Right now, to finish in the top 100 I have to play 2-3 hours of PVP each reset. It’s simply too much time. I do it…but it sucks lol. Tourneys should work in the following way:
All rankings below 1-10 should be scored on attaining an overall (and a SANE number) of points the way you advance now through the lower divisions of a tourney. So making it into top 100 say in this current PVP Panzer tourney should simply be attaining 10,000,000 points let’s say, and yes I know that might mean 150 people making the “top 100” but roll with me for a bit;
Rankings 1-10 should be point based, and make separate and distinct and incrementally better prizes for those rankings so that anyone who does want to play 4 plus hours per reset to attain those ranks can do it.
Right now IMO PvP takes too much time during a tourney, too big a commitment. Even if you win 95% of your games you still have to spend hours grinding…
Reward people who play and win by making levels of points (the way you do now with the lower divisions) but don’t force hours of grinding every day…
Any change to PVP ranking is good IMO. I can’t even imagine the struggle to maintain a top 100 placement, I’m stressed out over trying to keep 2500.
I like the Idea.It could use some fine tuning, but overall it sounds nice.
I think I see what you’re saying and I like it!
Rather than a ranking system, it’d be a point divisions system the entire way through?
So like for example (correct me if this isn’t what you’re saying)
1Mill - 3Mill points at the end get xxxxxx reward.
3Mill - 5Mill points at the end get xxxxxx reward.
5Mill - 10Mill points at the end get xxxxx reward.
10Mill - 20Mill points at the end get xxxx reward.
20Mill - 35Mill points at the end get xxxx reward.
So on, and so on…
I think the Devs should test the waters with this one and try this out in a future PvP tournament and see the type of feedback people give.
People know their limitations and so it’d be nice (for example) to aim for the 10 million points in order to get the 10-20Mill points rewards, and stopping at 10Mill if I know I won’t make past 20Mill, raher than continuing to grind and grind and grind and grind for a ‘rank’ that I might not even get in the end like it is now with the current system.
I support this fully, bigger checkpoints for people that just don’t have the time to play all day everyday to keep a spot for one PVP tourney. and i love poobgloob’s example. I hope it follows something like that.
Well poob close but I want them to keep the current system for the top 10 spots because there are some who maybe want to put in that 4 hours every reset to get better rewards and for the distinction of finishing 1 or 2, or top10 basically, and they shouldn’t be hurt by any changes I’m proposing.
I could see this.
For top so many ranks give a display pic. With the number of the Rank in the middle, with how many times you reached that rank, below it. So they would still have bragging rights, for doing it, and it being easily displayed.
You use 2-3 hours per reset because it’s current requirement that players make, not game. It just means that other 99 players are not lazy to play 2-3 hours.
Last top100 tournament I had to play 2 hours to get to top100. Next 15min I got to top50. Here you can see that the most players of this 100 are trying to keep top100 place and don’t to play more.
I havent the puissance of joker.
But i do top 10 évent pvp playing 4 hours every reset and using my revives.
But top 100 is easy if you play 2 hours every reset and revive one or two heroes.
Sorry for my english, im french.
First off: the representativeness of the sample.
People using the term ‘easy’ to refer to 2 hours every reset or ‘lazy’ to people who can’t give that sort of time are clearly a skewed sample. People who have signed up for the forum, esp those on this thread, are not a representative sample–It is an incredibly small percentage of people that can commit that amount of time especially considering it’s in addition to the other aspects of the game and that there is almost always a PvP tournament going on.
My proposal would be two-fold:
(1) Ranking be based not on absolute score (as proposed) or relative ranking (as exists) but on quantiles.
Players in the lowest quintile get x, next quintile get 1.5x, third quintile 2x, etc etc and then ranking in the top Y positions (eg 100) earns additional points (similar to what OP proposed).
This way, being passed by players over time is counteracted by new players making it to the low end of div 1 and the result is the scoring bracket you’re in doesn’t change as much as it otherwise would.
(2) The second part of the proposal is being able to ‘lock in’ your ranking. If you work to make it into the nth quantile, you should be able to lock in your ranking at a position near there instead of having to constantly prove you deserve to be there. Eg:
If you work to be in the 88th percentile, you should be allowed to lock in (possibly at a cost of some PvP gems?) at, say, the 83rd percentile and get the rewards of whichever quantile that corresponds to.
I apologize if this is a bit technical, I could elaborate but the tl;dr is this:
- With rewards allocated via absolute scores (proposed) devs need to guess how hero limitations, hero modifiers, player participation, etc will affect score distribution and end up using guesswork to estimate how to have rewards match up well w said distribution (everybody getting the highest prize is no good, same as nobody getting said prize)
- With relative ranking (current) you have the issue of the only thing mattering being whose ahead of you as opposed to how you compare to all players. This results in relentlessly fighting to hold rank and anxiety that wears people down.
- With quantile ranking (counter proposal) players are rewarded based on how well they perform relative to all players. This way rewards are allocated relative to the distribution ensuring that the ideal proportion of people get each reward. (This is also aided by the optional use of ‘locking in’ your percentile rank)
I do think the players commenting on this board are a good representative, vip 0/14 respond here, as well as top 200 and top 5 alliances, I also think your system is way to complicated, I’d rather see the system bonegasher and poobgloob were talking about
There’s also like 100.000 alliances under the top 200. We who hang out here are the nerds, we play several hours / week which also is why we care enough to be active on the forums. We’re exceptional.
I assume 90% of the total player base (which is an awful lot of people) are casual players at best, those who open the app, claim a daily reward, do a raid and done.
That’s another discussion though! Haha.
And I agree with you that the suggestions on how to rework the PVP system are great!
Also for those players it would be better if they knew how much points to score, I can’t imagine how hard it is for weaker players to struggle with getting in the top 15000, so a point system sounds nice
Just like how they implement milestones for bounties. There should also be points for losing, maybe their team power, so players are encouraged to experiment with team composition without worrying that they’ll not reach Div 1. I have a dedicated pvp set that I stopped working on and made them pvp only. If they give out points for losing, Pvp would be a lot more fun for me since I’m rewarded for just trying.