Grant extra points the the MVP

General Feedback
When a person gets the mvp of the match it would be fair to give them say 30 points. This would push others to play better and also semi relieve a persons discontent when they experience a loss if they got mvp. Essentially if a person received the mvp award on a losing team he would not lose as much points. This would also help a person gain rank that is being held back by leavers and trolls and so on.

If you support this please post your support below and hopefully it might get implemented in the game.

Thank you,
I am not against, however how you exactly determine MVP? Numbers are not everything. Medivh is good example why. He can do a lot of important stuff without it being mentioned in statistics.
Bear with me now, my interesting thoughts, "TL;DR" warning

I'd like to start off by saying that I don't feel as if I'm a leet closet-diamond player placed in a wrong league and that everybody else sucks

I personally like the MVP system, but in HL I don't like the "everyone gets a trophy" addition, which highlights every player's achievement in an different field. Just not right to put that into the competetive HL atmosphere.

I'd rather have an MVP and perhaps only 2 additional highlighted players. That way people would still compete and keep pushing in order to better themselves. Didn't get highlighted? Should motivate you to push harder next time. People would only play a dozen op characters? They pretty much already do and it would perhaps force blizzard to balance their game out again.

For some reason losing in HL feels psychologically a lot more draining than it does in other competetive games I play. Winning doesn't feel as fulfilling in contrast to how harsh losing in HL feels.

I'd rather get ~25% less rank points after winning and have those 25% rank points deducted and transfered over to the losing team so that as an award the MVP on the losing team wouldn't lose any rank points.

Winning team's MVP would still get full points (e.g 200), but the other 4 players would get -25% (e.g 150) and those 200 rank points (4x50=200) would be used to negate the loss of rank points of the MVP on the losing team to "0".

Yea I know this proposed example for a system punishes the player even more on a losing streak if they're not the MVP every 5th lost game. Losing 200 pts compared to earning only 150 when winning, but then again if they can't get MVP on your team every 5 losing games then perhaps they don't belong in your rank to begin with.

Would also make people stop crying about "noobs" on their team, because the more "noobs" there are on the losing team, the greater chance for the self proclaimed "pros" to obtain the MVP title and not lose pts.

5 players on a team, just have to get MVP once every 5 losing games and once every 5 winning games, thus rank points even out again.

Losing = 4x 200; 5th MVP game 0 pts lost = 800 pts in total lost;
Winning =4x 150; 5th MVP game 200 pts won = 800 pts in total won;

Seems fair.

Would allow good players to slowly climb into higher ranks if they get MVP more frequently than every 5 games even if they have a crappy win rate.

This is based on the strict 50/50 win-loss ratio Blizzard tries to enforce and it suits it well.

Bad players, who just get lucky and placed on double duo que teams where there are no feeders/afkers would just slowly start falling out of their rank, 50 points at a time, if they don't get MVP every 5th winning and 5th losing game.

Anyway, this is just an example suggestion, could probably do better if we put our minds to it. Point is that we could use some kind of a system.

Don't know if just generating the extra 200 pts out of thin air for the losing team's MVP would cause some problems within the ranked system's algoritm over the long run, because normally ranked pts aren't created, they are passed around

That would push everyone to give it their absolute best even in the face of an inevitable loss.

As I said losing in HotS ranked feels psychologically a lot more punishing than it does in e.g Counter Strike ranked (probably because it's easy to carry) and yet winning doesn't feel as rewarding in contrast.

This is why I'm all for the MVP on the losing side feeling more rewarded than the MVP on the winning side, that would stop feeding, afking and games being thrown, which in my experience happens ~50% of the time. I mean the winning team is already having a blast by mowing us down, in this game that, coupled in with the guaranteed rank pts, by itself feels rewarding enough.

Getting ridiculously outdrafted would switch me from being upset & mildly angry for the next 25 minutes to "I'll just give it my everything and aim for that MVP title" And it would probably have the same effect on a few others on my team and instead of people afking/feeding we might end up winning thanks to our newfound motivation.

This would also promote solo queing HL, because nobody wants to queue with a clearly better player, who jeopardises their chances of getting MVP every single game. Currently, the only way to effectively climb is to always duo queue with someone, who has proven himself worthy to you.

Would also prove that there is indeed a MMR hell if the same person, stuck in a league, keeps getting MVP on a much more frequent basis than others he is matched with. The extra points would help them ascend out of said MMR hell.

In my opinion some kind of a system would soothe and prevent those mental wounds we get from giving it our all and losing due to incompetent teammates/luck of the draw. Would allow good players to slowly climb even with a crappier win rate and bad players, who just get lucky team mates would start slowly sliding backwards into more suited ranks.
08/24/2016 04:53 AMPosted by Mermeoth
I am not against, however how you exactly determine MVP? Numbers are not everything. Medivh is good example why. He can do a lot of important stuff without it being mentioned in statistics.


They already said they have some kind of a complex system, which takes a lot of different factors into account, they gave the impression as if it were fool proof.

Remember some mention about half of it being about stats (they mentioned kill/assist to death ratio) and the other half objective participation/xp/camps/lane presence etc.

So it will hopefully not be based solely on stats.
The whole mvp thing is kinda pointless. Just a big time wasting detraction from jumping into another game so nerds can feel like they dominated, when most likely somebody else was making smarter plays which enabled the "mvp" to get there in the first place.
08/24/2016 05:51 AMPosted by vvhitey
08/24/2016 04:53 AMPosted by Mermeoth
I am not against, however how you exactly determine MVP? Numbers are not everything. Medivh is good example why. He can do a lot of important stuff without it being mentioned in statistics.


