PvP rankings are a joke

Gameplay Chat (PC/Mobile)
144

The same difference applies to people who are NEET and live with their parents vs. people who have jobs and a family to take care of. I could also ask: Should I be penalized because I have real life? But I think it’s wrong to think of it like that.

Everyone has their own circumstances. Some can pull all-nighters, some don’t. Some have someone they can’t play with, some don’t. There is probably a line somewhere, but as long as it’s 2-3 people sharing, who know each other in real life, I personally don’t care (more so if the devs themselves don’t). Comparing them to cheaters is clearly unfair, since they don’t really do anything against the rules, they just utilize the time resources they have available (as does someone who has nothing else to do with their life).

If it was possible for 2 people to play at the same time, then it would be different. but it’s not, so e.g 2 people who can play 5 hours each do not have any advantage over 1 person who can play 10 hours by himself.

2 Likes
145

Guild Wars is a completely separate game mode.

The title of the thread says “PVP rankings are a joke”.

Guild Wars have zero effect on PVP rankings.

146

I rather vote for limiting the amount of games that will grant PvP points, not amount of games ppl can play in general

4 Likes
147

I think points could be based off of team scores, but a simple Team Score / 100 is what points the team will give if you win. Who cares what team your using and if they are fully traited or not, some teams do not need to be fully traited.

I lost interest in PvP since 2.0, I think it was mostly due to having to spend gems to skip the same opponents over and over which urked me the most. Prior you used to only see 1 opponent, and it cost 10 gold.

Also, I do feel that if you lose your invade vs a team, you should lose 50% of what you could gain. Regardless of how the loss was occurred (disconnect, retreat, actual loss or other reasons).

I find it very suspicious that when there is 30000 people whom play 40+ hours a week, but Guild Teams do not progress at the same rate that the Trophies do. Seriously people, look at the differences. There has to be something else going on here and not just botting.

149

What a refreshing and enlightening perspective on the issue. Some food for thought for everyone i am sure. Thank you for your helpful contribution.

6 Likes
150

Yes it is! But GW is NOT the primary mode of playing the game. I am looking forward to these 5 battles as a real indication of my skill in comparison to other players.

PvP, however, is an integral and some might argue necessary component to the daily play of GoW. With daily gating limiting my ability to log in and knock out 20 matches quickly, or just limiting playtime in general, it would certainly negatively impact my joy of the game. Not having this gating, or energy mechanic, is one of the MAIN reason I have chosen to support up to VIP 5. It is one of the few mobile games, I can play whenever I want for as long as I want. Period. That’s special.

Finally, call me crazy, but since the rewards for the Leaderboards are nominal at best, I think we can all agree that the “REAL” players putting in the time to earn those top spots are doing it for pride, honor, ego, respect, pick your favorite intrinsic motivator and insert it here. But not for the rewards. THAT being said… that can be just as easily tracked via trophies. SO, why not just eliminate the leaderboard, the cause of all the aggravation, and simply make PvP points count for Tiers? Once Tier 1 is acheived, PVP points are no longer allocated to victories but resources and trophies are still gained. Then those top dogs can still boast and say, I earned my guild 10k trophies! Which is really more what the bragging is about then the 20k+ PVP points… Right?

9 Likes
151

Great post…

2 Likes
152

Ok nice opening, so the first six words I was like yup, sure makes sense… but then you threw everyone off the moving train, set the train on fire, and derailed it into a pile ______.

3 Likes
153

Good post. It certainly shows the other side of the coin. The simple fact is that you and I are probably completely different type of players who enjoy completely different things. The only real solution is a separate game mode that appeals to you. I’m certainly not going to be able to convince you that my view (I like the current PvP system) is correct any more than your post convinced me of your views (that the current system needs to be drastically changed) being correct.

I’m not in support of gating. Why are you writing this towards me? I’m in support of keeping the pvp system the same, making a few tweaks like Gervaise suggests in terms of 60 point 3t matches, and hoping the devs ignore the sweeping changes being suggested. My only problem with the current system are a lack of bot/script detection and different players being offered different points for max-difficulty matches.

THAT being said… that can be just as easily tracked via trophies.

