player?(I do expect radio silence from @Alsmir on this)
Alsmir said: Interesting. For once the vets are unhappy. I guess they really got used to being treated better than anyone else. The threats, the drama - quite amusing.
In the mini-season they had the season reward top out at 66 (or 67) wins over two events. Normal seasons run for 10 events + sim
Assuming the 10000 points in Season progression is based on 10*800 points from events + 2000 from Simulator, we'd arrive at 330 wins from 10 events + 70 wins from simulator to end up at a nice round 400 wins for the season.
Obviously, we won't know for certain until we get some official numbers.
Yoik said: I welcome the changed to the two characters. Psylock needed a boost which she has received. The Blue needs to be fortified maybe to give it a chance. I don’t think ive ever heard anyone say “ I think fury needs looking into “ but if he gets a boost then that’s positive. His count down should also be fortified to give it a chance. As to the wins progression system…. I don’t know anyone who prefers it. I know there are a few voices on this thread who are thumbs up but the vast majority of players I know hate the idea. These are players who are in decent alliances who constantly play, use line and express opinions regularly on the forum. Active engaged players who readily play and put time into the game. It seems double time consuming and the rewards have basically been nerfed for anyone outside of the top 10. If they change the rewards to include the CP that anyone outside of the top 10 will now lose out on and the amount of wins required for progression then it would be something that could be gotten used to. 40 wins for me at an average of 37 a pop is 1,480 score. Its too much. Please can you show the data that was acquired and how it was compiled to show how D3 came to this decision. If its in black and white then maybe it would be more easily acceptable. For me personally the game seems to be going backwards.
D4Ni13 said: rixmith said: Wow, I thought they'd at least lower the number of wins for a 4* from 40 to something more reasonable like 25 or 30. But I guess the data showed otherwise... They didn't said if they changed the number or not, just that the PvP based on wins will be starting from next season. Why so ready to jump to conclusions ? The rockett said: Throw a grenade and walk away. Great idea. Make a major change to the game and decide to go home for the night while everybody has questions. 95% of the people I play with, and it's a lot, think the win progression was a terrible idea. The only thing that can save this is if you put the CPs back in here, too bad this wasn't deemed important enough for you to post tonight. Plus do this major change right after the Anniversary and the sales you had. Already got our money now let's make a fundamental change to PVP, which is the money maker for the game. Good luck. First of, you are way overreacting. You will get your anwsers soon enough, there is still 2 days before the changes go live. Furthermore, everybody knew win-based PvP is coming sooner or later. They made 3 tests for it already, so it was only a matter of time, not a question of if. JHawkInc said: The devs are DENSE if they think PVP based wins are ready to be implemented straight into the game.Regardless as to whether you're for or against the change, it was pretty obvious that it was very rough around the edges and needed some work.I don't like being given deliberately half-baked game features. Nobody said it is going to be the same as the test reward & number-wise. Lets wait to see some actual details.
Throw a grenade and walk away. Great idea. Make a major change to the game and decide to go home for the night while everybody has questions. 95% of the people I play with, and it's a lot, think the win progression was a terrible idea. The only thing that can save this is if you put the CPs back in here, too bad this wasn't deemed important enough for you to post tonight. Plus do this major change right after the Anniversary and the sales you had. Already got our money now let's make a fundamental change to PVP, which is the money maker for the game. Good luck.
The devs are DENSE if they think PVP based wins are ready to be implemented straight into the game.Regardless as to whether you're for or against the change, it was pretty obvious that it was very rough around the edges and needed some work.I don't like being given deliberately half-baked game features.
Bowgentle said: Tony Foot said: Bowgentle said: Of course the 575 and out crowd is ecstatic about this.These are also the people claiming there were more varied teams in the PVP tests.To which I say "sure, if you're a 4* player".Open up MMR, let me hit 4* players and I'll give you 800 wins per PVP, you guys don't care about hits anyway.Bad thing for the devs: the 575 and out crowd doesn't pay the bills, while the 5* crowd does. In the anniversary thread you stated:Yes, I started PVP early, went to 900+ 3 times, then dumped to re-climb.It's been fun.Why can't you repeat that fun again?Of course I'm joking, I know season placement is everything. I don't give a rat's **** about season placement.But I don't have Carol, Medusa and Blade boosted at the same time, usually.With those 3 boosted to 460+? Yeah I'll kill dual champed 5s all day.Without? Not so much.
Lemminkäinen said: (I'm a four-star player who has three fully-covered five-stars but don't want to be stuck using just three chars forever and ever)
DyingLegend said:I would assume placement would be easier for some because after certain people (IE me) hit max progress, they will drop out of the event.