PvE: Progression or Competitive based?

Twysta

'Cause this is coming up so much.
The easiest way to see what the forum community wants!
So would you prefer a progression based PvE system or the current competitive placement system?

Starsaber

I would prefer progression based with both individual and alliance progression rewards.

simonsez

I voted placement, but if the EotS test becomes the norm, placement needs to be killed ASAP.

Crowl

There is room for both placement and progression in pve, but the primary rewards should come from progression and with placement being more about iso, hp and cp than the covers.

ClydeFrog76

PVE - Progression
PVP - Placement

That's the only structure - in any game - that makes sense. Competitive PVE is such a bad idea that it boggles the mind how it got greenlit in the first place.

Pongie

It would be wonderful if the PVE rewards structure were:

- 1 cover colour x as reward for a non repeatable node in the final sub (much like Hulk, Sentry and Antman)
- 1 cover colour y as reward in progression, before/after/replacing 25 command point
- 1 cover colour z as reward for individual placement to Top 100. Top 1-100 placements rewards should differentiate by ISO, HP and command points
- 1 cover colour z as reward for alliance placement to Top 100. Again, top 1-100 placements rewards are differentiated by ISO, HP and command points

TheOncomingStorm

Progression based is more fun and has continually been requested by players.

Unfortunately, instead of trying a pve with progression based rewards, they probably calculate player support of the idea based on gauntlet participation. Because you know honey crisp apples and granny smith apples are practically the same. You know, if you don't count color, taste, texture, price, etc.

TheOncomingStorm

Twysta wrote:

'Cause this is coming up so much.
The easiest way to see what the forum community wants!
So would you prefer a progression based PvE system or the current competitive placement system?

I like your initiative. Unfortunately, players have told mpq repeatedly we want progression rewards. The response has always been mpq knows what players want and what players consider fun.

The bitter truth is mpq is more concerned about austerity (iso and cover distribution) than what players consider fun. Or perhaps a more favorable interpretation is mpq believes fun and limited resources cannot exist without the other.

At least mpq likes polls, so they should also appreciate your effort.

carrion_pigeons

Galactus is progression-based, and my understanding is it's pretty popular.

I continue to think MPQ is essentially an experiment to test how little fun people can have in a game and still call it a game.

St1nkf1st

As much I want to say "progression, of course!" there could be a change to worse as well. In case devs would make the deal removing the placement layer, the events would get most likely significant harder in order to keep Health Pack consumption and to reward strong roosters and time effort. Not everybody should be in position to get the highest prog reward ranks, that's for sure.
I think the matches are already hard enough, current Simulator could be an indicator how it might look like... and I don't enjoy the currents Sim's difficulty level, even though it's nice to fight against fresh teams.

Crowl

St1nkf1st wrote:

As much I want to say "progression, of course!" there could be a change to worse as well. In case devs would make the deal removing the placement layer, the events would get most likely significant harder in order to keep Health Pack consumption and to reward strong roosters and time effort. Not everybody should be in position to get the highest prog reward ranks, that's for sure.
I think the matches are already hard enough, current Simulator could be an indicator how it might look like... and I don't enjoy the currents Sim's difficulty level, even though it's nice to fight against fresh teams.

Indeed, they would almost certainly look at ways to make things tougher rather than looking at the bigger picture that maybe 7 days of playing for several hours a day is actually enough to give people a 1/1/1 character, especially one that would be basically useless for 6 months anyway and at the same time would cost people hp in order to roster.

Taking another marvel mobile game as an example of an alternate approach, in marvel future fight they often release multiple new characters at a time e.g. Miles, Gwen and Silk all came out at once and they had an additional daily login reward that gave you enough bios to get a free Miles. The free character is no more or less usable than a 1/1/1 character in MPQ, but the difference in effort is obviously huge.

kyo28

Definitely progression for me. PVP is already very competitive oriented so when you feel you want to slowly go your own pace, I think it's nice you can go to PVE and gradually gain better rewards as you progress.

SnowcaTT

The problem is I've seen this same poll for almost two years - it always ends up 75% (ish) that would rather have progression - and D3 continues to ignore their user-base on this issue.

