The "new" pve

cardoor

slidecage wrote:

cardoor wrote:

Skygazing wrote:

HossDrone wrote:

Was much better than the old system which they re-implemented.

Does anybody know if they are going to bring it back or was it just too successful, too many people hitting Max progression for stingy af d3 to use it.

I actually enjoyed the scaling going up. I enjoyed that I could play when I could, ya know being a working adult with a wife and puppygirl. I made max progression for the first time in a long time and reaching IT ACTUALLY FELT GOOD and not like it was a consolation prize.

I really shouldn't be surprised though. If it makes the players happy then d3 has to take it away.

...

I enjoyed playing when I could. Which you can do with the current system. What many people don't seem to realize is that if all you're after is max progression, the recharge timer is an illusion. To give you an example, I didn't really want to play this past heroic at all, but with maybe two full clears each for the first two subs and hitting the easy nodes before the end, and then 3 clears and grinding the essentials and easy nodes on the final sub, I was able to hit progression pretty painlessly. You can play when you want with the current system and still very easily hit progression.

...

That is only one scenario; overall not being on a timer is better. Without a timer you have the flexibility to play casually or competitively even if you do not plan your day around MPQ. You could start casually and then 12 hours later decide you want to compete without having missed the first round of clears. In the new system your schedule does not revolve around MPQ's every 8 hours.

If you want to make a point about max progression, fine, but stop trying to convince people to keep the timer. A lack of a timer on each sub is an improvement!

maybe a lack of timer is Good for you but not all... most dont have 3 hours to play at the start of a nod then 2 hours at the end

By "not all" you mean the top two players in a slice. Everyone else will be able to get as high as top ten without maximizing the timer that way and just using the points available after 6 clears.

Vhailorx

Cardoor,

Here is why I think your argument about the timer is wrong.

(1) there IS still a timer, it's just buried behind 6 full clears. There is still a time based mechanism that dictates the optimal playing pattern. Its just a different pattern. Now you clear everything 6x asap, and the grind everything down at the end of each node (and then start the whole process over again immediately!)

2) because of no. 1 above your hypothetical about starting out casually and then switching to hardcore play halfway through won't work. There is still 1 optimal way to play. For hardcore, it's play that way or else.

3) for the truly casual players, this system offers no improvement in placement. Sure, you aren't penalized by a timer. But neither is anyone else, and placement is about playing more/better than other people. If people in the sweet spot for the scaling changes did better in these events, it likely wasn't because the system is easier; it's because the rewards were uninspired and the changes were irritating, so the top players didn't play as much, making placement easier. And the easy prog rewards in unstable iso-8 [edited because I had the wrong event name her at first] were because of the rubberbanding mistake. The rewards were intended to be harder to get (even if it's not clear how much harder). The same people will still grind like mad in character release events and fill up the top slots, so placement will be just as hard as ever.

4) ALL of the "soft" factors that affect the fun of playing are much worse for players (higher base scaling, higher level jumps after each win, higher prog rewards, and no trivial nodes).

The "removal" of the timer is just a smoke screen. Its a superficial improvement to distract us from a bunch of negative changes.

Don't interpret this as a defense of the timer. I don't like competitive pve. I just recognize that this new system is not better than the old one for players.

cardoor

Vhailorx wrote:

Cardoor,

Here is why I think your argument about the timer is wrong.

(1) there IS still a timer, it's just buried behind 6 full clears. There is still a time based mechanism that dictates the optimal playing pattern. Its just a different pattern. Now you clear everything 6x asap, and the grind everything down at the end of each node (and then start the whole process over again immediately!)

2) because of no. 1 above your hypothetical about starting out casually and then switching to hardcore play halfway through won't work. There is still 1 optimal way to play. For hardcore, it's play that way or else.

3) for the truly casual players, this system offers no improvement in placement. Sure, you aren't penalized by a timer. But neither is anyone else, and placement is about playing more/better than other people. If people in the sweet spot for the scaling changes did better in these events, it likely wasn't because the system is easier; it's because the rewards were uninspired and the changes were irritating, so the top players didn't play as much, making placement easier. And the easy prog rewards in iso-8 brotherhood were because of the rubberbanding mistake. The rewards were intended to be harder to get (even if it's not clear how much harder). The same people will still grind like mad in character release events and fill up the top slots, so placement will be just as hard as ever.

4) ALL of the "soft" factors that affect the fun of playing are much worse for players (higher base scaling, higher level jumps after each win, higher prog rewards, and no trivial nodes).

The "removal" of the timer is just a smoke screen. Its a superficial improvement to distract us from a bunch of negative changes.

Don't interpret this as a defense of the timer. I don't like competitive pve. I just recognize that this new system is not better than the old one for players.

The real world results of your first and second points, are probably where we disagree.

As I said in a different thread, just by farming ISO I came in 14th in my slice (which was a little over double progression). I was 6k behind 10th. If I was actually competing that 6k is all I would have needed to add to my score over 4 days (16k if I wanted first). After 7 clears there was way more than 16k available over those 3 subs. So if anyone actually did clear 6x as soon as the sub started, they didn't need to.

I have no problem with people wanting to adjust scaling, add trivial nodes or keep progression at its current effort level. The timer might be an issue for the two people who will actually practice their theory, but in the real world most events will be won by using points available in the back-end of the subs (even when the 6th clear is not optimal).

Vhailorx

Cardoor: placement results are meaningless in a test event where lots of vets didnt play because they didn't like the new scoring system AND the rewards were colossus and TA Hulk. Hard to conceive of a less enticing event. Of course modest grinding was enough to let you place well.

Placement will be just as competitive as ever when the rewards are tempting again.

Also, the rubberbanding mistake means it's basically impossible to judge the prog rewards scores for the second test event. There's no way to tell how difficult they were intended to be.

cardoor

Vhailorx wrote:

Cardoor: placement results are meaningless in a test event where lots of vets didnt play because they didn't like the new scoring system AND the rewards were colossus and TA Hulk. Hard to conceive of a less enticing event. Of course modest grinding was enough to let you place well.

Placement will be just as competitive as ever when the rewards are tempting again.

The effort required is going to be the same for all events relatively (the more competitive the event, the more effort that will be required). The real difference is that instead of being out of the running for a Howard cover because I could not play this morning, it would not have mattered if the new system was in place. It is safer to say I can find time in a 24 hour period to play more easily than in 8hr increments.

cardoor

OJSP wrote:

cardoor wrote:

As I said in a different thread, just by farming ISO I came in 14th in my slice (which was a little over double progression). I was 6k behind 10th. If I was actually competing that 6k is all I would have needed to add to my score over 4 days (16k if I wanted first). After 7 clears there was way more than 16k available over those 3 subs. So if anyone actually did clear 6x as soon as the sub started, they didn't need to.

I have no problem with people wanting to adjust scaling, add trivial nodes or keep progression at its current effort level. The timer might be an issue for the two people who will actually practice their theory, but in the real world most events will be won by using points available in the back-end of the subs (even when the 6th clear is not optimal).

Again, I wouldn't consider any result out of the test in Unstable Iso-8 useful..

I think, the reason that your top 14 could get more than 66k by playing casually was the rubber banding.

The reason that no one needed to do 6 clears immediately was because the reward wasn't worth competing for.

Let's say for example, the top 10 rewards are Jean Grey covers:
1. There would probably be more than 10 people wanting those rewards, including players from top alliances who want to increase the levels of their champions.
2. On average, there are probably about 10-20 early grinders in each bracket who did the 2nd clear immediately after the 1st (like in my current bracket during The Hunt), probably about 20 more who do the 2nd clear 6-7 hours after the 1st clear, and some play in between. With the tested system, there's no way to know if any of these 40-50 players were grinding because they wanted the top10 rewards or simply because they don't have any time to play later on during the event.
3. So, everyone who wants to get that top10 rewards would probably have to consider clearing all the nodes 6 times at the beginning of each sub.
4. As the end result, players who usually gets a top50 placement will probably only get a top100 placement (everyone in the bracket would need to play harder to get their usual placement).
5. In your bracket, your top 14 would've been filled by a few different players (maybe all different). The top 2 would play as much as they could to prevent the top 5 from chasing them. The top 5 would do the same to prevent the top 10 from chasing them. Top 10 would try to prevent the top 20, so on and so forth. Some would be limited by their health packs and some wouldn't (if they buy health packs or they've got a really strong roster). Even if you say you only needed 16k more to get 1st place, that person in 1st place already has the advantage of being faster than everyone else in that bracket from the start. It's unlikely for anyone else to be able to overtake them (unless they ran out of health packs, didn't have time to play at the end of the event because of unforeseen circumstances or had internet connection/server problems). The reason I said that is because it usually takes planning to aim for top 10 and a good execution to actually get top 10 (unless we snipe a fresh bracket near/right at the end of the event).

You mentioned "two people who will actually practice this theory", I can say there were more than 2 in my bracket who played this way: for .. 'nuff said

I wasn't playing casually but also was not playing for the top spot. I still had to do 7 clears to farm everything. What I am saying is that after the 7 clears there were still enough points left to compete. Over three subs that means I would have needed a little over 5K more each time, which was very doable and would have been keeping up with the pace of the frontrunner.

cardoor

OJSP wrote:

cardoor wrote:

It is safer to say I can find time in a 24 hour period to play more easily than in 8hr increments.

So do the other 1000 players in your bracket, making it more unlikely for anyone who don't actually clear each nodes 6 times at the beginning to place well.

Anyway, look, I'm happy the test worked out better for you and everyone else who felt that way.

The only way to be absolutely certain about how it would turn out for a new character release event, is to test it on such event. But, as I said in the very first feedback that I posted in the EotS thread: If any developer is reading this, even if we need further data, please don't!

Having most of the 1000 placements determined by effort vs timing is an improvement I think. Not perfect, but an improvement.

Eddiemon

Skygazing wrote:

Too many people hit progression which isn't what D3 wants. This past test lowered progression beyond even the usual PvE standards. If this was the case in the current system it would be easier as well. In other words this has nothing to do with the new system.

Actually it didn't. They left rubberbanding turned on which meant we scored far far better than we should have. They got no reliable progression data from this test.

I actually enjoyed scaling going up. Why? You realize that with levels jumping in increments of 10-15 each time that you end up with way higher levels than the present system right? You want to fight harder for the same rewards? (More on this in a second)

Sure. Because everyone else had to as well, and some of them couldn't and gave up. It gave my balanced roster a massive advantage over people who had been deliberately underlevelling their characters to rig the old system.

I enjoyed playing when I could. Which you can do with the current system. What many people don't seem to realize is that if all you're after is max progression, the recharge timer is an illusion. To give you an example, I didn't really want to play this past heroic at all, but with maybe two full clears each for the first two subs and hitting the easy nodes before the end, and then 3 clears and grinding the essentials and easy nodes on the final sub, I was able to hit progression pretty painlessly. You can play when you want with the current system and still very easily hit progression.

No you can't. It was painless because you did full clears every 8 hours and then ground at the end. But you have to do the full clears every 8 hours to get 200% of the full clear amount and then hit some extra nodes at the end to hit progression. If 2 hours into the sub I clear every node 5 times I am not making the progression target at the end. That's what 'playing when I want' means.

Progression felt good and not like a consolation prize. Progression is a consolation prize by default, no matter the system. I don't know why this last time made you feel like it wasn't, because I doubt that hitting progression earned you that high of a placement.

I got nothing here. I normally only play for progression anyhow, and seeing as I can't do the 8 hour dance unless it's a weekend I generally can't even make a run at that.

If it makes players feel good, D3 has to take it away. D3 can be out of touch with the player-base, but by and large has implemented a lot of very well-received changes. Removal of 20 iso rewards, addition of DPD, increased token odds, removal of the 3* vault, addition of the vault reward system, increased PvE recharge from 3 hours to 8 hours, standardized PvE, nerf of Galactus/Ultron, and even more. Comparatively there are very few things that D3 has "taken away" from the playerbase. In fact all I can really think of is the removal of HP-purchased covers, double ISO, and "premium" PvP.

Yeah people forget the good stuff and focus on the bad which is sad, but it's human nature.

I should also note that by and large the reaction to this new form of PvE is highly negative and you are one of the few that seems to want it to stick around.

I disagree. There have been plenty who enjoyed it but those who dislike it are shoutier. Plus this forum tends to attract 'elites' who turn it into an echo chamber for their views. The people who are most vehemently against the new system are those who placed well in the old system - they could revolve their lives around the 8 hour schedule and it gave them a distinct advantage over those whose lives precluded that level of commitment.

Now I am not saying that everyone against the new system is in that camp, they just appear to be the loudest. And this forum is comprised of more top 10 finisher players than casual players. So while D3 may read what is said on here, where they really look is at the play statistics over the total population. What we say isn't necessarily trivial, but if someone is yelling that they are quitting the game while playing an extra 20 minutes per day, which is D3 going to weigh more heavily.

'Everyone' quit when Rag was nerfed. And again when Wolverine was nerfed. And when Loki was nerfed. And when Thor was nerfed. And yet there are still multitudes playing.

There is constant complaining about how 5* draws are totally unfair, and yet I have seen some of the megawhale rosters and I know they are listening more to the dollars coming in than the griping on here. Which is how it should be if we want the game to continue. They are listening more to teh behaviours than the anonymous ranting on an internet forum.

Vhailorx

cardoor wrote:

OJSP wrote:

cardoor wrote:

It is safer to say I can find time in a 24 hour period to play more easily than in 8hr increments.

So do the other 1000 players in your bracket, making it more unlikely for anyone who don't actually clear each nodes 6 times at the beginning to place well.

Anyway, look, I'm happy the test worked out better for you and everyone else who felt that way.

The only way to be absolutely certain about how it would turn out for a new character release event, is to test it on such event. But, as I said in the very first feedback that I posted in the EotS thread: If any developer is reading this, even if we need further data, please don't!

Having most of the 1000 placements determined by effort vs timing is an improvement I think. Not perfect, but an improvement.

You think placement is currently determined by timing and not effort? That might be true at the very very top, when optimal grinding and speed are the most important factors
But for everyone else, placement is just a matter of who is willing/able to play that extra match. That is the same in both systems.

And if you played 7 straight grinds at the beginning of every sub under the old system you would definitely place top 100, probably top 50. Other than a psychological comfort from not "leaving points on the table" with un-optimum play, I don't see any advantage to the new system.

Eddiemon:

In heroic venom I joined my slice 2 hours before the first sub ended. I did about 1.5 full clears. I did 3 optimal clears in the second sub and ground for the cp. I then did 2 optimal clears in the third sub and ground at the end to hit the final prog. I stopped playing immediately after getting the 25cp. I ended up finishing 49th. I did not play for the last hour+, and I never hit any node more than 4 or 5 times. How did the timer hurt me? I cleared optimally when possible and ignored it when necessary. Hitting the top prog reward definitely requires 1.5-2 hours a day of playing, minimum. But if you are willing to play the game that much, you could get significant rewards from one whether or not you cared about the optimal schedule. With the new system, playing that many matches have gotten me the final prog (if it was set lower than in the word test), but it would have taken longer with the higher scaling and lack of easy nodes.

If "playing when you want" means waiting 2 hours in to a sub, and then clearing 5 steaght times in order to get the prog rewards, then I have good news for you. You can do that now under the old system!

And while people did threaten to quit when xfw was nerfed, few people threatened to quit when rags was nerfed the last time (and given his **** third power). Unless you mean back when he was nerfed the first right after launch. There may have been a shitstorm then, but who cares: he had a 2ap power that started a winfinite chain. He was stupidly broken and had to be fixed.

Crowl

tanis3303 wrote:

I can't understand why they don't just take the things everyone seems to like from both styles of PvE and hybridize them into one and test THAT. Keep the trivial nodes and the current scaling model, keep the 6x before the timer point style and the 13/13 cap on enemy powers and trash everything else. Seems that would make everybody reasonably happy...

They need to improve things further than this before introducing the new system, scaling is still too high on the old system and people are punished for drawing a 5* cover when that should be the best thing that could happen to you when winning a cover or token not the worst.

The split of trivial, essential and normal/hard nodes from the current system should remain in any new system but they need to fix or improve scaling, address the double grind issue that invalidates their sensible aim of increasing more flexibility (lock nodes after 6/7 clears and then unlock it for the final hour as a placement tiebreaker) and as an extra bonus drop the crit boosts as a reward.

From the devs perspective, the first question should be does this new system make the game more fun, if the answer is no for any significant part of the userbase then back to the drawing board to rework it again and the second question should be, does this system encourage people to keep leveling and improving their roster because they benefit from sales of iso and hp and soft-capping is as bad for them as it is for the userbase.

hamsup_sotong

honestly guys 3 clears fully refreshed. . is not that hard. .

as long as your first clear at the beginning of the sub..
You literally have 23 hrs to do 2 clears...

as long as they're spaced more than 8 hrs apart

cheers hamsup

slidecage

Want to make everyone happy D3 this is what you do..

MAKE PVE A GROUP BASED EVENT ONLY and SCALE IT to the number of people in groups..


Round 1 boss has 200,000 HP or 10,000 per member what locks in at start

around 8 10 million or 500,000 per member (or enter your number here)

this way is even if someone did it solo they would have a chance to win

cardoor

OJSP wrote:

cardoor wrote:

I wasn't playing casually but also was not playing for the top spot. I still had to do 7 clears to farm everything. What I am saying is that after the 7 clears there were still enough points left to compete. Over three subs that means I would have needed a little over 5K more each time, which was very doable and would have been keeping up with the pace of the frontrunner.

It's fine, honestly.

I understand: You like the test. You've mentioned it a lot of times, even in the other thread. With the current system, if you play each node 7 times any time you want, you'd probably get a top100 placement at least for a non-new character release event. You've placed higher during the Unstable Iso-8, probably more due to other factors than the actual system. How did you do in Enemy of the States, by the way?

Me, I don't really like it, but I can probably adapt to it to still play competitively if I want to..

I think it's going to be difficult to make you see the potential problem of implementing this system as it was tested. Many people have tried..

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else that the current system is the best. Adapting some aspects of the tested system to the current system is probably preferable.

You do not seem to be replying to anything I actually wrote. Trying to provide examples about why I like the timer is different than being inflexible about improving the test. In fact I have already listed several things I think can be adjusted.

I barely played EOS, so not that great.

I agree with the sentiment of your last paragraph.

cardoor

Vhailorx wrote:

cardoor wrote:

OJSP wrote:

cardoor wrote:

It is safer to say I can find time in a 24 hour period to play more easily than in 8hr increments.

So do the other 1000 players in your bracket, making it more unlikely for anyone who don't actually clear each nodes 6 times at the beginning to place well.

Anyway, look, I'm happy the test worked out better for you and everyone else who felt that way.

The only way to be absolutely certain about how it would turn out for a new character release event, is to test it on such event. But, as I said in the very first feedback that I posted in the EotS thread: If any developer is reading this, even if we need further data, please don't!

Having most of the 1000 placements determined by effort vs timing is an improvement I think. Not perfect, but an improvement.

You think placement is currently determined by timing and not effort? That might be true at the very very top, when optimal grinding and speed are the most important factors
But for everyone else, placement is just a matter of who is willing/able to play that extra match. That is the same in both systems.

And if you played 7 straight grinds at the beginning of every sub under the old system you would definitely place top 100, probably top 50. Other than a psychological comfort from not "leaving points on the table" with un-optimum play, I don't see any advantage to the new system.

...

No, placement is currently determined by timing and effort. In the new system, placement will be determined only on effort for the majority of people.

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Lukoil

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Nope. In new system you must do 6 straight clears as fast as possible and then grind at the end of the sub with highest difficulty in ALL nodes.

With old(current) system. you must do only 1 full clear at the start 2 in between and grind the rest at the end (4 clears).

New system - win those who have a LOT of spare time. The current system is great for people with job.

My schedule with current system - 1 clear before going to bed - 1 clear at the morning when i am going to my job - 1 clear at the end of th work day - 4 clears in between (when i am at home).
The last 4 clears ususally the following:
4 hours before sub ends - do the hard nodes so the scaling is not that high for them.
2 hours before sub ends - clear essential nodes
Remaining sub time - relax with trivial nodes.

With new system all are hard nodes - there are no nodes to relax. You must grind - grind - grind.

cardoor

Lukoil wrote:

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Nope. In new system you must do 6 straight clears as fast as possible and then grind at the end of the sub with highest difficulty in ALL nodes.

That is apples and oranges. We are talking about 7 clears (aka grinds) and only 7 clears and where that would rank you.

Edit: as an afterthought, I would be willing to bet that stats show that very few people ever do more than 7 clears (which is probably why they used 7 as the number of clears with rewards attached).

alphabeta

cardoor wrote:

You think placement is currently determined by timing and not effort? That might be true at the very very top, when optimal grinding and speed are the most important factors
But for everyone else, placement is just a matter of who is willing/able to play that extra match. That is the same in both systems.

And if you played 7 straight grinds at the beginning of every sub under the old system you would definitely place top 100, probably top 50. Other than a psychological comfort from not "leaving points on the table" with un-optimum play, I don't see any advantage to the new system.

...

No, placement is currently determined by timing and effort. In the new system, placement will be determined only on effort for the majority of people.

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.[/quote]


Except whenever there is an optimal path people will adapt to that - under the new system the path is grind 6 immediately and then grind in final 2 hours - so timing is a factor for placement - if anything a bigger one in a competitive event rather than the tests they ran.

