Well, that wouldn’t be too different from pve currently where 5* players flood lower brackets to get top rewards. Hell I just started a baby account the other day and there was a guy with a level 400 5* in the top ten in cl1. Guess he really needed those 2* Daken covers.
That’s not anywhere near what he said, you are being disingenuous at best. These ideas are being thrown around to help people play a mode that not many people play.
Even if your argument is that something should not be given away for nothing (which is false anyway, they still have to do the matches), you have to concede that the game is vastly different now from when you went through the 4* transition.
There are more 4* than 3* now, right? 1000 days ago there was less than a half dozen. Acting like the game is the same (when it isn’t) doesn’t help anyone. Theoritically, we all want the game to grow and adapt, right?
I wish they would do a live PVP where we fight real people and not a computer.
I’m very curious what it would be like to play against a real player
Imagine you need one hop to get the next progression reward, and the person you match up against takes 30 seconds thinking about what their next move will be. It would take forever. Meanwhile, you come out to -300 points because everybody hit you while you were fighting mister magoo.
There is a reason mobile games rarely match you up against live opponents versus a.i. versions. Aside from the nightmare scenario i mentioned above, it would make games even longer. Right now, we all know how the ai will interact with the board. We can predict with a good degree of accuracy what power they will fire, and when.
slow
It wouldn’t just plug right in to the current system. But Hearthstone matches are synchronous multiplayer. You need a shot clock, and some mechanism for rage quitting etc. I’m just saying, I’d like to challenge a real player at this head to head one time to see what it’s like.
Your win rate would go down to 50% from 99% and matches would take 15 minutes to complete.
Do not want.
Except in live PvP no one would be able to fight you because you’d already be in a live battle
I just want to have that challenge, like playing a real game of chess against a real person.
Duh, you are right, i totally overlooked that part!
That said, i still dont see the appeal of a live version. Personally, i play a lot intermittently, so i may take 10-15 for a match while i do things around the house.
It would be a serious drain on resources too as most would go in with all ap boosted so you would need to do the same or you’d be at a huge disadvantage right from the start.
Ok, I’ll start off by saying I don’t agree with anything you said. But I REALLY REALLY don’t agree with the part I quoted. I, and many others, enjoy the current system very much. Don’t try to speak for everyone…
The only real reasonable option mentioned here is an either/or system. But, I’d rather see them working on adding more reward thresholds from 900-1200, than changing the scoring system.
I agree that adding rewards in the dead zone would be nice. That said, i thought it was understood that the majority dont like pvp. Comparing the numbers of players of pve to pvp, especially for top 10-20%, pve outweighs pvp. Plus, the way i read it, the quote was about scoring, not pvp as a whole. You can like how pvp currently is and still dislike the scoring
@Spudgutter
While I don’t necessarily disagree with you that the majority dislike the Versus scoring system, I don’t agree with you either. There really isn’t anyway to quantify that. I could agree that a majority of the forums, or at least half the forums, dislike the scoring system. However, the point I was making is that not EVERYONE as the OP said in his opening statement hates the current scoring system. I, and others, enjoy the current system the way it stands.
Net points for placement rewards.
Gross points for progression rewards.
It’s the easiest fix in the world, and it’s utterly baffling to me that they don’t do it.
Because that would make dumping and sniping the most effective strategy by far and no one would use a shield anymore until the last hour or so.
you may want to play head to head, and it would be fine to do so on a one off basis. But live head to head matches for prizes would be awful.
- live matches are inherently slower. AI never stops always making its move on time.
- Anyone who’s played yahoo games or any online games know that matches can go from boring to basically unplayable when a live player turns griefer.
- Actual matchmaking would be slow and undependable. As someone who played alot on Xbox live, I can tell you that even the biggest games on Xbox Live arcade had issues consistently finding live opponents. I’m pretty sure they would have major issues finding enough live opponents with equivalent rosters to actually battle in a live format.
As an aside, these types of new pvp suggestions are really pointless. All thats really being done is tweaking how points are allocated and prizes divied up. I.e. just changing the scoring.
try to develop new modes or objectives instead. Those will be much more interesting and thought provoking that just another scoring thread disguised as pvp improvements.
Yeah, I have no idea what “dumping and sniping” is, but it can’t be any worse than the current system.
You think people would use dramatically fewer shields? I don’t know. To fight for T10, you’d still have to shield early and often. There would be fewer people shielding JUST to reach progress and then get knocked back down, but I don’t imagine shielding would fall off dramatically. By-and-large, most of the people who bother shielding up to reach 900 are the same kind of people who also want good placement.