There already are a lot of people going the trophy route. Those of us who choose to battle for top LB points are doing something completely different. We’re taking the hardest matches we can for the high-point pvp. Trophy hunters set 1-troop defense and take the easiest 3-trophy matches they can for the higher trophies per hour. Both playstyles are viable under the current system. There’s no need to force those of us who are after higher-difficulty higher-point matches into the trophy-hunting style of play.

Infact, I’d say the trophy hunting style you suggest is MORE viable under the current system since trophies last forever in guild rankings while my leaderboard achievement is permanently deleted at the end of the week. That’s not even getting into the fact that trophy hunters please an entire guild while us LB climbers’ achievements are more personal (ie- breaking pr’s, etc).

I wouldn’t mind if the devs added a second leaderboard tracking only trophies, but I’d be annoyed at having that playstyle forced on me. But the trophy route wouldn’t stop the bulk of complaints in this thread about not being able to play as much as others. The solution is what the devs are doing: add a completely different game mode so that the people complaining that some of us play so much that they can’t compete have somewhere else to go.

Telling me I shouldn’t get any pvp points after I reach tier one because someone doesn’t like competing with the amount of time I play is utter BS.

Why don’t you just not look at the leaderboard and not suggest deleting something a lot of us like? Just don’t click the leaderboard tab. That sounds like your issue: not the actual pvp, just the leaderboard.

Because LB competitors don’t care about trophies, otherwise we’d be trophy hunting now instead of LB hunting. Just adding a second leaderboard could be a temporary bandaid if that’s your major gripe. One LB for trophies and one LB for points … though I guarantee people will swap from complaining about point-hunters having too much time to trophy-hunters having too much time.

I can play whenever I want for as long as I want. Period. That’s special.

I agree 100% and that’s exactly what I’m doing. Unfortunately, some people seem to think that I should be penalized for playing more they THEY want to.

6 Likes
154

I don’t think a single person thinks that. Unless “you” are actually 2 or 3 people.

2 Likes
155

Two cents

The leader board means NOTHING. You can’t pay your bills, you can’t buy food, it doesn’t give shelter.

The leader board means only what you attribute it to mean.

If you need to have some kind of recognition that really means something - donate blood, go spend a day reading to children in a hospital.

But don’t get all worked up about something that the only meaning is what you assign it to be, which is just your name in a slot that others can see.

4 Likes
156

When i mentioned earlier in this thread this:

I was already considering the problems with “daily gating” as pointed by @htismaqe, so i took some time and i’ve been thinking about another way to deal with it.

Maybe having a set number of battles that are humanly possible to be done, let’s say 1000 battles each week, that will grant Ranked Score for the Leaderboard. You could play more to your heart’s content still getting gold and trophies.

The way the Ranked Score would be calculated on those 1000 battles had to be something with variables being openly explained to us in order to favor team-bulding and strategy. Could use some of the ideas and concepts that are in place for Guild’s War.

For Example:

  • Facing a team with +25% weekly bonus status = +2 points for each troop.

In the end the number of battles providing Ranked Score could allow players to reach a, more or less, well deserved position on the Leaderboard. People sharing accounts could still finish their battles faster, but comparable to Chess everyone has the same number of “moves” (battles). Also, as each battle counts for Ranked Score is meaningful it would make the “Refresh Button”, wich costs gems, relevant again.

A few problems i can already see vs Some basic solution:

Problem: People would put one troop defenses in order to minimize the gains of Ranked Score of their adversaries.

Solution: The system could fill the empty spaces with the strongest troops that player owns based on the power equation that already exists in PVP.

Problem: Using the refresh looking for better oponents too many times would probably consume much more gems than we can actually obtain on the Leaderboard Rewards depending of how many Ranked battles we can perform.

Solution: Increasing the number of opponents we can see each time would help a lot.

Well, there are more things i’m not finding/considering solution yet… Like players using four unleveled and untraited troops in order to provide teams that are worth much less Ranked Score.

But i’ll leave it here for discussion and maybe someone will add their own considerations. :slight_smile:

157

@MineralsMan Thanks for your well thought out response. I hope you allow me a rebuttal. :wink:

Complete misunderstanding. Nothing I said was directed at you but the community/thread in general. You quote was just what got my mind racing and so it was up top. Sorry for the confusion. :slight_smile:

Great points. I already do this. The leaderboard does not exist for me. I am not at all interested in it in any way. But sometimes players like myself, DO need reminders that there are LB hunters out there and not just trophy hunters.[quote=“MineralsMan, post:153, topic:22677”]
I agree 100% and that’s exactly what I’m doing. Unfortunately, some people seem to think that I should be penalized for playing more they THEY want to.
[/quote]

I’m glad we can agree that GoW is amazing and unique in its willingness to allow players this freedom. And in a post above I stated this and I’ll say it here too, I am not for limiting legit play at all, I want to see an end to players botting and “gaming” the system with exploits and loopholes that need to be corrected.

Fortunately, it seems like the devs feel Unity will help them achieve this reality. Here’s hoping! :wink:

1 Like
158

:smiley::+1: I agree 100%. My main suggestions are:

  1. Not everyone gets 60 points per max-difficulty match. If the devs made max-difficulty (the ones you get when your attack/defense teams are the highest points your account allows) 3-trophy matches a stagnant 60 points, it would even the playing field against people who know what the loopholes are to getting more points per battle.

  2. Of course, better detection of botters/scripters/account sharing.

What if there were multiple leaderboard tabs? Maybe that would alleviate some of the negative feelings people have to the current system. For instance:

Tab 1: Rankings based on who has more points. That’s the main LB now and a lot of us really like it (though feel it needs a few tweaks).

Tab 2: Rankings based on who has more trophies. Trophy-hunters are just as competitive as point-hunters, though their strategy results in them getting less points. This would give them some well-deserved recognition.

Tab 3: Per 350. Players are ranked on how they perform on the best 350 matches out of their 1st 360 matches in the week. This would give people who like to take it slow and make perfect moves an avenue for recognition. Best 350 out of 360 would give a 10-match leeway to compensate for things like “this match has already ended” errors. One way to rank it would be using pvp points for those 350 matches. Another way, would be using the Guild Wars scoring system of how many troops you have alive at the end of the match, etc etc.

3 Likes
159

I really havnt notice anyone in this topic call you out?

We are talking about 2 things here:

  • number of players in leaderboard is inflated to give a sensation of more players playing the game. Of course devs wont confirm this but numbers arent being backed up when simply compared to the other leaderboard we have - guilds leaderboard.

  • there are players who share accounts in a way that gives them way to big unfair advantage over other players. Some level of account sharing is ok, but keeping that account active for 20 hours every day of every week is just gaming the system. There are also people that use bots. And there are players who use loopholes and exploit the system. So all 3 types are gaining benefits a regular player that fights hard for his resources and postion like you @MineralsMan do are at a disadvantage. Either you need to play more to out perform them or they play less to have what you have.

Those are the 2 things we are discussing here.

160

And just to add that we should indeed have flat amount of points for trophies option! Why would high level players within a strong guild get less points against 3 trophy fights just because their team is strong? Why penalize us for something we worked hard for? (Getting our team strong)
Ive done 50-60 battles this week, my point average is bellow 40. .

4 Likes
161

I don’t get this. @saltypatra has said there are no artificial players inflating the leaderboards.

This makes no sense. I am an active member of a top ten guild. I come somewhere between 100 and 20,000 places each week depending on how much I play. Where is any evidence that comparing the PvP board to a board of 50 guilds says anything about fake players?

1 Like
162

You really think someone would admit such a thing?

As you seem to be a smart person i thought you would understand. I also think its been explained a few times in this topic.
But here it goes again. Players earning 500+ trophies are getting ranked above 30k pvp rank. Last week for example i earned close to 600 trophies (580-590) and ended up ranked 31k with almost 10k pvp points. This further imples there are at least 30k players doing 600 and more trophies.
That is enough to make 1000 guilds where all of those guilds would be earning 18k+ trophies a week. 18k+ trophies a week is something that at mos 10 guilds are doing, but usualy even less guilds do that much. Now you could say those players arent all in top guilds. That would be true if they existed. But they would be in a bit higher ranked guilds still making an impact on leaderboards at least on lower ranks. This isnt the case either. Our allied guild took 3- 3 and a half week to climb to top 800 ranks. They have 2-3 players at most doing 500 trophies or more. So do you want to say there are 20k and more players doing 600 and more trophies that arent members of any guilds. Come on man, think about it.

2 Likes
163

I am a bot just to let you know guys

2 Likes
164

:astonished:

That explains SOOOOO much…

:astonished:

1 Like