Ed_Dragonrider said: Sorry, what is baking?
The rockett said:MMR lockout: This needs to end too. I have a 500 Okoye but I am not allowed to Q up teams that are 520+. Why? This is just a dumb system that is outdated and needs to be fixed. If a 550 player can Q me from 0 then I need to be able to do the same. Time to end the special, bought for, whale protection, whatever you want to call it MMR system that we have now. There is no reason this system should tell me what matches I can and cannot do. It is THE most frustrating thing in PVP to a lot of higher end players.
broll said: PvP has always been stale and boring but glad to hear you come around.I finally gave up PvP completely at the start of Christmas off-season. The only event I played at all this entire season was Simulator which I started last night and finished in one sitting with 30 wins, yet to complete progression in the every 2 day events it takes either 75 wins, joining a battle chat and spending hundreds of HP on shields, or an extremely high leveled roster of 5*s that have a natural float point over 1200. Shouldn't the event that you have all season to complete take much longer and the constantly changing events be much simpler? This seems completely backwards to me.I decided PvP is no longer worth the effort. I'm missing out on resources but I don't care. I was spending a few hours a day playing a mode I don't like that has bad scoring designs when I could be doing better things.Though TBH the way the game seems to be going the rest of the game may not be far behind. The fun has been drained out and all signs of things to come seem bleak with every new system being horrible for a while now.
Bowgentle said: broll said: PvP has always been stale and boring but glad to hear you come around.I finally gave up PvP completely at the start of Christmas off-season. The only event I played at all this entire season was Simulator which I started last night and finished in one sitting with 30 wins, yet to complete progression in the every 2 day events it takes either 75 wins, joining a battle chat and spending hundreds of HP on shields, or an extremely high leveled roster of 5*s that have a natural float point over 1200. Shouldn't the event that you have all season to complete take much longer and the constantly changing events be much simpler? This seems completely backwards to me.I decided PvP is no longer worth the effort. I'm missing out on resources but I don't care. I was spending a few hours a day playing a mode I don't like that has bad scoring designs when I could be doing better things.Though TBH the way the game seems to be going the rest of the game may not be far behind. The fun has been drained out and all signs of things to come seem bleak with every new system being horrible for a while now. ROFL.Play S1 any time in the last 8 hours with a barely champed Thorkoye and cash in an easy 1200.No need to have a gigantic roster.
broll said: Bowgentle said: broll said: PvP has always been stale and boring but glad to hear you come around.I finally gave up PvP completely at the start of Christmas off-season. The only event I played at all this entire season was Simulator which I started last night and finished in one sitting with 30 wins, yet to complete progression in the every 2 day events it takes either 75 wins, joining a battle chat and spending hundreds of HP on shields, or an extremely high leveled roster of 5*s that have a natural float point over 1200. Shouldn't the event that you have all season to complete take much longer and the constantly changing events be much simpler? This seems completely backwards to me.I decided PvP is no longer worth the effort. I'm missing out on resources but I don't care. I was spending a few hours a day playing a mode I don't like that has bad scoring designs when I could be doing better things.Though TBH the way the game seems to be going the rest of the game may not be far behind. The fun has been drained out and all signs of things to come seem bleak with every new system being horrible for a while now. ROFL.Play S1 any time in the last 8 hours with a barely champed Thorkoye and cash in an easy 1200.No need to have a gigantic roster. ROFLThanks for mentioning the other biggest problem with the game, time slices... I want to play when I want to play. It's not fun to schedule your life around a video game either. The last 8 hours of the S1 is often when I'm sleeping through the first 4 hours of work or so. I already get up an extra hour earlier for PvE slices, not doing another extra hour early to play PvP.And even if I was to schedule my life around a game PvP shifting the time slices by 12 hours every event makes that very difficult to do constantly.I'm so glad it works so well for you though....
AardvarkPepper said: @Sm0keyJ0e @broll: Yeah.@Spudgutter: The OP's point, as I read it, is collusion is tinykitty. When you have to resort to out-of-game behavior to manipulate your in-game score, you end up having to do things that are not-of-the-game to influence your progress in game.Players can't just "opt out". Even if you personally want to opt out, others are doing it so yu put yourself at a competitive disadvantage by not doing it. The fact the system works as it does is what's being criticized (as I read the OP).I like your point about increasing rewards for the first 5/6 CL btw.==@The rockettI think you have some real good points. But I think also1) Please provide specific solutions if at all possible.2) Please don't call things "dumb". I understand you're outraged (or at least I read your OP as being outraged) and even if you wouldn't call it outrage I'd say sure okay, why not be outraged? There's some crazy stuff that happens. But calling stuff "dumb" and "outdated" encourages conflict rather than productive discussion.==@ posters in general:I could be wrong in the following. But as I read the OP:1) MMR lockout. If you have a developed 5* team at high champion, you can queue up whenever, and grab points. But because of the way the MMR works, you won't be hit back even without shields, because some players just can't queue into you.And yes okay, another poster brought up the point that other players don't *want* to have to cycle through loads of teams they can't beat, and that's a valid point. But unlocked team strictures could be applied to teams that are over level 500, or 480, or whatever. Or there may be other ways to address it. At any rate my point is though there may be other considerations, if there's a real identifiable problem, there's probably a real solution that can be implemented. (Though I'd mention there are real costs attached to making changes).I mean really. If you're talking championed 5* matchups, 20-40 levels I'd think really doesn't make much a difference. The win comes from a synergistic championed team.2) Political crud. Other players might be like "ah, well, nobody wants to be a tinykitty" or "well that's just how things work". But really think on it. One member hits a "cupcake" or whatever you want to call it because they didn't know how it worked. Then every member of the alliance comes under attack in PvP by concentrated attacks by not just the 20 players in the "offended" alliance, but maybe 80-100 players in associated family/allied alliances. I mean really! That might not happen *all* the time but it only needs to happen once to scar a player. "You play by our rules or you don't play."I'm no saint myself. If my alliance commander asks me to hit XYZ alliance, that's exactly what I'm going to do. And more, if I were more involved in PvP, I'd set up a collusion system if one didn't already exist (provided reviewing the Terms of Service didn't specifically prohibit such behavior).But just because I'd push for advantage doesn't mean it's "right". Even if it's not immoral or unethical or against terms of service, the fact that you're doing out-of-game activities to advance in-game progress is tinykitty.Imagine if before every game, you had to watch a 15 second advertisement. Just 15 seconds. Can you imagine the outrage? How dare the people that keep the lights on and pay for the servers and pay for the license and pay for the development monetize their product at the expense of player time? Outrageous! Yet it's okay when players have to play by out-of-game rules and take personal time to coordinate or suffer the consequences because of an oversight? How is it really any different? Because it affects only a subset of players? Because it's free? Okay, let's have 15 second commercials for all the players with championed 5*s and donate the proceeds to charity. That doesn't sound good to you? And if you say "well that's different", well that's my point. It's a matter of perspective. If you don't think it affects you, okay, just let players and developers make decisions based on the current structure, and eventually you *will* get to the point that it affects and offends you, just give it time.As to PVP - yeahhhh I'd be interested in seeing metrics regarding time spent in game for players at different levels matched to rewards. As I see it, PvP's kind of screwy. Apart from the whole collusion thing, 40 wins for a 4* is high. 75 wins to get the CP reward? Ugh.==Say you have a PvE event. Three subs totaling nine easy nodes (which don't count because they're whatever), nine hard nodes, twelve Essential nodes, five to seven clears of each. But the individual nodes are typically filled with non-character goons that fire powers that have no immediate effect, so the matchups aren't necessarily that punishing. So though you're doing 105-147 node clears over a period of three days (counting the hards and essentials) at SCL 7 it's not really a big deal; players with championed 3*s can handle it (rough for some events but even so); players with championed 4*s can handle it (provided the 4*s are at least sort of good), championed 5*s just trample it easy peasy. Those matches are fast and easy.Now let's say you have a PvP event. You get 8-10 matches against easy peasy seed teams assuming the game doesn't reset (which it may). And maybe you set up a few easy matches to try to pull easy retaliations, MAYBE. But once you hit a certain point level, all your matchups are fairly difficult so you need to cycle through matches which is a painstaking process. If you want to win a 4* on score, sure that's great if you have a developed 5* roster, but if you're using a 3* roster and happen to have a few 1-cover 5*s? Too bad for you! Gonna need to grind (though I hear the dev team fixed this, it's still true if you have just a few championed 4*s and are facing synergistic enemy boosted 4*s) The matchmaking system again is going to feed you a bunch of really really nasty matches, the match count might be a lower, even a lot lower, but the difficulty and time investment is much much higher per match.And I'd bet examining the metrics would support my point. For the players with developing rosters that do PvP, I'd bet they're generally using a load of time and healthpacks and not getting the same sort of rewards they would for time spent as they would in PvE. Even for players with developed championed 5* rosters, I'd say again the amount of time spent to earn a 4* cover is nowhere near as high in PvE as it is in PvP - and PvE generally has more rewards up through the sixth clear of a node anyways.
Bowgentle said: AardvarkPepper said: @Sm0keyJ0e @broll: Yeah.@Spudgutter: The OP's point, as I read it, is collusion is tinykitty. When you have to resort to out-of-game behavior to manipulate your in-game score, you end up having to do things that are not-of-the-game to influence your progress in game.Players can't just "opt out". Even if you personally want to opt out, others are doing it so yu put yourself at a competitive disadvantage by not doing it. The fact the system works as it does is what's being criticized (as I read the OP).I like your point about increasing rewards for the first 5/6 CL btw.==@The rockettI think you have some real good points. But I think also1) Please provide specific solutions if at all possible.2) Please don't call things "dumb". I understand you're outraged (or at least I read your OP as being outraged) and even if you wouldn't call it outrage I'd say sure okay, why not be outraged? There's some crazy stuff that happens. But calling stuff "dumb" and "outdated" encourages conflict rather than productive discussion.==@ posters in general:I could be wrong in the following. But as I read the OP:1) MMR lockout. If you have a developed 5* team at high champion, you can queue up whenever, and grab points. But because of the way the MMR works, you won't be hit back even without shields, because some players just can't queue into you.And yes okay, another poster brought up the point that other players don't *want* to have to cycle through loads of teams they can't beat, and that's a valid point. But unlocked team strictures could be applied to teams that are over level 500, or 480, or whatever. Or there may be other ways to address it. At any rate my point is though there may be other considerations, if there's a real identifiable problem, there's probably a real solution that can be implemented. (Though I'd mention there are real costs attached to making changes).I mean really. If you're talking championed 5* matchups, 20-40 levels I'd think really doesn't make much a difference. The win comes from a synergistic championed team.2) Political crud. Other players might be like "ah, well, nobody wants to be a tinykitty" or "well that's just how things work". But really think on it. One member hits a "cupcake" or whatever you want to call it because they didn't know how it worked. Then every member of the alliance comes under attack in PvP by concentrated attacks by not just the 20 players in the "offended" alliance, but maybe 80-100 players in associated family/allied alliances. I mean really! That might not happen *all* the time but it only needs to happen once to scar a player. "You play by our rules or you don't play."I'm no saint myself. If my alliance commander asks me to hit XYZ alliance, that's exactly what I'm going to do. And more, if I were more involved in PvP, I'd set up a collusion system if one didn't already exist (provided reviewing the Terms of Service didn't specifically prohibit such behavior).But just because I'd push for advantage doesn't mean it's "right". Even if it's not immoral or unethical or against terms of service, the fact that you're doing out-of-game activities to advance in-game progress is tinykitty.Imagine if before every game, you had to watch a 15 second advertisement. Just 15 seconds. Can you imagine the outrage? How dare the people that keep the lights on and pay for the servers and pay for the license and pay for the development monetize their product at the expense of player time? Outrageous! Yet it's okay when players have to play by out-of-game rules and take personal time to coordinate or suffer the consequences because of an oversight? How is it really any different? Because it affects only a subset of players? Because it's free? Okay, let's have 15 second commercials for all the players with championed 5*s and donate the proceeds to charity. That doesn't sound good to you? And if you say "well that's different", well that's my point. It's a matter of perspective. If you don't think it affects you, okay, just let players and developers make decisions based on the current structure, and eventually you *will* get to the point that it affects and offends you, just give it time.As to PVP - yeahhhh I'd be interested in seeing metrics regarding time spent in game for players at different levels matched to rewards. As I see it, PvP's kind of screwy. Apart from the whole collusion thing, 40 wins for a 4* is high. 75 wins to get the CP reward? Ugh.==Say you have a PvE event. Three subs totaling nine easy nodes (which don't count because they're whatever), nine hard nodes, twelve Essential nodes, five to seven clears of each. But the individual nodes are typically filled with non-character goons that fire powers that have no immediate effect, so the matchups aren't necessarily that punishing. So though you're doing 105-147 node clears over a period of three days (counting the hards and essentials) at SCL 7 it's not really a big deal; players with championed 3*s can handle it (rough for some events but even so); players with championed 4*s can handle it (provided the 4*s are at least sort of good), championed 5*s just trample it easy peasy. Those matches are fast and easy.Now let's say you have a PvP event. You get 8-10 matches against easy peasy seed teams assuming the game doesn't reset (which it may). And maybe you set up a few easy matches to try to pull easy retaliations, MAYBE. But once you hit a certain point level, all your matchups are fairly difficult so you need to cycle through matches which is a painstaking process. If you want to win a 4* on score, sure that's great if you have a developed 5* roster, but if you're using a 3* roster and happen to have a few 1-cover 5*s? Too bad for you! Gonna need to grind (though I hear the dev team fixed this, it's still true if you have just a few championed 4*s and are facing synergistic enemy boosted 4*s) The matchmaking system again is going to feed you a bunch of really really nasty matches, the match count might be a lower, even a lot lower, but the difficulty and time investment is much much higher per match.And I'd bet examining the metrics would support my point. For the players with developing rosters that do PvP, I'd bet they're generally using a load of time and healthpacks and not getting the same sort of rewards they would for time spent as they would in PvE. Even for players with developed championed 5* rosters, I'd say again the amount of time spent to earn a 4* cover is nowhere near as high in PvE as it is in PvP - and PvE generally has more rewards up through the sixth clear of a node anyways. You can easily opt out if you have a developed 5* roster and only want 1200.