EotS &Uiso locked out a lot of the higher end rosters because of the scaling issues and the rewards being so poor self selected out another bunch (getting people to play 7 day PVE at best of times is tough - this was a perfect storm). So know one really know what impact the new system would have but I'll say I expect if that system ever appears for a new release everyone who liked it suddenly won't because the top PVE alliance, many of whom gave members a free pass on play or don't for the tests and most didn't, will adapt and then you'll have to find 5 hours of your life to grind and old sub and clear new sub repeatedly in one block.

Current system requires regimented time play - new system will to if its implement, just in a different way. If 10 people per slice play optimally they'll have t10 locked up - then some will try to but not quite make it and will fill up the rest of the t50 - the play whenever brigade who currently see the new system as a success will be relegated to maybe a t100 place - most likely a lot of them will simply end up playing for progression when they realised starting when suits them has put them in 400th place pretty quickly (especially if they remember to turn off rubber banding - hence why Uiso is fundamentally misleading players on where they might place - I hit progression in two afternoon grinds of goon only nodes at 1000 point per time).

Reality is new system can only work if rewards are made entirely progressive and not placement - actually given that also addresses bracket sniping I'd be in favour of that but before you start declaring the previous tests better recognise they where some way from a realistic basis on which to understand what a format only change (but leaving current scaling method) would do.

Lukoil

cardoor wrote:

Lukoil wrote:

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Nope. In new system you must do 6 straight clears as fast as possible and then grind at the end of the sub with highest difficulty in ALL nodes.

That is apples and oranges. We are talking about 7 clears (aka grinds) and only 7 clears and where that would rank you.

Edit: as an afterthought, I would be willing to bet that stats show that very few people ever do more than 7 clears (which is probably why they used 7 as the number of clears with rewards attached).

If this system becomes staple - 7 clears would never give you high placement. The reason why tests where good for "casuals" is beacuse a lot of top PVE players ignored this tests (rewads are not that great for increased effort).
Placement will be determined by who do 6 full clears first (when 24 hour timer starts). That how new system will work in non-test environment.

So the best strategy in new system would be: -
Claer 1-3 nodes(current trivial) - 1 time,
Clear 4-6 (current hard nodes) - 1 time,
Clear 7-9 (essentials) - 6 times because they give the most points.
Return to 4-6 and do 5 clears
Return to 1-3 and do 5 clears

And then at the end - do 5 clears in all nodes
And then repeat from the start.
Burning out is real.

alphabeta

cardoor wrote:

Lukoil wrote:

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Nope. In new system you must do 6 straight clears as fast as possible and then grind at the end of the sub with highest difficulty in ALL nodes.

That is apples and oranges. We are talking about 7 clears (aka grinds) and only 7 clears and where that would rank you.

Edit: as an afterthought, I would be willing to bet that stats show that very few people ever do more than 7 clears (which is probably why they used 7 as the number of clears with rewards attached).

Everyone t20 or above in the hunt is doing more than 7 clears per node in my slice alone - 7 clears leaves approx. 1800 points on the table under current system and on new system will leave closer to 6k vs optimal

cardoor

Lukoil wrote:

cardoor wrote:

Lukoil wrote:

If you play 7 straight grinds in either system you will place high. The new system allows for more flexibility of when you play the 7.

Nope. In new system you must do 6 straight clears as fast as possible and then grind at the end of the sub with highest difficulty in ALL nodes.

That is apples and oranges. We are talking about 7 clears (aka grinds) and only 7 clears and where that would rank you.

Edit: as an afterthought, I would be willing to bet that stats show that very few people ever do more than 7 clears (which is probably why they used 7 as the number of clears with rewards attached).

If this system becomes staple - 7 clears would never give you high placement. The reason why tests where good for "casuals" is beacuse a lot of top PVE players ignored this tests (rewads are not that great for increased effort).
Placement will be determined by who do 6 full clears first (when 24 hour timer starts). That how new system will work in non-test environment.

So the best strategy in new system would be: -
Claer 1-3 nodes(current trivial) - 1 time,
Clear 4-6 (current hard nodes) - 1 time,
Clear 7-9 (essentials) - 6 times because they give the most points.
Return to 4-6 and do 5 clears
Return to 1-3 and do 5 clears

And then at the end - do 5 clears in all nodes
And then repeat from the start.
Burning out is real.

No one playing casually is going to do 7 clears (that would not be casual). With that said the majority of people (even some playing semi-competitively) will be ranked on effort (not a timer). Which is the initial point I made. It is difficult to say exactly what 7 clears will rank you, but I would say top 100 in either system for all events. So by "high" that is what I meant.

I have understood the math of optimal play in the new system and I agree that burnout is real. As I said earlier