An idea for a new PvE reward structure

tanis3303

Imma put this at the top: TL:DR - what if we played for event currency in PvE, then spent that currency on whatever prizes we actually want/need?

So I've been playing Final Fantasy Record Keeper recently, and one of their current events seems like it would solve a lot of issues here in mpq land...they have a special item you gain by participation in the event (magicite shards) that you then save up and turn in for a large list of available rewards. This seems PERFECT for pve. Play for red ISO or what have you, then turn it in for prizes. Gauntlet style, no competition with the rest of the world, just play as much as you like to get whatever prizes you can.

Something like:
4,000 red ISO - 1 4* cover (professor x, you choose the color) {1 available}
2,000 red ISO - special event ten pack {2 available}
1,500 red ISO - 1 roster slot {1 available}
1,500 red ISO - 1 cover of any color for the featured 3*s {3 total available, 1 for each hero}
800 red ISO - special event token {4 available}
700 red ISO - 200 HP {4 available}
500 red ISO - 2,000 ISO 8 {10 available}
500 red ISO - pack of 3 +all boosts {5 available}
250 red ISO - standard token {20 available}

Then just structure it so that you can't possibly win ALL the prizes in the time the event runs no matter how much you grind, but a reasonable effort throughout the event (think 2x normal top progression maybe?) gets you like 6,000 red ISO. That helps players of all levels, the vets can get the 4* and a roster slot, 3* guys can spec out the events featured characters, newbies can rake in a ton of ISO and tokens to build their roster, everybody wins!

Thoughts? Ideas? Suggestions?

Unknown

I think the vets, the 3* players and the newbies would all get the 4* cover and the roster slot .

A system like that would work better if your performance in PvE was stratified by roster strength where it really isn't. So when everyone with a roster beyond a certain point (maxed 2*s and the featured) and enough time to devote to the game can score a lot of points in PvE (converted to red ISO in your example). So everyone will want the "best" rewards. There is little incentive to take anything over the roster slot or the guaranteed 3*+ covers.

Nice to think of a non-competitive route for PvE, I think a lot of ppl would like that. I just don't think the idea would fit with what D3 want to give away in PvE.... all those 4* covers per PvE would give them an embolism.

tanis3303

You're right, didn't think of why I liked the reward structure in FFRK, just that I liked it. What if we set a fixed difficulty scale then? Make it flat out impossible to earn enough points for the 4* without a deep, developed roster. 395s even for the 2* guys! The reason I like the event in record keeper is because while I realize I'll NEVER earn enough of the magicite to get the good stuff, I can earn enough to get the stuff that actually helps me at my current stage of the game. You need to do the "hard" path of the missions to really rake in the special currency, and I can't even get past the 2nd stage of medium yet. But I can beat easy, and that's getting me lots of tools to progress, so maybe next time I can do better, the equivalent of lots of event tokens and ISO to a 2* player here.

I just think our entire community is completely drained from all the constant grinding and having every available mode be a knock down drag out fight with thousands of other players. I think if a structure like this could be fine tuned to make each player tier feel like they're getting something worth their time it would really help both our sanity and the long term health of the game. Also, choosing your own prizes has a certain satisfaction to it that a locked reward ladder just doesn't offer.

Zen808

I can see this being a win-win for everyone.

-Eliminate personal scaling and rubberbanding. Keep the 8hr refreshes. Now the devs know exactly how many points are available for collection.

-Node strengths increase with each win, basically gating the prizes by roster strength.

-Might need to playtest the prices, to find a happy medium between letting people win good prizes for their needs, and not giving away the farm. For example, my inclination would be that the 4*, the 10pack, and Roster Slot prices probably need to be higher, relative to the others.

But this idea really sounds like it could be great.

Unknown

I'm not going to go full conspiracy theory mode or claim what D3 want or are trying to do with respect to newer and veteran players getting stuff/having fun....

I will just say that having a fixed sliding scale of difficulty in PvE where the best rosters get the best rewards would be better than the current situation for one section of players, and worse for another section. At the moment 2* rosters and evenly, but intentionally underlevelled 3* rosters can get 4* rewards. If you change that then you make another angry collection of players who have had something taken away at the expense of more stuff being given to other people. I don't see them making it better for vets and worse for newer guys in light of the kind of changes they've been making of late.

It's the fundamental problem with all balance changes and mechanics changes in this game. They limit the number of things to be won, so if they keep that same limit and give more stuff to one set of players they HAVE to give less stuff to another set of players. No change can happen in a vacuum because of the rewards model they have in place.

So if you want to change PvE and not upset a bunch of ppl you either have to do something that essentially doesn't change a single thing about how much time/effort and what kind of rosters get the rewards OR you need to persuade D3 to give out more stuff (seems like a long shot either way).

I honestly don't see non-competitive PvE being extended beyond DDQ for that reason unfortunately. Having it be competitive puts a reproducible and absolute ceiling on certain rewards (basically everything barring progression stuff) so it's a safe way for them to control the flow of rewards without relying on them not screwing up expected scores and expected play patterns.