Will anyone get the Black Hulkbuster from round 8?

famousfoxking

arktos1971 wrote:

That's far lower than usual. So in the end, the new PvE system is not as rewarding as the "common" version.

Or, since HBIM is being given out during Enemy of the State the regular way, you could think of it as 40 MORE covers than would normally go out (plus however many of the red and blue covers). If HBIM were only available from Ultron, that would well and truly suck, but I'm not seeing a lot of people taking into consideration the fact that it's available the regular way, through regular PVE PLUS the special Ultron event. My guess is that the Tacos and Best will end up with 7 covers in total, not counting any that individuals pull from tokens.

Vhailorx

famousfoxking wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

That's far lower than usual. So in the end, the new PvE system is not as rewarding as the "common" version.

Or, since HBIM is being given out during Enemy of the State the regular way, you could think of it as 40 MORE covers than would normally go out (plus however many of the red and blue covers). If HBIM were only available from Ultron, that would well and truly suck, but I'm not seeing a lot of people taking into consideration the fact that it's available the regular way, through regular PVE PLUS the special Ultron event. My guess is that the Tacos and Best will end up with 7 covers in total, not counting any that individuals pull from tokens.

I only partially agree with you foxking. It's true that IMHB is being given out in two events. But the amount of grinding necessary to excell at both events is insane: perfect play by all 20 (!!!) members of an alliance for Ultron, and near perfect play in PVE (including end-of-sub grinds) in EOTS for PVE. And those events overlapped for 4 days. That is an awful lot to ask of one's playerbase, especially when a PVP season is also starting at the same time.

Additionally, in a vacuum, I would hope that we can all agree that the final alliance-wide prog reward for this type of cooperative event should not be set so high that only a handful of alliances can reach it. We know that 2 alliances made it. GROOT would have made it but for their incorrect assumptions about the event format (which is an entirely different problem for a different thread). No one else seems to have gotten particularly close. I know that setting aggregate targets can be difficult for the devs, but it appears that they basically picked numbers that required perfect coordination throughout the event. I think that is more than a little bit too high.

TheOncomingStorm

Congratulations to Best and DPT for getting black hb in spite of mpq ' s best effort to make sure no one got it.

I'm just sorry that the price Y'all paid was 4.5 days of misery. It's good to know that is how mpq measured success this weekend.

I'm also sorry for any alliance that never had 20 ppl before this weekend and always been able to compete before.

Lastly, I'm sorry for any 20 person alliance that a player (s) that had a life commitment (s) over a 4.5 day period, so your alliance has zero chance of being successful.

It was definitely a stark contrast for the second run of ultron compared to the first run.

1. The first run was some of the best fun to date on mpq. The second run from over scaling too early to absurd points needed each level felt like one of the most tedious and anti-fun events in a long time.

2. They could write a detailed faq for the first run, but could not give warning of the increased difficulty or answer any player's technical questions for the second run.

Sad, the first run with the problems with players reaching million point progressives and more widespread server issues seems to have been the better event from players' perspective. Now that's saying a lot about the second run.

famousfoxking

Vhailorx wrote:

Additionally, in a vacuum

Oh, I absolutely agree that in a vacuum the round two Ultron difficulty is a problem. In my opinion though, it was kinda an unavoidable problem.

But... Basically, even with their data from Round 1, I don't think there is any way they could have possibly correctly tuned the difficulty for Round 2 (I doubt they even tried, I think the health we saw in Round 2 was the health we were always going to see in Round 2). They had to either err on the side of making it too easy, or too hard (or, I guess getting spectacularly lucky and goldiloxing it, but c'mon, that's not happening). In their position, you ALWAYS err on too hard. You can always run the event again in 6 months and shave a few million health off of the places you want. You can't really run it again and add a bunch. The fallout would be worse than what we're seeing here.

So what to do, what to do? Let people get the covers the regular way as well, even if it means a tinykitty load of grinding. It's basically the only way to rationally run a completely new event like this. Don't get me wrong, I think D3 certainly does some things that are pretty appalling (three new covers in a row, I tried so hard to give them the benefit of the doubt, but that suuuuuuuuuuuuucked), but this isn't one of them.

Polares

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

It was definitely a stark contrast for the second run of ultron compared to the first run.

1. The first run was some of the best fun to date on mpq. The second run from over scaling too early to absurd points needed each level felt like one of the most tedious and anti-fun events in a long time.

2. They could write a detailed faq for the first run, but could not give warning of the increased difficulty or answer any player's technical questions for the second run.

Sad, the first run with the problems with players reaching million point progressives and more widespread server issues seems to have been the better event from players' perspective. Now that's saying a lot about the second run.

I think this summarizes the event. Great first run, even with the problems, disaster of second run. Second run should have been a little bit more difficult, specially the las round, but not that difficult. My Alliance didn't even clear the fith round. I made 1.2M points and I could not win the blue IMHB. This is really sad.

Unknown

Well its certain that the Developers/Coders are either one of two things.

Hypocritical

or

Don't plan well


could it be both?

The event actually had decent pacing if you knew that round 8 would be the difference between doing several nodes every few hours or setting your alarm clock to do each node within seconds and possibly ignore other events AND buy health packs and boosts to deal with the broken goons.

Its actually much closer to a good system if you ignore the fact that it was the exact same thing repeated over and over for 4.5 days (boring?) and no story at all (boring?)

Another half hearted attempt at making something good without the necessary micromanagement on the design end to make a great event.

Kudos for the refreshed nodes actually giving awards at least - and decent ones at that

JVReal

LoreNYC wrote:

Kudos for the refreshed nodes actually giving awards at least - and decent ones at that

Giving rewards... but 0 points.

Colognoisseur

First I wasn't miserable I had a blast working with my teammates trying to figure out if we could do it at all.

As for the repetition I only know I was rotating through very different teams depending on the essential character. I also really liked the sentries as enemies. Took me a couple rounds to get the hang of them but once I did there was a purposeful strategy to each wave that got me through. Compare that to grinding down another set of morale boosts, rockets, pistols, threaten tiles and backroom deals. That's misery. I'm playing EotS but my heart is just not in it because I got my new covers through Ultron.
I like the concurrent PvE and Ultron for a new 4* though. It allows for a player to choose an individual or team route or if truly dedicated go for both. You want Hulkbuster covers there are many ways to get them and that is a very good thing.



Yes there were issues with the first two runs but that has been the norm with almost every new thing they've tried. Those who remember the global life meters to open up nodes on PvE know how poorly they estimate what players will do. Since I know how much they dearly love metrics and now that they have two events worth I think they can tune this to a more appropriate level in the future. If this isn't better run for the third run I'll be very surprised.

JVReal

Colognoisseur wrote:

First I wasn't miserable I had a blast working with my teammates trying to figure out if we could do it at all.

As for the repetition I only know I was rotating through very different teams depending on the essential character. I also really liked the sentries as enemies. Took me a couple rounds to get the hang of them but once I did there was a purposeful strategy to each wave that got me through. Compare that to grinding down another set of morale boosts, rockets, pistols, threaten tiles and backroom deals. That's misery. I'm playing EotS but my heart is just not in it because I got my new covers through Ultron.
I like the concurrent PvE and Ultron for a new 4* though. It allows for a player to choose an individual or team route or if truly dedicated go for both. You want Hulkbuster covers there are many ways to get them and that is a very good thing.



Yes there were issues with the first two runs but that has been the norm with almost every new thing they've tried. Those who remember the global life meters to open up nodes on PvE know how poorly they estimate what players will do. Since I know how much they dearly love metrics and now that they have two events worth I think they can tune this to a more appropriate level in the future. If this isn't better run for the third run I'll be very surprised.

I agree with that. I didn't look at it as which event do I WANT to do, group or individual... it comes across to me as which one CAN I do?

I have faith that the third attempt will be better balanced, and it starts at 12PM EST... J/k...

Pylgrim

arktos1971 wrote:

That's far lower than usual. So in the end, the new PvE system is not as rewarding as the "common" version.

