Ludia Forums

Suggestion: Asynchronous PvP

After spending months confused by the developer’s inability to fix PvP while poring over 100s of posts bashing the WoW PvP system, I have decided to post my proposed solution to this conundrum. I suggest the developer should implement Asynchronous PvP.

In most games i’ve observed, PvP is asynchronous, with human opponent heroes being controlled by the app, esentially as bots. The human opponent is unaware his/her heroes are battling. The battle result only impacts the active player; the battle has no effect on the botted opponent’s score.

In some asynchronous PvP games the player is offered the choice to select from a small selection of potential opponents, each with a different challenge rating. The battle reward (or penalty) is based on this rating. (ie. the weakest offered opponent might be worth 10 trophies while the most difficult opponent may be worth 40) In this model the players choose the difficulty of their opponents, with the score increase/decrease relative to this choice. This method works well and is tends to be supported by players.

For some reason, Ludia has taken an alternative approach to PvP. Choosing to allow real players battle one another. Unfortunately it has proven unworkable and the perplexingly unsound algorithms have proven unacceptable. I can no longer support this approach. It makes little sense to continue down this path for two fundamental reasons:

  1. Most players despise this current PvP system.
  2. Insufficiently active PvP has resulted in most of my opponents being bots anyway.

I have concluded it is time for Ludia to abandon the ideal of true PvP, and I suggest they follow the asynchronous approach taken by other developers.

1 Like

Most games I have played with “pvp” did what you suggest or something similar. After playing this version I would agree that maybe they should at least consider your way. They could also then allow us to choose our team since, at least in the ones I have played, every body sets their own defensive team.

I actually like fighting a live opponent, if the matching was better

I agree that I would prefer a live human if they could fix the current issues within the game.

Fighting real players in PvP was in theory a superb idea. It was briefly fun shortly after PvP was introduced as there were many active PvP players. This enabled PvP match making. However, many players abandoned PvP (and many abandoned the app) shortly after PvP was introduced because matchmaking was atrocious.

While other developers discovered true PvP did not work during beta and switched to asynchronous systems, Ludia did not beta test PvP. Instead it was an untested add-on. Ludia seemed unaware it would not work until players abandoned the app en masse.

Due to this lack of players since the mass abandonment, I speculate 90% of my matches are now against bots. They have attempted to use overpowered bots to bottle neck players in an effort to condense trophy counts around league minimums. In theory this was intended to allow the app to match those within these groupings against each other. However, even with this governing in place, there is still not enough active players to generate real PvP matchups. There seems to be no evidence Ludia will be able to generate a functional true-PvP system.

I like the idea as a concept, either as the sole option or as an improved solution to the choice of battling a bot versus waiting for a player. If players truly do like playing other players, then it gives the players a better option than the current setup.

Many years ago, I played an MMOCCG which initially had an asynchronous PvP mode but eventually added a live PvP for tournaments.

I preferred the live mode as the asynchronous PvP was usually too easy.

I believe the live system also pushed competitive players to spend more than the asynchronous game mode. So I think the developers may have a negative profit incentive to move towards an asynchronous game mode.

Second, the developers would need to find a new method to stratify players to accomplish their goal of limiting access to League reward chests or remove them altogether.

Remember that player and developer interests are only sometimes aligned. When it comes to getting players to spend money, these interests are often unaligned.

This may be true. I could see how a functional true-PvP system could generate more revenue than an asynchronous one. However, that would require the PvP system be acceptable to the players.

I may be wrong but it seems significantly more players are currently avoiding PvP in WoW, than spending money to improve their odds. Additionally, under the current structure it appears having higher levelled items may reduce one’s win rate. For example, my cousin and I have similar trophy counts, with his currently slightly higher than mine. The only significant difference is that my renown and item levels are significantly higher. As a result i routinely battle level 20 bots, while the maximum he has faced is level 16. As such, I would be better served in PvP to lower my renown and/or item levels. When improving one’s heroes decreases ones win percentage, there is little reason to spend money for hero improvement.

I am confident converting WoW PvP to asynchronous would not hamper revenues currently being generated by PvP, in fact, I expect it could enhance revenues.