Issues for Cat Daddy to adress

[Isc23I]

Quote: Originally Posted by ActionJack

With however many players, all starting seasons at wildly different times, yes, I do think it's difficult to create seasons without one or two outliers. You're looking at it from the perspective of the Rare Pro guys. I'm sure there are some seasons in which 2500 across the board will be a winner. The issue is that, what of you're the guy with 4000 across the board? Where does he go? How long would he have to wait to be placed in an even season? 3 days? A week? Making anybody wait that long would obviously be ridiculous. Instead, that guy gets thrown into a Rare Pro season, and he destroys it. So what's the better idea? How do you place those guys into seasons, knowing nobody wants to wait several hours or even days for a season to start? Any ideas? Anybody? The reality is that nobody's thought of a better way. There may not be a better way. People want to win, so they feel slighted by this, and I can't fault them... but that doesn't change the realities of the situation. My take on it is, any way you slice it, 29 out of 30 teams are gonna lose to the best team anyway. It really doesn't make TOO much of a difference of that best team is 300 points above everyone, or 2000 points. It's still the same result. If this game were actually competitive, and there was skill involved, and things you could actually do to sway the results, other than setting a lineup and hoping, I'd be more gung-ho about solving this, but for me, as just look at seasons as a 3-4 day raffle. You throw your name in the hat, and hope you're the best team. If not, try again next time. What else are we really doing here?

I had an idea of all seasons running from Mon-Fri. That way every player will start a season at the same time and then CD will have the entire pool of players to match, kinda like how rivals always starts on the same day. They would have to remove sub ins as well and only let players sub in players on the inactive list, so they could actually match decks and players could mess around with lineups and be matched with similar decks without people subbing in legends.
Not ideal I know, but players with all legend pro LU are killing seasons for guys just trying to get a single epic. Its the only way to be able to assign people into a well matched season, have them all start at the same time.

[ActionJack]

Quote: Originally Posted by Isc23I

I had an idea of all seasons running from Mon-Fri. That way every player will start a season at the same time and then CD will have the entire pool of players to match, kinda like how rivals always starts on the same day. They would have to remove sub ins as well and only let players sub in players on the inactive list, so they could actually match decks and players could mess around with lineups and be matched with similar decks without people subbing in legends. Not ideal I know, but players with all legend pro LU are killing seasons for guys just trying to get a single epic. Its the only way to be able to assign people into a well matched season, have them all start at the same time.

Idk.. I think that'd be a LOT worse.

Not only does it kill the flexibility we've all enjoyed in being able to set our seasons to time well with whatever else we have going on, it could also destroy whatever little parity exists in this game.

In the high tier seasons, Twista, Adil, and a couple of others would win every single week.

In mid tier seasons, it'd be the same. Whoever is at the top of their respective tier would just win constantly. 95% of teams would still stand little chance.

If I'm at 2900 across the board, I can just stay there and win seasons over and over again. It's not like your team really gets better through season wins. If you're at the low point, or the middle of your tier, you still just lose hopelessly forever.

Again... The only real difference, as I see it, is that people FEEL better losing to somebody 300 point higher, than somebody 3000 points higher. In reality, there is zero actual difference.

Rivals remains the only reliable way to improve your team, other than spending money.

What needs to change, is season rewards. If the game actually incentivized playing out seasons to win, and rewarded teams for going far, the problem would be solved. The best teams would still win out, but every other team wouldn't feel like they wanted their time. They may not get the TOP reward, but similar teams can compete for the worthwhile 2nd or 3rd place rewards. If they win those, then their lineup improves, and maybe they can compete for the next season win.

Nothing is going to change the fact that 29 teams lose. In a game with very little actual interaction between players, the difference between losing a close game, and losing a blowout, is functionally nonexistant. What needs to change is the reward system. As it is, getting 2nd place in a season SUCKS. That's what needs to change. That way people would be way more OK with their losses, when 29 out of 30 people inevitably lose.

Even winning seasons isn't a real thrill. I've won my last 4 seasons, and only one of those wins gave me a card that helped at all, and all it did was give me an Epic Pro to sit in 3rd string on my lineup.

That has to change. Apparently CD is changing that, so to me, it's all good.

[NWGameDad]

Quote: Originally Posted by ActionJack

Idk.. I think that'd be a LOT worse. Not only does it kill the flexibility we've all enjoyed in being able to set our seasons to time well with whatever else we have going on, it could also destroy whatever little parity exists in this game. In the high tier seasons, Twista, Adil, and a couple of others would win every single week. In mid tier seasons, it'd be the same. Whoever is at the top of their respective tier would just win constantly. 95% of teams would still stand little chance. If I'm at 2900 across the board, I can just stay there and win seasons over and over again. It's not like your team really gets better through season wins. If you're at the low point, or the middle of your tier, you still just lose hopelessly forever. Again... The only real difference, as I see it, is that people FEEL better losing to somebody 300 point higher, than somebody 3000 points higher. In reality, there is zero actual difference. Rivals remains the only reliable way to improve your team, other than spending money. What needs to change, is season rewards. If the game actually incentivized playing out seasons to win, and rewarded teams for going far, the problem would be solved. The best teams would still win out, but every other team wouldn't feel like they wanted their time. They may not get the TOP reward, but similar teams can compete for the worthwhile 2nd or 3rd place rewards. If they win those, then their lineup improves, and maybe they can compete for the next season win. Nothing is going to change the fact that 29 teams lose. In a game with very little actual interaction between players, the difference between losing a close game, and losing a blowout, is functionally nonexistant. What needs to change is the reward system. As it is, getting 2nd place in a season SUCKS. That's what needs to change. That way people would be way more OK with their losses, when 29 out of 30 people inevitably lose. Even winning seasons isn't a real thrill. I've won my last 4 seasons, and only one of those wins gave me a card that helped at all, and all it did was give me an Epic Pro to sit in 3rd string on my lineup. That has to change. Apparently CD is changing that, so to me, it's all good.

Action Jack - Thank you for a good analysis.


The rewards are a big part of the problem and with the v1.18 update we are changing the rewards to the following:


Finals Champion - 1 Legendary
Finals 2nd Place - 1 Epic Pro
3rd Round Playoffs - 1 Epic
2nd Round Playoffs - 1 Rare Pro
1st Round of Playoffs - 1 Rare
No Playoffs - 1 Uncommon Pro


I'm sure you'll ask, "Wait, an Epic Pro has better stats then a Legendary, that isn't fair!" That is true, but if you Pro up the Legendary it will have much better stats than the Epic Pro (in most cases, yes, I know about Yao and Mullins. Larry Johnson is just a really good Epic Pro). So in the short run if you "tank" for 2nd place you'll improve your deck but if you go for the winning spot each time you'll end up having a better deck in the long run.


v1.18 is very close now, but I do not have a specific day when it will be released.

[Disca92]

Quote: Originally Posted by NWGameDad

Action Jack - Thank you for a good analysis. The rewards are a big part of the problem and with the v1.18 update we are changing the rewards to the following: Finals Champion - 1 Legendary Finals 2nd Place - 1 Epic Pro 3rd Round Playoffs - 1 Epic 2nd Round Playoffs - 1 Rare Pro 1st Round of Playoffs - 1 Rare No Playoffs - 1 Uncommon Pro I'm sure you'll ask, "Wait, an Epic Pro has better stats then a Legendary, that isn't fair!" That is true, but if you Pro up the Legendary it will have much better stats than the Epic Pro (in most cases, yes, I know about Yao and Mullins. Larry Johnson is just a really good Epic Pro). So in the short run if you "tank" for 2nd place you'll improve your deck but if you go for the winning spot each time you'll end up having a better deck in the long run. v1.18 is very close now, but I do not have a specific day when it will be released.

Wow nice rewards, great work and about the limit card in your deck, it will be increased?

[MeloMamba]

Quote: Originally Posted by NWGameDad

Action Jack - Thank you for a good analysis. The rewards are a big part of the problem and with the v1.18 update we are changing the rewards to the following: Finals Champion - 1 Legendary Finals 2nd Place - 1 Epic Pro 3rd Round Playoffs - 1 Epic 2nd Round Playoffs - 1 Rare Pro 1st Round of Playoffs - 1 Rare No Playoffs - 1 Uncommon Pro I'm sure you'll ask, "Wait, an Epic Pro has better stats then a Legendary, that isn't fair!" That is true, but if you Pro up the Legendary it will have much better stats than the Epic Pro (in most cases, yes, I know about Yao and Mullins. Larry Johnson is just a really good Epic Pro). So in the short run if you "tank" for 2nd place you'll improve your deck but if you go for the winning spot each time you'll end up having a better deck in the long run. v1.18 is very close now, but I do not have a specific day when it will be released.

Is that the update will improve rewards quick games too ?

And when the update is planned ?

[ActionJack]

Quote: Originally Posted by NWGameDad

Action Jack - Thank you for a good analysis. The rewards are a big part of the problem and with the v1.18 update we are changing the rewards to the following: Finals Champion - 1 Legendary Finals 2nd Place - 1 Epic Pro 3rd Round Playoffs - 1 Epic 2nd Round Playoffs - 1 Rare Pro 1st Round of Playoffs - 1 Rare No Playoffs - 1 Uncommon Pro I'm sure you'll ask, "Wait, an Epic Pro has better stats then a Legendary, that isn't fair!" That is true, but if you Pro up the Legendary it will have much better stats than the Epic Pro (in most cases, yes, I know about Yao and Mullins. Larry Johnson is just a really good Epic Pro). So in the short run if you "tank" for 2nd place you'll improve your deck but if you go for the winning spot each time you'll end up having a better deck in the long run. v1.18 is very close now, but I do not have a specific day when it will be released.

Amazing.

Quick question: whenever the update hits, will the new rewards be given to seasons already underway, or will they take effect whenever new seasons are started under the new system?

I ask this because I'm planning on tanking my current season...

[NWGameDad]

Quote: Originally Posted by Disca92

Wow nice rewards, great work and about the limit card in your deck, it will be increased?

The card limit will be raised to 120 with the new update.

[NWGameDad]

Quote: Originally Posted by MeloMamba

Is that the update will improve rewards quick games too ? And when the update is planned ?

We're not changing the rewards in Quick Games. You will still get 1 or 2 Draft Picks depending on if you win or lose.