I really don’t have an answer to this, but I just wanted to mention it, so we can think about it. The ranks in PVP are just a matter of how much playing time you are able or willing to devote to it, as we all know. But a side effect more or less is that you are dropping ranks overnight faster than you can climb them during the day. Last night I made an effort and got from around 10,500 to 9,500, only to discover that I dropped all the way to 11,750 after I woke up. This way I think I just can’t be bothered to play PVP anymore, except perhaps for the trophies for the guild.
Like I said, I have no idea how to solve this. Just some thought.
It’s worth noting that you can still just do PVP for the Tier rewards each week, and not bother about the Ranked ones. There is a lot of discussion about what the reward system for the Rank should be, though we’ll just have to see what the devs do. Until then, I’m just going to be focusing on Tier rather than Rank.
1 Like
I am getting mixed feelings in pvp at the moment… I am in the top 100 rankings, but have been too busy to consistently push so I am slipping down… I was #12 three days ago, now I am #78… but I am playing more for trophies and the glory / gold rewards really…
I am already getting so sick of this meta though… The best reward battles are 90% of the time against one of:
- Maw
- Mercy
- both together
- Mab
- Mab with Mercy
- all of the above
…which is really not fun…
4 Likes
This is my reason at this point, one you get your tier 1 rewards then the rest is on what every you want to do. My guild is done trophy hunting so pvp holds nothing for us at this point except personal rewards.
Well, in the middle of the week I saw that the number 100 had around 6000 points, and I thought that meant a number 1000 position would be feasible. Of course I know that the numbers go up once the week ends, but I never thought it would go this fast. I just think it should be possible to reach some sort of anchor points beyond which you can’t drop below them. How , I don’t know. 
I don’t understand, you want a way to ensure your rank doesn’t go down? Not your PvP score?
Because that would mean, effectively, that no other player could get ahead of you. Or are you saying that you should be rewarded at the end of the week for the highest position you achieved? (Which doesn’t sound terrible to me, but I am not in any position to model that sort of change.)
3 Likes
This is already implemented in a different way… via tier-rewards. “You didnt make it into the top 1000 this time, have some glory and keys for your effort.”
1 Like
I want/need to do both trophies and personal rewards, and the ‘hard’ pvp is by far the most lucrative way to do this… so yes I choose this, but what else could I choose? It’s just cack that the pvp meta is getting broken…
2 Likes
Getting broken how? What’s exactly bothering you? Just bored of facing the same teams?
Seeing the same teams in the meta has always been a problem, and right now it has even more diversity than usual (as in, more team combinations that are considered a worthy defense team, compared to most of the game’s history).
Or is it the ranked system? Because, as @Lyya mentioned, that’s how ranked leaderboards are supposed to work. If you can gain ranks, then others can too (which means you drop if you don’t play), there’s no way around it. What would be less broken for you, not having the ranked mode at all? It’s not like you’d get more reward if that was the case…
Yes, that’s true. Sometimes it’s broken ones (TSO, Webspammer days gone by), sometimes it’s just the proportionately stronger (or easier to obtain) ones.
From my standing-point, that’s not true. Do check out my shiny graphs. Good luck to you if you’re seeing more variety and I’m glad you’re enjoying it…
No that was nothing to do with it. I don’t entirely agree with how rankings and points are currently done, but it seems to be almost working and I’m not losing sleep on not having played the 2000 games needed to be high up the charts this week. Life is too short for that…
I did. You mostly complain not about specific team combinations (such as goblins), but about specific “OP” troops, whatever they are paired up with. As in, you consider a team as a ‘repeat’ simply by it having maw in it, even if there’s much diversity in the rest of the teams’ content.
If you consider that, and count how many such troops bother you (there are 3 mentioned in your first post of this thread) compared to past single OP troops (there were usually 1 or 2 tops at the same time), then yes, there’s more diversity, and certainly not less.