Agreed. For the comparatively minuscule amount of players that would normally top 5 in a "normal" 4* rewarding PVE, this event was not as rewarding. For almost everybody else, this event was much, much, much more rewarding.

Vhailorx wrote:

I only partially agree with you foxking. It's true that IMHB is being given out in two events. But the amount of grinding necessary to excell at both events is insane: perfect play by all 20 (!!!) members of an alliance for Ultron, and near perfect play in PVE (including end-of-sub grinds) in EOTS for PVE. And those events overlapped for 4 days. That is an awful lot to ask of one's playerbase, especially when a PVP season is also starting at the same time.

And yet I (and you too, likely) will walk away from these combined events with a 1/1/2 IMHB as opposed to the 0/0/2 we'd have got from a single old-style PVE alone. Could we have gotten yet another cover? Yep. In fact, we could have another 10 covers and hope that they gave it away after a single round of Ultron, but that's not how games work.

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

1. The first run was some of the best fun to date on mpq. The second run from over scaling too early to absurd points needed each level felt like one of the most tedious and anti-fun events in a long time.

It's almost as though the second event was awarding rewards that were twice as valuable as the first event! Like, you know, the difference between a 3*-awarding "normal" PVE and a 4* one. Ooh wait a minute.

LoreNYC wrote:

Congratulations to Best and DPT for getting black hb in spite of mpq ' s best effort to make sure no one got it.

Yeah, too bad that their diabolical plan of depriving the MPQ populace of IMHB's black covers went bust when someone done goof'd and made black the bottom/alliance reward in the next PVE.

Another half hearted attempt at making something good without the necessary micromanagement on the design end to make a great event.

Yep, I'm sure that the whole event was programmed in one lazy half-afternoon in between a week of bathing in the money they steal from us with their Machiavellian tactics as opposed to a frantic string of 12+ hour days (as hinted by devs answering questions at 9 pm). The second run of the event mean basically a vacation week on top of that. Pretty sure that if they had sacrificed the other half of the afternoon in micro-management, all issues would be ironed. "Issues" apparently being not everybody and their grandmas getting all rewards in the event.


EDIT: Do I think that the last cover in that event was too hard too achieve? Yes I do think so, but not by much. It was always supposed to be something that only the most dedicated alliances would get. They missed the target by a comparatively little in the first 4* launch made this way. On the other hand, everybody else that normally couldn't aspire at getting ALL the rewards of an event got a much, much better result that they would normally do. So I believe that this is a positive development and a net positive outcome.

Vhailorx

Pylgrim,

I think you are right to point out the context of these ultron reward events relative to the "normal" reward structure.

But I don't think that argument alone is sufficient because the "normal" reward structure is completely arbitrary itself.

I could use the same argument to suggest that we players should happily accept a single 2* cover as the top 1 placement award for all pve events moving forward "because the devs don't HAVE to give out any rewards at all and that's not how how games work." that is an obviously absurd argument, but it uses the same logic that you are employing here: ie be happy with what you got because it's better than what the devs could have done instead. The same is true with respect to the relative value of 3* and 4* covers. By the devs own statement, 4*s are supposed to offer 166% of the value of 3*s, but they cost 200% as much and are more than 200% harder to acquire. The pricing model is silly and we shouldn't just accept it because it is the way it is.

It's great that we will end up with better 4* rewards from these two events combined than we might have gotten from a Single event (though we have also had to put in a an awful lot of work to get there). That is a different discussion than how difficult the rewards are to achieve in any particular event.

But from your last edit, it sounds like we basically agree. Ultron 2 was too hard, and the devs probably could have offered better communication about the difficulty increase, but it's not the end of the world. You just have a more of a glass is half full attitude about it!

TheOncomingStorm

Pylgrim wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

That's far lower than usual. So in the end, the new PvE system is not as rewarding as the "common" version.

Agreed. For the comparatively minuscule amount of players that would normally top 5 in a "normal" 4* rewarding PVE, this event was not as rewarding. For almost everybody else, this event was much, much, much more rewarding.