This is not the only issue where they ignore their user base, sadly.

Redrobot30

Progression, although if you are consistently hitting the nodes to get optimal points to hit the final progression reward of 25CP and at least grinding the trivial/easy nodes for the Iso rewards you generally end up around top 50 or 100. I think for most people that placement is great. I know getting 2-3 covers to progress my 3* Champions is a pretty nice boost while making that horribly long transition to maxed 3*s.

stowaway

Even as someone who plays PvE competitively more often than not, I vote for a progression-based system. Or as others have suggested a hybrid that gives Iso, HP and CP for placement.

carrion pigeons wrote:

I continue to think MPQ is essentially an experiment to test how little fun people can have in a game and still call it a game.

So true.

Reminator

I'm all for progression. And I also agree that there should be placement rewards for ISO, HP and CP, etc.

It would be cool if they combined this with the new EoTS system. All progression rewards can be obtained if you hit all nodes 6 times. Then afterwards if people want to fight for placement they can grind it out after the 6 times. A nice hybrid system.

Eichen

Look at the name Player vs Event. Now where is there is anything about competing against other people for rewards in there. It isn't; the name itself says it should be progressive.

Slarow

The question that no one advocating for Progression only will answer is this:

New 4*'s are given out to the top 10% of the playerbase via PVE placement. Regular 4*'s are given out to the top 1% of the playerbase via PVE placement. How do you, via progression, ensure that only that small percent of the population gets 4* rewards?

If they make it an extremely high progression reward (unattainable for 90% or 99% of the players), then it will cause people to give up on progression, complaining that it is a complete grindfest. Too low, and they are given out too fast, causing them to have to increase the difficulty next time, angering players.

Placement ensures that the reward distribution stay in check with the playerbase population. You can't do that with progression unless you change the rules after every pve to increase the difficulty, which will only anger players.

And saying "make them attainable by everyone" is a response that shows that you don't understand that the game you are playing is a business and needs to earn money through scarcity. If you want to make a game and give away everything for free then go ahead.

Starsaber

Slarow wrote:

And saying "make them attainable by everyone" is a response that shows that you don't understand that the game you are playing is a business and needs to earn money through scarcity. If you want to make a game and give away everything for free then go ahead.

I don't think anyone saying Progression only is saying to give 13 covers for a 4* in the release event. I think the most I've seen is 3 (like in the Galactus events). That lets everyone get a taste of the character, but they still need to buy/grind for the remaining 10 covers. Injustice mobile does something similar for most of their new character releases

slidecage

SnowcaTT wrote:

The problem is I've seen this same poll for almost two years - it always ends up 75% (ish) that would rather have progression - and D3 continues to ignore their user-base on this issue.

This is not the only issue where they ignore their user base, sadly.

People do not understand PROGREESION PVE WILL NEVER WORK If they ever did PROGRESSION it would probally look like this



3 4 star covers Must score 90% of all pts
2 4 star covers must score 85% of all pts
1 4 star cover must score 80% of all pts
3 3 star covers must score 70%
2 3 star covers must score 60%
1 3 star cover must score 50%
2 star covers must score 35%


if you think LT is insane to get to they would make the 4 star even higher

Starsaber

slidecage wrote:

SnowcaTT wrote:

The problem is I've seen this same poll for almost two years - it always ends up 75% (ish) that would rather have progression - and D3 continues to ignore their user-base on this issue.

This is not the only issue where they ignore their user base, sadly.

People do not understand PROGREESION PVE WILL NEVER WORK If they ever did PROGRESSION it would probally look like this



3 4 star covers Must score 90% of all pts
2 4 star covers must score 85% of all pts
1 4 star cover must score 80% of all pts
3 3 star covers must score 70%
2 3 star covers must score 60%
1 3 star cover must score 50%
2 star covers must score 35%


if you think LT is insane to get to they would make the 4 star even higher

Then they should stop calling competitive events PVE, because they're just a different form of PVP. I'm not saying they wouldn't need to restructure the rewards somewhat (because they would), but I've seen enough other mobile games with true PVE to know that progression only PVE can work and is more fair to everyone involved.