Also consider that this meta is very young, and still changing - Mab is newer than the rest, and new good combinations are still getting discovered. I think this is too early to get bored with the meta, and far from the feeling of having to deal with mostly TS+Agile teams for 2+ months.
I partly agree, but it’s easy to see the warning signs.
On the graphs, yes, I have openly pointed out this was ‘maw is in a team’, not ‘the whole team is the same’… but the issue as I saw it (and am still seeing it) remains… I did say from my standing-point; I appreciate that others won’t be seeing the same thing, getting the same match-ups or feeling the same about it…
Just to add, this is how I see it usually plays out:
- The meta is broken by a patch or a troop rebalance.
- People start looking for new good combinations.
- Someone finds a very good team and everyone start to copy it.
- Some time after the meta is set, many top players get bored and field other interesting combinations just for diversity.
As I see it now, we are somewhere between stage 2 and 3. People have found some good teams, and they are getting copied, but the meta is not set yet. I believe that this time too, after the search is done and the meta is truly set, more and more people will start to get bored of it, and diversity will somewhat return.
This is of course assuming the still forming meta won’t be prematurely broken by an early nerf, then the cycle will begin anew.
1 Like
The problem with your cycle is that the new PVP ranking system breaks the incentive to field a weaker team. Every time someone beats your team, that is another win you need to earn to maintain your position relative to them. Not to mention the points you get from a defense win, which don’t even require you to be at the phone/PC to earn. So why would anyone trying for the top 1-100 bother making an intentionally weak team? Diversity doesn’t cut it any more now that there are actual rewards involved.
If anything, that will make people keep searching for better, stronger teams. That’s what I see happening right now, and it will probably keep happening for a while longer. No more sitting on a “good enough” combination, but striving for better results, leading to a constant change.
Of course that can only help people who really just get bored of seeing the same teams. For those who use it as an excuse but really just want easier fights, well, for them I guess the future seems grim indeed.
TLDR: some people get tired and bored because they play way too many games.
O,O
I really hope that if changes are applied they will NOT be to serve the top 100-ish convenience while hurting the 20k people just looking for tier 1 or the even more stopping before that. The competitive part of the play is not supposed to be painless and easy ride.
Not being excessively annoying and sadistic is not the aim certainly but the observations like you drop fast due to others playing and that you fight similar teams are fairly natural. And some may not be even avoidable either.
I.e a naturally fair-looking matchmaker would select the more point granting games by rank, from around you, little above if possible. What means if you’re close to top, you’ll play the same couple of people over and over. No matter what is the team diversity is in general, the top will observe much less of it.
Unless we part with the idea to fight people’s delegated defense team and switch to some other method. Or eliminate the ranking altogether. But why go backwards – IUC the game still have that in the ‘causal’ tab, is lack of diversity a problem there too? If so, that should be worked on and create a fun environment for those looking to play.
3 Likes
TL;DR too
Just came to post my thoughts on PvP : I’m currently in top 20. I played litterally all my free time this week, just to forge an opinion of how worth it was grinding the ranks.
I actually got more rewards doing the grind (5 celestials, 3 arcanes) than I’ll get if I keep my current position for achieving said rank.
So… That’s the first and last time you’ll see me in the top 100. It’s not worth, and even if it was, it’s consuming much more time than I can afford to spend on a weekly basis.
7 Likes
This much was obvious to me when I saw the winning score last week.
1 Like
I didn’t really check them, and didn’t need to, I also had it figured out before even trying to grind, but I just wanted to give it a shot to see what kind of commitment was really required.
I completely understand the personal decision not to try to compete bc you don’t have the time to be competitive. If you can’t make it in the top 20 or so, it isn’t worth it.
That said, it’s absolutely worth the 600-2000 battles to be at the top. Grinding Challenges to try to get an equivalent number of Traitstones would take you much longer, and you get basically no other rewards in the process.
1 Like