Filling the holes of PvP.

[joebob555]

A few of us were talking in chat about getting rid of league, and before long we started to discuss what it would be replaced with. As the discussion went on, we began to develop a very interesting idea, though that idea was in no way related to league.

The idea is thus. A calendar would be placed somewhere on the forums. Players could then sign up for hour long slots. The player is simply committing themselves to sit in PvP1 for that hour. If they don’t find a match, they can move on. If they do, they would fight them and then return to waiting. This would make it so that PvP1 had somebody in it around the clock, making the game seem more active. This would help the community as new players would would not leave the game due to inactivity.

Now while this is for the community, it may be hard to fill all of the slots unless their were some rewards involved. For this, I proposed that every 100 hours logged(Though, on second though it should be less, even half that is reasonable), they would get a Mark/Nymph code. The regulation of this would be just as simple. This would be based primarily on the honor code, if somebody signed up, it should be assumed that they showed up. If however, a mod or trustworthy user or two entered and they did not get matched within a couple of minutes, the use who committed themselves to the hour would be penalized.

Now there are a number of the details that are not fleshed out, but the bottom is that the elements community is filled with smart and active people. We should be able to fix our current PvP drought, it just needs a kickstart. PvP is one of the main draws to this game for a lot of people, and to have it sit vacant is appalling.

Spoiler for Hidden:

[22:17:43] ‹RootRanger› I think we should just scrap Leagues
[22:17:54] ‹RootRanger› Replace them with EtG pyramid or something
[22:18:18] ‹RootRanger› Have I talked about EtG Pyramid? I think I've had this idea since before I even played EtG
[22:18:34] ‹Puff› I still want something where I can just challenge people in chat anytime I want
[22:18:42] ‹Puff› with League rewards, of course
[22:19:19] ‹RootRanger› Pyramid would be like - you have to play someone on your "level", plus or minus one. If you win, you climb up to the next level, if you lose you drop down 2 or 3.
[22:19:51] ‹RootRanger› Get to level 5 or something for a reward
[22:20:25] ‹RootRanger› For the vast majority of players on the first two levels, it's easy to get a match
[22:20:26] ‹RootRanger› Might be harder for higher levels but that's ok, those are meant to be more of a challenge anyways
[22:20:36] ‹RootRanger› And of course each level would have its own deckbuilding restrictions
[22:20:38] ‹rob77dp› like a ladder style, Root?
[22:20:46] ‹RootRanger› Honestly if you want to go even simpler you could just replace leagues with events
[22:20:53] ‹RootRanger› Basically event rules with a league format
[22:21:10] ‹Puff› sounds good
[22:21:26] ‹RootRanger› ‹@rob77dp› Yeah you could say that
[22:21:50] asdw152 left.
[22:21:55] ‹Puff› Yea, maybe some event rules would make leagues more fun, but I'm guessing people's response would be something like "no rules will give a better representation of the meta"?
[22:22:08] RootRanger left.
[22:22:21] RootRanger joined.
[22:22:15] ‹RootRanger› They were meant largely for new players to just hop into with no deck restrictions
[22:22:15] ‹RootRanger› It's like, if you look back to the original point of leagues
[22:22:46] ‹RootRanger› They were meant largely for new players to hop in with little deckbuilding restrictions
[22:22:46] ‹RootRanger› There's no point having a representation of the unrestricted metagame. There's no value you get from that.
[22:23:02] ‹joebob555› I think it would be cool if somebody just tracked every pvp match in the game and gave a reward to the person with the most wins at the end of the week. -- This would make it so you don't need to be that good as long as you play a lot
[22:23:30] ‹Puff› hmm, right. Maybe if this game had updates, but right now it really gets stale
[22:23:35] ‹RootRanger› OK so it helps in balancing? We already know what decks are strong in unrestricted play. Leagues are not researching anything new
[22:23:59] ‹RootRanger› ‹@joebob555› There's no value to a reward if there's no difficulty in obtaining it
[22:24:05] ‹rob77dp› I enjoy an arena to play against others in an unrestricted format... for prizes/recordkeeping/etc...
[22:24:29] ‹joebob555› It would be difficult though as everyone would just pvp more often
[22:24:35] ‹RootRanger› Well, maybe that's just my opinion
[22:24:35] ‹RootRanger› This generation is all about giving everyone a reward regardless of their merit
[22:24:42] ‹joebob555› and it would help pvp become more active which in return would help the community
[22:24:52] ‹Puff› not everyone can stare at a game chat for 16 hours daily
[22:24:52] ‹rob77dp› ‹@RootRanger› 0.o?
[22:25:04] ‹Puff› so some people would definitely have an advantage
[22:25:36] RootRanger left.
[22:25:42] RootRanger joined.
[22:25:40] ‹Puff› at the current state anyway, ELO encourages playing games a lot
[22:25:42] ‹joebob555› Same can be said with events being held at specific times.
[22:26:19] ‹rob77dp› specific times is not all that relative to "who can be on all the time"
[22:26:27] ‹Puff› Events are very flexible though. It's just tourneys that aren't
[22:26:32] ‹rob77dp› *not all that relate-able
[22:26:47] ‹RootRanger› ‹@rob77dp› You're a bit older so you might be less familiar, but in my generation, "participation trophies" are very prevalent
[22:27:14] ‹joebob555› hmm perhapses. -- I was just thinking if what I said happened, anybody could enter pvp at any time and find a match. And that would be quite nice.
[22:27:40] ‹RootRanger› Anyways if we want casual games just whenever, we should make league ratings permanent with small decay
[22:27:49] ‹RootRanger› Well for one the 25 game requirement is soooo stupid
[22:27:56] ‹rob77dp› it would also promote a player with a low win% but 15 hours a day to sit and play towards rewards...
[22:27:57] ‹rob77dp› brb
[22:27:57] ‹RootRanger› Puff is right that ELO encourages volume of games
[22:28:08] ‹RootRanger› The math behind it is incontrovertible. Rating systems is something I specialize in
[22:29:01] ‹joebob555› their would be more than one person willing to sit their all day -- and so they would constantly be matching each other..
[22:29:47] • rob77dp needs to pause chatting to build more DG decks
[22:29:53] ‹rob77dp› and DB for Brawl
[22:30:19] ‹RootRanger› Yeah heh sorry for the opponent swap lol
[22:30:19] ‹Puff› then you'll only have two people competing for the rewards, we can then call it "joebob vs Puff league"
[22:30:25] ‹Puff› which is why rating systems are nice
[22:30:42] ‹RootRanger› At least you're not DANIEELA, who has her opponent's Allegiance and Support Elements change completely
[22:31:14] ‹RootRanger› At least it's early in the round
[22:32:31] pyro_doom_96 joined.
[22:33:01] UTAlan left.
[22:32:56] ‹pyro_doom_96› hello ppls :p
[22:33:43] ‹joebob555› I could be wrong, but I feel as if that is beneficial to the community. Sure, they would be stacking up rewards, but having pvp not be dead all day also shows that the community is alive. I would assume a lot of players play elements for kong badges
[22:33:52] ‹joebob555› and just leave after because they see that pvp is dead.
[22:34:34] ‹joebob555› If it is alive, they may stay and join the community, and revive the game to its former glory
[22:34:36] ‹RootRanger› Oh you mean PvP1? well it's impossible to take records on that anyways without major intervention from zanz
[22:35:12] ‹Puff› actually, I'm thinking about the same too
[22:35:32] ‹rob77dp› hey pyro
[22:35:33] ‹joebob555› Ya, that is what I meant. -- but I don't think it would be as much trouble as you think.
[22:35:39] ‹Puff› if PVP is what makes this game fun, then maybe we should just, I don't know, have more of it?
[22:35:41] ‹RootRanger› I say this with full honesty: the community should consider having a couple PvP 1 bots
[22:36:05] ‹RootRanger› I know we have people who know how to set it up
[22:36:59] ‹Timdood3› That isn't a terrible idea
[22:37:12] ‹joebob555› Ya.. that certainly is a fine idea..
[22:37:36] ‹Puff› that would technically be breaking game rules though, or at least that's what I heard
[22:37:45] ‹RootRanger› Alternatively we could just give Discord the staff title "PvP1 Expert" or something and have her do it
[22:37:57] ‹RootRanger› Only effective for 50% of the day though
[22:38:02] ‹Linkcat› lol
[22:38:13] UTAlan joined.
[22:38:09] ‹Linkcat› That's a good idea though.
[22:38:20] ‹rob77dp› like an AveragePotato for PvP1?
[22:38:26] ‹rob77dp› AveragePvPotato?
[22:38:30] ‹Puff› I would totally go for a staff title that simply requires me to do PvP 1 ten times a day
[22:38:31] ‹RootRanger› I mean really when you're just idling in chat how much of an inconvenience is it to just lurk PvP 1?
[22:38:33] ‹Timdood3› Puff, what rules?
[22:38:44] ‹RootRanger› PvP1 Lurker should absolutely be a staff title
[22:38:55] UTAlan left.
[22:39:02] ‹Puff› ‹@Timdood3› I don't know, something about third party programs with the game
[22:39:25] RootRanger left.
[22:39:24] ‹Timdood3› ‹@Puff› It's to better the game and the community, not for personal gain, so I see nothing wrong
[22:39:37] RootRanger joined.
[22:39:26] ‹RootRanger› You could call it something like "Newbie Knight"
[22:39:48] ‹Linkcat› I can imagine the guests coming in asking why nobody ever replies to them.
[22:39:49] ‹Timdood3› Also is that actually a rule?
[22:39:54] • rob77dp likes AveragePvPotato1
[22:39:58] ‹Timdood3› ‹@Linkcat› That was my concern, yeah
[22:40:11] ‹rob77dp› hint: the bot should be able to basically reply/chat like AP?
[22:40:13] ‹Puff› I could lurk in it with a grabbow, and volunteer for the title "newbie murderer"
[22:40:13] ‹joebob555› We could also have people sign up and take hour long shifts of string in PvP.
[22:40:22] ‹Linkcat› ‹@Timdood3› I see that as a plus.
[22:40:28] ‹joebob555› And perhaps have some incentive, such as a code every 100 hours logged
[22:40:30] ‹joebob555› but idk..
[22:40:32] ‹RootRanger› Yeah seriously
[22:40:32] ‹RootRanger› PvP 1 shifts
[22:40:41] ‹RootRanger› I'd get on right now but I should be in bed right now
[22:41:01] ‹rob77dp› I would totally do the hour ending 20 mins from now
[22:41:15] ‹joebob555› lol
[22:41:29] ‹RootRanger› Then it's decided!
[22:41:32] ‹Timdood3› This is starting to sound like an excellent idea
[22:41:36] ‹rob77dp› robotrager needs sleep?
[22:41:36] ‹RootRanger› We shall appoint 12 Newbie Knights and 12 Newbie Murderers
[22:41:47] ‹Timdood3› Oh gods
[22:41:48] ‹RootRanger› ‹@rob77dp› As if that's what I do in bed
[22:42:16] Arum left.
[22:42:10] • rob77dp whistles and taps fingers
[22:42:14] ‹Timdood3› EtG is a job now
[22:42:40] ‹rob77dp› EtG just created 24 jobs?
[22:42:49] ‹joebob555› lol
[22:43:11] ‹RootRanger› Keynes would be so proud
[22:43:33] ‹RootRanger› We should have an entire economy based on mark codes
[22:43:59] ‹Timdood3› I don't know about that
[22:44:08] ‹rob77dp› Alan? (sp)
[22:45:13] Linkcat left.
[22:45:19] Linkcat joined.
[22:46:43] Skotadi_Phobos joined.
[22:47:13] ‹Puff› Should we write a feedback thread for this?
[22:47:34] ‹Puff› (minus the EtG economic system)
[22:47:57] ‹joebob555› I guess. Shall I, or do you want to?
[22:48:13] ‹Puff› I'm not good at organization. I'll just comment
[22:52:05] ‹RootRanger› idk, doesn't have to be official yet
[22:52:07] ‹RootRanger› anyways goodnight
[22:52:27] Guest-Physalia-e4657 joined.

[iancudorinmarian]

This is actually not a bad idea at all.

[Sera]

I've made my comments in the chat log, so here's what I have to add:

I'm still unsure about the proposed reward system, I was thinking of a somewhat casual long-running PVP event for it. Also, it might be mean to run grabbows against someone who just enters PvP1 for the first time so maybe some incentive to not do that would be nice. But overall, I don't really know how both of those, along with the main goal, would work out together and hopefully a good system for this can be implemented.

[bert1432]

So, why does everyone seem to think they need rewards to do some community reviving? I mean yea I know there should be some incentive but it's like that's all you talk and care about. at least it's what I mostly got out of the chat log I just read.

Besides I think you should just go into pvp1 currently every once in awhile to see if anyone is there.. at least it'd be a start instead of just talking about it.. may take 3 weeks who knows.

[Aves]

The idea has an interesting premise, but there remain a few major issues:

1. What level of difficulty would this be presented in?
It would be pretty demoralizing for a newbie to enter pvp for the first time and face optimized meta decks like firestall or grabbow.
On the other hand, it would be pretty boring to play with a darkness starter deck for an hour. A balance could be struck, but then that encourages/enables poor deckbuilding.

2. No way of verification. The honor system has been a staple of our events, but it's relatively easy to discern an illegal deck. Checking for an hour's worth of activity? Not so much-- entering pvp1 and finding no challengers could simply be a case of the 'on-the-clock' player being already in a match, or more likely...

3. The pvp servers have been notorious for issues in connecting two players. How many times have we all entered pvp (I know, years and years ago, but still), gotten a match, and then saw the timer slowly tick from 60 to disconnect, making it obvious that the second player didn't connect? With pvp-duel it's easy to try to synchronize searching times. With pvp-1, there is no way of doing this unless the 'newbie' is in a chat.

4. Incentive. Even with dangling the promise of a mark code, literal days of time wasted in a buggy pvp-1 queue solely to play new players with sub-optimal decks sounds more like a chore than any sort of fun. I'm not talking incentive, though that is an issue for some too given that there is electurm spent on each match (trivial, I know)-- there needs to be a way to maintain interest in this more-boring-than-grinding activity. Maybe along with scheduling, the calendar could specify a series of restricted rulesets that are encouraged for the player(s) in the timeslot, akin to potluck.

5. Leagues provide a useful medium in which to practice unrestricted meta deckbuilding. Unorganized pvp would not nearly be so helpful in that regard.

[Manuel]

mmm this is a nice idea, the reward code is really tempting, idk if it can work or we will simply waste hours waiting players or simply playing against us because 2 guys search at the same time.

for the problem that we will use good decks, we can simply use decks for fun/not optimized (or alternate them, like one game grabbow, one game antilon/fate egg rush)

for verifing if we are in the pvp waiting for an opponent, masters of an elements/admins/council member/other respected guys can simply try to find a battle, they should find the guy that told to be on at that time

[Ginyu]

I like the idea. The major problem I see is several players of the community searching, getting connected over and over again (for more equal score) and new players still looking into the "hole". Not sure if we really need such a high reward for it, maybe a forum icon instead (that is getting "bigger" like the donor one)?

[UTAlan]

Definitely a no on Nymph/Mark code. If people are interested, I'm sure a forum icon or another reward could be given (maybe someone would be willing to offer up their own code). Could use the reward to the first person to play X games or spend X amount of time in pvp1 rather than everyone who does it. Or the person who does the most in a period of time.

I do like the idea of giving some rulesets to choose from, to keep it interesting. Roll a die and you gotta make a deck that fits those restrictions.

[iancudorinmarian]

Maybe the council can set something up? ^^