Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: How to fix Colo for Season #3

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pull lead View Post
    I battle way more than 40 a week at upper Gold/lower Platinum. The single best fix would simply be to remove team battles. That puts tons of actual active players into the pool. It will also help the efficiency since the servers won’t be getting bogged down by as many scripters/alts abusing team battle.
    It’s a simple issue: the need to find a balance between the needs of many vs the needs of a few.

    We cannot deprive players who want to play as a team because a small portion of the player base is cheating. What we need to do is address the cheating or make the cheating very expensive.

    50 free battles a week is a lot of battles. And asking people to pay a small FP is fair if they want to battle more. This follows Arena where you get a set number of tokens and must pay to use more tokens.

    Btw, my main is in Platinum to Diamond and I don’t need more than 30 battles to reach the Honor Point limit for either tier. If you are playing more than 40 battles, then you already accomplished your Gold Tier Honor Point limit and highly likely for Platinum Honor Point Rankings.

    Here is the math:
    40 losing matches gets you the Honor Point for that tier, respectively
    30 matches of half losses & half wins gets you HP for that tier, respectively
    24 winning matches gets you HP for that tier, respectively

    Therefore, if you are trying to get HP for that tier, respectively, you are looking at 24 to 40 matches per week. The problem is players that cheat by getting 200 matches in 3 hours. If we make those matches after 50 free matches cost FP and it would cost twice as much for direct matching, it will cut down on the cheating. My point is to making the cheating very expensive!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    20,268
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    I see no reason that Teams couldn't be matched up against Singles teams.
    ~VoV~

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batw View Post
    If you are playing more than 40 battles, then you already accomplished your Gold Tier Honor Point limit and highly likely for Platinum Honor Point Rankings.
    Some players may be battling more than 40-50 times a week for several reasons. For instance:
    - You're not only trying to get Honor Points, but trying to improve your ranking.
    - You're having fun battling in Colo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Batw View Post
    We cannot deprive players who want to play as a team because a small portion of the player base is cheating.
    Quote Originally Posted by Batw View Post
    50 free battles a week is a lot of battles. And asking people to pay a small FP is fair if they want to battle more.
    So you're saying we can't take away something from certain players, and right after you say it's fair to take away something else from some other players (because yes, not everyone is a spender, and if you make players pay to be able to play as much as they want, some players won't be able to play as much as they used to. The fact that is would be "fair" is entirely subjective).

    Quote Originally Posted by Batw View Post
    My point is to making the cheating very expensive!
    There are much better ways to stop the abuse of the matchmaking.
    The feature is FREE. The only people I see trying to make it a non-free feature are spenders. I think there are already enough stuff requiring money in CA. And I think it's really awesome that they implemented a new feature which is completely free.

    They can simply fix the matchmaking so players can't abuse it.
    For instance, make it so that you can't team up with players if the difference in stars is too big (so a Gladiator with hundreds of stars can't team up with low rank lvl 1 minis).
    For higher ranks, or at least higher Gladiator stars amounts, make it so that teams can end up battling even though the stars difference is much higher than just 15 between the 2 highest ranked players.
    I haven't thought about it much, but there are probably lots of other things that can be done. Lots.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    the merge
    Posts
    2,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    I see no reason that Teams couldn't be matched up against Singles teams.
    This is probably the best idea yet.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    as far away as possible from the rest of the world <_<
    Posts
    22,854
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pull lead View Post
    This is probably the best idea yet.
    It sounds pretty bad to me. Would be just another advantage for teams..

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    20,268
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Actually, it would (in theory) disrupt any "cheats" in team play, by randomizing the mix of opponents a bit more.

    People working cohesively towards a common goal will always have an advantage over those that don't. But regardless if it's organized or more random, every battle is for teams of 5v5.
    Last edited by VersionsOfViolence; 09-03-2019 at 05:45 AM.
    ~VoV~

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gogoo View Post
    Some players may be battling more than 40-50 times a week for several reasons. For instance:
    - You're not only trying to get Honor Points, but trying to improve your ranking.
    - You're having fun battling in Colo.



    So you're saying we can't take away something from certain players, and right after you say it's fair to take away something else from some other players (because yes, not everyone is a spender, and if you make players pay to be able to play as much as they want, some players won't be able to play as much as they used to. The fact that is would be "fair" is entirely subjective).


    There are much better ways to stop the abuse of the matchmaking.
    The feature is FREE. The only people I see trying to make it a non-free feature are spenders. I think there are already enough stuff requiring money in CA. And I think it's really awesome that they implemented a new feature which is completely free.

    They can simply fix the matchmaking so players can't abuse it.
    For instance, make it so that you can't team up with players if the difference in stars is too big (so a Gladiator with hundreds of stars can't team up with low rank lvl 1 minis).
    For higher ranks, or at least higher Gladiator stars amounts, make it so that teams can end up battling even though the stars difference is much higher than just 15 between the 2 highest ranked players.
    I haven't thought about it much, but there are probably lots of other things that can be done. Lots.
    Dude, you are missing the key points.

    The math clearly points out those who play for honor points don’t need more than 40 matches. That covers the 95%+ of the player base. There is always going to be a small minority that will be upset. You want to focus at the 5% rather than the 95% player base, which makes no sense to me.

    So the question is what is a FAIR solution, not a perfect solution. Colo ISN’T fun for a lot of people due to poor matching, long wait times, etc. I have 5 toons and the matching s*cks for all 5 toons. That is why people just want their weekly Honor Points ASAP.

    So let’s make Colo less painful for these people. 15 minute matches might be the solution to reduce wait times. There might be other solutions.

    My goal is to focus on the 95% player base and not some small minority base (that is most comprised of cheaters).

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    20,268
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    No. Your goal is to redesign Colosseum for you, instead of shifting your own gameplay to go with the mechanics as they are.

    And again, the whole 5 toons thing. How can you expect to do great with any single toon when your focus is distracted like that?

    There are plenty of honest players that have already been able to purchase a medal, and are aiming for a second once rewards have been sent out. Limiting honest people from being able to play as much as they like doesn't seem like a good idea for anyone. Especially just so you can keep your 5 toons from getting too far behind the curve.
    Last edited by VersionsOfViolence; 09-03-2019 at 07:17 PM.
    ~VoV~

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batw View Post
    That’s why I am advocating 50 free battles per week.

    I have 5 toons and none of my toons need more than 30 battles a week (because they win a portion of their matches) to reach at least Gold.

    Most of the people I speak with also don’t battle more than 30 to 40 battles per week; once they hit their honor point for their tier, they stop.
    I am not aiming for gold, when you reach gladiator you will know that you need to win as more battles as you can to get a good rank.
    Also there are campaign tasks that can be completed via colosseum.

    Anyway your suggestion to put battles behind a paywall to punish everyone is still a terrible idea.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolver Blast View Post
    I am not aiming for gold, when you reach gladiator you will know that you need to win as more battles as you can to get a good rank.
    Also there are campaign tasks that can be completed via colosseum.

    Anyway your suggestion to put battles behind a paywall to punish everyone is still a terrible idea.
    1. Campaign tasks takes two weeks. I think you know this. To use this argument is plain silly. I finished all my 200 Evade requirements in my morning session. One morning session was enough to get 200 Evades, which is hard to do without Colo.

    2. It DOES NOT MATTER if you are Gladitor, the points system is set up so you need 24 to 40 battles per week. To argue Gladitor means you don’t understand how the point system was designed.

    10,800 pts divided by 450 points per win is 24 wins
    10,800 pts divided by 270 points per loss is 40 losses.

    What you are saying is not making any sense to me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •