Cyclops reward mistake

2

Comments

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    If you went back to how things used to be, with the alliance prize the same as the top 5 prize, this would upset people a lot less and make for the most even distribution. I never understood why that change was made to begin with, because it made the order the prizes were awarded in that much more important.
  • mjh
    mjh Posts: 708 Critical Contributor
    Ben Grimm wrote:
    If you went back to how things used to be, with the alliance prize the same as the top 5 prize, this would upset people a lot less and make for the most even distribution. I never understood why that change was made to begin with, because it made the order the prizes were awarded in that much more important.
    I agree however I believe they made the change because too many people complained they couldn't be in a t100 alliance so it was unfair. 2 sides of the same coin kind of.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    mjh wrote:
    I agree however I believe they made the change because too many people complained they couldn't be in a t100 alliance so it was unfair. 2 sides of the same coin kind of.
    No, they made the change to encourage people to try for top tier rank, in order to get the cover they wouldn't otherwise get as an alliance award.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Demiurge_Miles wrote:
    Hey guys, I know this isn't going to be a popular answer, but the rewards for Lethal Intent are not a mistake. We use a random number generator when determining the order of covers for PVE and PVP rewards to ensure there's no favoritism for particular covers. As such any given cover has a 1/3 chance of being the top cover, and a 1/9 chance of being the top cover twice in a row. It hasn't happened in a while, but it does happen.

    This makes me a sad panda. I get using a RNG on the first appearance of the cover, but after that a rotation would also ensure no favoritism and better distribute colors. Relying on RNG for all appearances of rewards just invites chaos. I know I'm in Chaos Leauge, but still, too much chaos is not good.

    This does explain the 3 times in a row Black Hulk top 5 rewards tho. Turns out it's not D3 that hates us, its the RNG gods. That is a hate I can wrap myself in like a comfy blanket. The RNG gods have hated me since I first picked up a d20.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    While I get and agree with the arguments against a perpetual RNG, I am okay with your logic to go that route. However, it would at least be helpful if the top tier award for PvE was the progression award for the next event, rather than a new RNG. The fact that someone who finishes second tier in both events will exit with a 0/2/5 or 0/3/4 Cyclops (can't remember which was PvE alliance reward) is bonkers
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    simonsez wrote:
    mjh wrote:
    I agree however I believe they made the change because too many people complained they couldn't be in a t100 alliance so it was unfair. 2 sides of the same coin kind of.
    No, they made the change to encourage people to try for top tier rank, in order to get the cover they wouldn't otherwise get as an alliance award.

    Ironically, it made me essentially abandon trying for top 5 for all eternity, and I'm contemplating abandoning trying for top 25.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Demiurge_Miles wrote:
    Hey guys, I know this isn't going to be a popular answer, but the rewards for Lethal Intent are not a mistake. We use a random number generator when determining the order of covers for PVE and PVP rewards to ensure there's no favoritism for particular covers. As such any given cover has a 1/3 chance of being the top cover, and a 1/9 chance of being the top cover twice in a row. It hasn't happened in a while, but it does happen.

    Not a popular answer, not at all.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Ben Grimm wrote:
    If you went back to how things used to be, with the alliance prize the same as the top 5 prize, this would upset people a lot less and make for the most even distribution. I never understood why that change was made to begin with, because it made the order the prizes were awarded in that much more important.

    I had totally forgot about this. This 100% correct. Moreover, this is probably the change that they've made that I did not understand just totally had scorn for.

    I do not say this often, but changing the alliance from being the same as the t5 individual has not been beneficial to the playerbase.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    simonsez wrote:
    mjh wrote:
    I agree however I believe they made the change because too many people complained they couldn't be in a t100 alliance so it was unfair. 2 sides of the same coin kind of.
    No, they made the change to encourage people to try for top tier rank, in order to get the cover they wouldn't otherwise get as an alliance award.
    I agree with this. Also, I think they mentioned something about too many people alliance jumping in order to get the cover. If you can only get the rare cover through ranking, it decreases the number of people alliance jumping.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    daibar wrote:
    simonsez wrote:
    mjh wrote:
    I agree however I believe they made the change because too many people complained they couldn't be in a t100 alliance so it was unfair. 2 sides of the same coin kind of.
    No, they made the change to encourage people to try for top tier rank, in order to get the cover they wouldn't otherwise get as an alliance award.
    I agree with this. Also, I think they mentioned something about too many people alliance jumping in order to get the cover. If you can only get the rare cover through ranking, it decreases the number of people alliance jumping.

    The only problem with that statement is the 4* PVE rewards for t50 Alliances cause more jumping that the PVP rewards ever did.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    4* PvE happens once a month, PvPs happen every 2 days. I'm not sure they care (or can even stop) the alliance shuffle for the 4* rewards, since it's so infrequent.

