Kikujiro of Christmas Past wrote: Last night I couldnt sleep neither could play a lot because of flu, so I started thinking ... but all the reasonings are fever inducted so take all of this with caution xD First I want to classify the point system in two sections, matches and sub-events. The sub-events ... There is one main event and main bracket with certain number of missions that rotate daily. Each one of them opens a sub-event when completed like in The Hunt or the current Hulk tournament and each one of them has a fixed value of points, say 40-50-60 depend on difficulty, where you always earn that number. So far we are walking on firm ground. The sub-events have 4 missions, Easy-Medium-Hard-Impossible, with amounts of 100-200-300-500 for example, which is the maximum value you can win each time you finish one of them but not real (more on this later). You can do these missions any number of times and always with the same fixed value of max points, but only in a short period of time (like 1 hour), then the sub-event is closed. So there are no rankings on these, only progression rewards. The main event missions then starts a countdown to reset and let you open the sub-event again. The countdown may be 4,6, or 12 hours but, and this is optional, if you reach a treshold (3000 or 4000 points) in the previous sub-event the main mission resets earlier, 3, 4 or 8 hours ... or later like some sort of rubberbanding, but that wouldnt be so popular xD The matches ... Like I said before you always win the same amount of points on the main missions, but not for the sub-missions. How so ? Those have a fixed maximum value of points, but you earn them depending on two factors. 1) Total level of your 3-team. Say you have a lvl 85 Thor, lvl 50 Storm, lvl 40 Wolverine (175 total). Other fella have a lvl 6 Bag Man, lvl 10 Bullseye, lvl 30 Invisible Woman (46 total). The two of you do the same easy mission, three lvl 20 goons (60 total) ... he can win the max amount of points (100) because doesnt exceed the total goons level, but you win less points based on an algorithm which processes how better are you than the goons. More levels, less points. This way you can spam that mission because you are faster than the other fella but win less or go to higher difficulties and earn more for each match. 2) Total health of your 3-team when the battle is over. Here comes another algorithm because is not the same a lvl 100 Ragnarok than a lvl 10 Widow. Worst case scenario, two heroes down and the third crying out in pain ... if you have high level characters then you win one paltry point. Pros: there would be more skill and tactical decisions. For example may I use Web Bandages or try to finish Hulk with a Thunder Strike with cascade and expose myself to Thunderous Clap ? Cons: it would be difficult to tell people that they are not winning the maximum points in their mission briefing but a reduced amount based in the earlier factor too. Maybe with a new end combat info screen where you can see "I win this points because of this I lose that because of that". Also these two factors may weigh equal, 50-50, or some other fixed amount like 65 for total level and 35 for total health. Even there would be rubberbanding, 45 for TL, 35 for TH and 20 for RB. What do you think ? The missions part could be doable, the matches ... complicated. I forget one thing regarding the total health part ... There must be some number of algorithms due to matches against goons, against Dark Avengers and against a mix of them. More Dark Avengers, less punishment in points lost because low health. I hope that I´ve explained myself simple enough with my rusty english
Kikujiro wrote: They toned down the community scaling, but cant get rid of it because rubberbanding. If it doens´t exists at all I could wait and join late to fight low level enemies for a huge amount of points while you´re struggling against high levels for a reduced amount. Like I said, I get it but I don´t like it, hence my need for a total change
I have seen it noted several times that rubber-banding will not allow someone to overtake you (in the end) that does less work than you. If that is the case, why have it at all?
dlaw008 wrote: I play a lot, but I never really got to much into PVE until I felt like I needed to contribute more to my alliance. I understand scaling and rubber-banding to an extent, but sometimes I read an explanation that confuses me a bit. For example: I have seen it noted several times that rubber-banding will not allow someone to overtake you (in the end) that does less work than you. If that is the case, why have it at all? Seems like if the points are all a flat value you get the same result, no? And the scaling seems like a vicious circle. If you use a team that clears quickly and well, your enemies get harder forcing you, ultimately, to use your Spiderman and etc. Which makes the levels harder yet again, until you have no options. Perhaps I'm dense, but I do not understand it very well.
Eddiemon wrote: dlaw008 wrote: I play a lot, but I never really got to much into PVE until I felt like I needed to contribute more to my alliance. I understand scaling and rubber-banding to an extent, but sometimes I read an explanation that confuses me a bit. For example: I have seen it noted several times that rubber-banding will not allow someone to overtake you (in the end) that does less work than you. If that is the case, why have it at all? Seems like if the points are all a flat value you get the same result, no? And the scaling seems like a vicious circle. If you use a team that clears quickly and well, your enemies get harder forcing you, ultimately, to use your Spiderman and etc. Which makes the levels harder yet again, until you have no options. Perhaps I'm dense, but I do not understand it very well. No, that is a misstatement of a fact. If I have a lead on you and we are doing the same missions at the same time, rubber banding will never allow you to overtake me. You will close the gap but I will win. But if I have a massive lead on you and have done all the missions, you can quite easily burn past me with rubber banding. Timing is the most important element of not losing out to rubber banning.
dlaw008 wrote: If it is the case that timing is the most important element, it would not appear to be of much benefit to newbie and casuals, whom one would presume such mechanics are designed for. It would seem to make good placement in an event much more opaque and therefore discouraging to those who have not read the forums.
Eddiemon wrote: dlaw008 wrote: If it is the case that timing is the most important element, it would not appear to be of much benefit to newbie and casuals, whom one would presume such mechanics are designed for. It would seem to make good placement in an event much more opaque and therefore discouraging to those who have not read the forums. Even a non forum goer would see the scores keep going up so doing them at the last minute when they are highest is best. We've had a few new forum goers express their understanding, and while it was wrong the general theory of points go up, play later was there.