Vhailorx wrote:

I only partially agree with you foxking. It's true that IMHB is being given out in two events. But the amount of grinding necessary to excell at both events is insane: perfect play by all 20 (!!!) members of an alliance for Ultron, and near perfect play in PVE (including end-of-sub grinds) in EOTS for PVE. And those events overlapped for 4 days. That is an awful lot to ask of one's playerbase, especially when a PVP season is also starting at the same time.

And yet I (and you too, likely) will walk away from these combined events with a 1/1/2 IMHB as opposed to the 0/0/2 we'd have got from a single old-style PVE alone. Could we have gotten yet another cover? Yep. In fact, we could have another 10 covers and hope that they gave it away after a single round of Ultron, but that's not how games work.

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

1. The first run was some of the best fun to date on mpq. The second run from over scaling too early to absurd points needed each level felt like one of the most tedious and anti-fun events in a long time.

It's almost as though the second event was awarding rewards that were twice as valuable as the first event! Like, you know, the difference between a 3*-awarding "normal" PVE and a 4* one. Ooh wait a minute.

LoreNYC wrote:

Congratulations to Best and DPT for getting black hb in spite of mpq ' s best effort to make sure no one got it.

Yeah, too bad that their diabolical plan of depriving the MPQ populace of IMHB's black covers went bust when someone done goof'd and made black the bottom/alliance reward in the next PVE.

Another half hearted attempt at making something good without the necessary micromanagement on the design end to make a great event.

Yep, I'm sure that the whole event was programmed in one lazy half-afternoon in between a week of bathing in the money they steal from us with their Machiavellian tactics as opposed to a frantic string of 12+ hour days (as hinted by devs answering questions at 9 pm). The second run of the event mean basically a vacation week on top of that. Pretty sure that if they had sacrificed the other half of the afternoon in micro-management, all issues would be ironed. "Issues" apparently being not everybody and their grandmas getting all rewards in the event.


EDIT: Do I think that the last cover in that event was too hard too achieve? Yes I do think so, but not by much. It was always supposed to be something that only the most dedicated alliances would get. They missed the target by a comparatively little in the first 4* launch made this way. On the other hand, everybody else that normally couldn't aspire at getting ALL the rewards of an event got a much, much better result that they would normally do. So I believe that this is a positive development and a net positive outcome.

I see what you did there, but you're missing the point. The problem is not that the second run was harder, it was insanity
People that earn 4*s in pve and pvp will tell you it's hard, but this was poorly designed. Basically, it's like saying all 20 alliance ppl grind heroic pve to all 1's. No one is going to convince me theoretically this 2nd run was reasonably designed. In fact, with the info given and not given, I'd argue players are set up to fail. Don't believe me, ask We Are Groot or The X men. I feel extremely fortunate as a player base that two of our alliances made it.

Unknown

So, are we in agreeance it wasn't impossible ?

All in all, even if missing the Hulk covers, it felt enjoyable as an event... for me in a casual, laid-back alliance. We threw our best at it, and were happy with getting things when we got them. Aside for the ending of the first event kerfuffle, I felt no big worry (due to work, I could not play at the start, so the starting kerfuffle did not worry me, but I do understand why it would bother others).

TheOncomingStorm

Jester Day wrote:

So, are we in agreeance it wasn't impossible ?

All in all, even if missing the Hulk covers, it felt enjoyable as an event... for me in a casual, laid-back alliance. We threw our best at it, and were happy with getting things when we got them. Aside for the ending of the first event kerfuffle, I felt no big worry (due to work, I could not play at the start, so the starting kerfuffle did not worry me, but I do understand why it would bother others).

But was that by purpose or accident? You say tomatoe, I say tomatah.

famousfoxking

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

I'd argue players are set up to fail.

Why would they do that, though? I keep seeing people attributing malice to the devs, but if they were setting up the players to fail, why make HBIM available during regular PVE? Why give 6 3* covers over two events for progression alone? Why make the Ultron Tokens so good, and so cheap? They failed me right into three HBIM covers, and two new 3*s over half-covered. Those wicked, wicked devs!

"Moo hoo ha ha ha, we, the evil D3 will punish the entire player base by making this one event slightly too hard, and giving away a ton of stuff at the same time!"