    Progression rewards for PvP are on a fixed rotation, at the 4* level. Last several tournaments we have been able to predict correctly the next 1000 reward. So clearly there are some rewards that are fixed. Top 20 reward being next PvE progression reward makes a lot of sense. The RNG placement awards I kinda get, but progression rewards, at a minimum, should follow a schedule instead of random.
  • Trisul
    Trisul Posts: 887 Critical Contributor
    Playing devil's advocate here, but I wonder if they went with the RNG determination of covers due to financial reasons, much like how they reduced token odds and ended up making more money via token sales.
    mjh wrote:
    Wow. Just wow.

    D3 does something amazing, Deadpool Daily Quest.

    But it's awesomeness is shadowed by the fact of how covers are rewarded (or not rewarded).

    RNG in itself is not a bad idea to start with, as previously mentioned. But after the first RNG it should rotate on a set schedule. I really have to question product management here.
    To be fair, they didn't change anything, just clarified how it already was working. Disappointing yes, but, not nearly enough to offset the general positivity of DDQ.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Lerysh wrote:
    4* PvE happens once a month, PvPs happen every 2 days. I'm not sure they care (or can even stop) the alliance shuffle for the 4* rewards, since it's so infrequent.

    Progression rewards for PvP are on a fixed rotation, at the 4* level. Last several tournaments we have been able to predict correctly the next 1000 reward. So clearly there are some rewards that are fixed. Top 20 reward being next PvE progression reward makes a lot of sense. The RNG placement awards I kinda get, but progression rewards, at a minimum, should follow a schedule instead of random.

    The shuffling is not bad. The turmoil and hurt feelings that they cause are.

    The T100 PVP swapping was also before 20 person alliances for just ISO.

    As always, if want to get rid of swapping, there is always the Smart Scoring system.
  • Pylgrim
    Pylgrim Posts: 2,332 Chairperson of the Boards
    Demiurge_Miles wrote:
    Hey guys, I know this isn't going to be a popular answer, but the rewards for Lethal Intent are not a mistake. We use a random number generator when determining the order of covers for PVE and PVP rewards to ensure there's no favoritism for particular covers. As such any given cover has a 1/3 chance of being the top cover, and a 1/9 chance of being the top cover twice in a row. It hasn't happened in a while, but it does happen.

    First time I have downvoted one of your posts Miles. That's a terrible method. Maybe it's ok for the very first time covers of a character are given away, but afterwards they should be rotated accordingly. That way there will be guarantee of NO repeating and NO favouritism. And you are sadly incorrect; it happens very frequently. It's been the case recently with Magneto, Mystique and R&G, and now, Cyclops. How do I know it? Simple, because for those characters I have 5 covers of one colour (with the 5th being acquired in their latest PVP and the alliance reward one going to waste) while the other colours have 2, 1 or 0 covers.
  • Chirus
    Chirus Posts: 191 Tile Toppler
    When PVE has normal (non-new release) covers as the primary featured toon, does that toon also feature in PVP as well? I haven't been paying attention. For instance Hood will be the next event's essential toon. Would Hood also be expected to feature in PVP as well around the time of next PVE event?

    Reason I'm asking, I want to know if the color pattern a lot of people have been expecting as far as tiered rewards applied to both old and new heroes.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    It usually does. Allows someone to earn a cover to complete essential nodes in PvP if they missed it in PvE. The exception, obviously, is 4*s who don't get handed out for placement in PvP beyond 1st.

    It typically happens at the half marker, like this Gamora PvP handing out Cyclops.
  • mjh
    mjh Posts: 708 Critical Contributor
    It's still not too late to change the rewards. I've seen it done before, you can do it now.

    Show that you care, fix this.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Disappointing. After good move in daily PVE another bad move.....

    For a new character to be usable the dev should delivery every types of cover farily to the majority but not some color limited to the top guys... especially 3*

    I dont think lots of player will use him. the majority will get 1 yellowflag.png 1 blackflag.png in PVE , 1 blackflag.png from progressing and 2 blackflag.png from PVP and no redflag.png red? so will you use or give a chance to a new character without 1 color? he is just wasted a slot for majority.

    It is not encouragement to PVP but a wall to limit diversity . Yes encourage to fight top 5 for 10 players? 20 players? but discourage those want to fight top 50 top 100....

    what a mess...
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Good lord. This makes no sense. I guess that's why the rewards never seem to be what they should be. I guess that's why the easy reward always seems to be one that I have maxed. I thought D3 was purposefully trying to shaft me. RNG is probably the dumbest way I could think to distribute them. Just rotate them so people can actually get one of every color.

    After all these cyclops rewards there is a good chance that most people will be sitting without a red and no way of telling how long it will take to get a red.

    This is very disappointing.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Just fix this. Please. It's not too late.

Categories