They already said they have some kind of a complex system, which takes a lot of different factors into account, they gave the impression as if it were fool proof.

Remember some mention about half of it being about stats (they mentioned kill/assist to death ratio) and the other half objective participation/xp/camps/lane presence etc.

So it will hopefully not be based solely on stats.


They were deceiving you. It is pretty much just Takedowns vs Deaths/Time Spent Dead.
The MVP-system isn`t good enough to do that in my opinion. There are heroes that contribute much, but don`t have high stats.
For example if you are the sololaner and the other lanes are a slaughterfest, your teammate with the least deaths on the other lane will most likely end up as MVP(as you weren`t part of the takedowns).

And the mainproblem by rewarding MVP is incentives:
If you can gain points/loose less as MVP, there will be players that draft/play for this instead of what would be best for the team.
08/24/2016 04:53 AMPosted by Mermeoth
I am not against, however how you exactly determine MVP? Numbers are not everything. Medivh is good example why. He can do a lot of important stuff without it being mentioned in statistics.


Not showing in the showed statistics doesnt mean that you cant calculate it. Pretty much everything can be shown as numbers. For example a complex system could calculate that teammate XY takes a huge amount of damage, enters a portal to escape, gets a shield from you to make sure he escapes. The system would see the huge amount of damage the teammate receives compared to the 0 damage he receives after he used the portal and got a shield from you.

Such things are not easy to calculate but it is possible. And actually you can get MVP with Medivh easily. Depending on the match up you can get top heroe damage, soak a moderate amount of EXP and have a good number of specific role (dmg absorbed and healed).

People need to realize that you dont get MVP for one or two high stats. You get MVP for the overall best stats including everything that Blizzard already takes into account and thats not shown at stat-screen. You can get MVP without the highest heroe damage aslong as you have compareable heroe damage but more objectives, more exp, less deaths and so on.

IMPORTANT PART:
I wouldnt say that every single MVP should get more ranked points and so on. You have to keep in mind that one person will get mvp. This could also mean that everybodys performance was pretty compareable but one person has to be MVP, even though he was just slightly higher.

So I would be more up for a solution like Khaldor mentioned in one of his clips on youtube. Increase OR decrease the MMR and RANKED POINTS a player gets if he totally falls out of line. So feeders would lose their rank faster. Additionally players could lose less points if the system sees that they had an extremely bad teammate which almost made it impossible to win anyway. Why not decrease the amount of points you lose for a game in which you dont have much impact on the outcome anyway ?

The other way around ... if you are MUCH BETTER than your teammates you should benefit from this. Just had a game as Chen top lane on Braxis @ master heroe league. I had 0 deaths the entire game while the rest of my team died directly at level 3-4 (YES - all 4). Than they all died again, and again ... We were like 3-4 levels behind. I kept soaking EXP, I managed to get a few kills, a few ganks in late game, somehow we won an objective, got back into the game and won in lategame. I split the enemys, confused them, got a few more kills with storm earth fire and in the end we won. Remember: me 0 deaths and overall most impact, all teammates 5-6 deaths. All teammates were like "olol thanks for carry Chen!". So far so fine. The problem is just ----> ME and THEM ... we all received pretty much the same amount of ranked points ... even though they totally threw the entire early to midgame and i carried us to lategame kinda solo.

So no, not every MVP should adjust the amount of ranked points you gain but if the difference between players in a team is too big this should end up in adjustments.

And the mainproblem by rewarding MVP is incentives:
If you can gain points/loose less as MVP, there will be players that draft/play for this instead of what would be best for the team.


I realy doubt that. I have above 20% MVP rate right now at Master without even carring about MVP at all. I pick whatever I like and I am pretty sure that I got MVP with pretty much every role played now. Solo lane, non-solo lane, support, assasin, tank, specialist and so on. If you have a good impact in the game, good heroe damage, good minion damage, do camps, do objectives, dont die and so on. If you do all this helpful stuff you will get MVP as long as you are above your teammates with everything taken into account. You realy dont have to be the highest heroe damage, you dont have to be #1 in kills. All you have to do is to be #1 in overall impact which includes pretty much - not everything yet - but much more than just KILL / DEATH / DMG.
10/11/2016 06:10 AMPosted by LowBob
I realy doubt that. I have above 20% MVP rate right now at Master without even carring about MVP at all. I pick whatever I like and I am pretty sure that I got MVP with pretty much every role played now. Solo lane, non-solo lane, support, assasin, tank, specialist and so on. If you have a good impact in the game, good heroe damage, good minion damage, do camps, do objectives, dont die and so on. If you do all this helpful stuff you will get MVP as long as you are above your teammates with everything taken into account. You realy dont have to be the highest heroe damage, you dont have to be #1 in kills. All you have to do is to be #1 in overall impact which includes pretty much - not everything yet - but much more than just KILL / DEATH / DMG.


Yes there is more than K/D + dmg and yes every role has the potential to be MVP (and we both aggree that not every mvp should get extrapoints). What I meant is the mindset of people. Example: If I can die to save 3 teammates that`s good for the team and bad for my chances being MVP. With MVP-rewards you have an incentive to let your people die there.

@Khaldors Idea:
Not bad, but I don`t think that it is that easy. Example @your example: The game would need to check if your teammates weren`t fighting+dying in a 4v5 because you didn`t join them. Checking stuff like that isn`t that easy for a programm if you don`t have infinite processors.
Or there are also heroes with easier escapes, who can leave the team behind on a lost fight and survive. Did they play better? Can`t really tell on a statsbase only.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum