PVE Scaling Feedback & New Test : Prodigal Sun

JVReal

firethorne wrote:

We realize some like it (though, I'd like to see you put up some supportive evidence for that 90% figure). If you liked it, then that's wonderful. It doesn't mean that criticism shouldn't be considered.

I'm not a top player. I literally cannot remember when I've placed in the top 10 on anything. It hasn't been this year. And the old story mode is very broken. But, I honestly think these changes are still bad. The bottom line for me is that it still represents increased difficult and effort for zero additional rewards. And for me, that is a horrible change.

I got my figures the same place as the fellows that say NOBODY likes it... I made them up.

Though more accurately, anyone that doesn't go for top 10, anyone that has a medium roster but "lucked" into a couple single cover 5*'s, anyone that has a family and can't or won't wait on an 8 hour timer and live their life by game instead of gaming when their life allows, anyone with a job that prevents them from hitting optimal clears, all these people benefit, and all of these people likely add up to a huge chunk of the playing population.

Now if you want to say that most of the forum base doesn't like the change, ok, you have a point. The forum is filled with mostly dedicated players that do grind and competitively go for top placement. Those are the guys that rightly have a complaint about the new system. But to dismiss everyone else because the competitive folks feel a "need" to grind for 6 hours... that's a problem too.

It's ridiculous to expect them to grind for hours on end, it's ridiculous, but they do it anyway. They know it's crazy to do it, but they still do... why? Because they want top placement and have created in themselves a "need" that they will fulfill regardless of how insanely it "makes" them grind. Yet they do it. And because all the rest of the top 10'ers have that same mentality, they are egging each other on. It's a bidding war... and their remorse at the end comes back as negative feedback because they can't accept that they spent an insane amount of time and energy (and sometimes money) on something that shouldn't cost that much time and energy. Can't blame themselves, or fellow grinders... so it must be the format! God forbid they have some accountability for their own actions.

The strawman argument is that people who don't play competitively (which has been redefined here to mean top 10 according to forumites... because going for T100 doesn't apparently qualify as competitive) shouldn't care about reduced points, all they have to do instead of 3 optimal clears is do 5 non-optimal clears according to theory. That solution is ridiculous in itself... people don't have time to clear 3 times optimally for points to hit progression so the answer is to play more for less? And yet you say that is the same problem with the new one... that increased progression means we are to play more for less (even though we've seen that progression is still being adjusted by the devs too). If I did 3 clears when the sub opens in the old format in a 24 hour sub, I'm hosed for the rest of the sub, never to get full point clears until the next sub any more clears are wasted effort with less points for more work. In the new format, those same 3 clears would be full points, and I'd have 3 more clears I could do later at full points before then having diminishing point values.

The only problem I have with the new system is rewards, and scaling, and they are still working on scaling. I would like easier nodes and harder nodes, but the scaling has been right for my roster in both tests. I like the idea of scaling. I like the idea that progress is possible no matter where you are at in your roster growth in PVE. I like that I'm not locked out of goals because I haven't lucked out in my RNG. Scaling is brilliant... when it's done right, and I think they are on the right track personally.

I think that "competitive" players have valid concerns for their own particular situation, but when they proclaim it as a fail for the community of game players in general, that it's no good for anybody, it's disingenuous. That is what frustrates me about the "feedback" in this thread. It's very little feedback, but very much posturing and hyperbole.

rawfsu

I picked a good time to bow out. The PVP changes have been punishment enough, but these changes have pretty much killed off what little motivation I had left to play. I may check in to do some DDQ once in a blue moon, or perhaps around Marvel movie time, but that'll be the most. It seems that there's a focus on the new players and whales, with veterans being pushed aside. I could share several theories on why I feel that is, but I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist. I will say this has seemed to be a pattern in several changes, with this being the first time I've seen where PVE and PVP were changed at the same time. There's something there, but I guess that's only for the few to know exactly why. Until I read of some new aspects being added, I'm essentially done playing. No more cover chasing, ISO hoarding, or grinding for the near future.

carrion_pigeons

The scaling wasn't bad in the last test, although it was exhausting having everything be so uniform. So in that respect this test has made changes I like.

I'm still not going to grind out multiple clears every day though. I don't call that fun, and I resent that my refusal to submit to a definition of fun that I hate means that my roster is basically completely brickwalled.

Also, the ceiling for points is not in a very good place. Either cap it at a point where it takes a "reasonable" amount of grinding to get there, or else remove it completely. As long as it's there, someone is going to try to hit it, and that's not good for them or anyone else.

dsds

Yeah six clears in one go will definitely use up all your health packs. So if you want t10, this is what you will have to do. Buy the win through buying health packs so that you can clear the six in the first hour and then clear it once more at the end.

The feedback is more to see how many people hate it. They will combine the feedback information with their numbers on the back end such as amount of hero point purchases. And then find a balance. The more hero point purchases, the less the feedback would be taken in.

TxMoose

JVReal wrote:

The strawman argument is that people who don't play competitively (which has been redefined here to mean top 10 according to forumites... because going for T100 doesn't apparently qualify as competitive) shouldn't care about reduced points, all they have to do instead of 3 optimal clears is do 5 non-optimal clears according to theory. That solution is ridiculous in itself... people don't have time to clear 3 times optimally for points to hit progression so the answer is to play more for less? And yet you say that is the same problem with the new one... that increased progression means we are to play more for less (even though we've seen that progression is still being adjusted by the devs too). If I did 3 clears when the sub opens in the old format in a 24 hour sub, I'm hosed for the rest of the sub, never to get full point clears until the next sub any more clears are wasted effort with less points for more work. In the new format, those same 3 clears would be full points, and I'd have 3 more clears I could do later at full points before then having diminishing point values.

[/quote]
I have to disagree here. I don't play competitively as much as I farm. I do enjoy t50 sub hp and that's basically a byproduct of farming. the old system sets up well for my play style - little in the morning. little at lunch. and quite a bit of play in the evenings. getting to green checks (or mainly getting cps and the 500/250/200 isos out) in the most time efficient manner is what I care about most. the rest is just extra. any change that takes me more time to farm what I need to progress my roster will get negative feedback from me. additionally, their progressions have been all over the place, so depending on what they settle on, if longer play time is required for the cp progression, that will get negative responses too. I dislike what has been tested because of the scaling and progression issue. I really don't care about the timer or no timer, but they (the devs) see it as interrelated, especially since they've arbitrarily put a 20 pt floor on the points. since the floor is now 20 pts, they see it as they can't let someone farm 20 pts forever on a level 55 or 90 node endlessly, so that node necessarily has to increase in difficulty to make it problematic to grind it for 20 pts a pop. and that is tied to their 'no timer' attempt. I think in their minds you basically can't have trivial nodes and no timer. if that is really what they think, and no timer means harder nodes, then i'll take timers every time.

really, if they just kept the old scaling system (with adjustments that take care of the 5* penalties for earlier rosters) in place but only implemented to 6x to timer, with the 1 pt floor (not the 20 pt floor), I think (nearly) everyone would be very positive about it, again, other than those who consistently shoot for t10. however, getting to the timer on the initial grind would take much less time when there are actually a mix of trivial/easy/hard nodes.

edit: fixed the quote to show correctly

jordanix

My thoughts on PVE and the testing.

Crowl

DapperChewie wrote:

This is my big thing too. If all pve events were more cooperative instead of competitive, where you work with your alliance for alliance progression rewards, and placement was only for alliances (for a bonus reward, same way it is now is fine), it would be a lot less stressful. The last couple Galactus Hungers events were the most fun I've had in this game, because they had me working with my friends and saw all of us benefit.

Tying results to alliances for every event would be a horrible idea, so many alliances who can happily cope with a range of scoring in events would break up because the higher scoring players would be getting far too penalised, unlike now where as long as you can keep in t100 you only really lose a bit of iso due to your lower scorers.

Crowl

sinnerjfl wrote:

Wow, you really want to implement this new garbage system don't you?

Majority is telling you we don't want it, stop it. PVE is already a huge timesink, this makes it require more time and every fight gets harder for no reason besides you want it to.

The current system is broken, better for us to suffer through a few iterations of a new system that ends up being an improvement rather than blindly sticking to the old one.

Scaling - this still needs a lot of work for a lot of rosters, we will see what progress they have made in the next event

Flexibility - distinctly improved for the vast majority as over 80% of the players do not do 7+ clears per sub, there is still clearly a lot of room to improve for the people chasing top placements as the double grind is ludicrous.

Level range of nodes - the lack of trivial nodes is stupid and annoying, we will have to wait and see if they have made enough changes in the next event to address that.

Crowl

Vhailorx wrote:

For casual players, they must clear more nodes per event to get the same prog rewards. And there are no more trivial nodes.

Given that we have had wildly varying points totals for the two tests so far, we cannot take that first claim as fact and we'll have to see if they manager to get close enough to trivial nodes back in this next test.

Vhailorx

Crowl wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

For casual players, they must clear more nodes per event to get the same prog rewards. And there are no more trivial nodes.

Given that we have had wildly varying points totals for the two tests so far, we cannot take that first claim as fact and we'll have to see if they manager to get close enough to trivial nodes back in this next test.

We know that the first test set the max prog reward significantly higher than it usually is.

We know that demiurge stated an intent to reduce that difficulty for the second test. But we have no idea how much they actually lowered it because rubberbanding was left on.

We will see how high it is set in prodigal Sun. I would guess it is more than 3x clears per sub because I think part of demiurge's goal is to reduce the number of cos being awarded per event. Is it fact? No. Is it supported by the evidence (i.e. the rest changes and demiurge's past actions)? I think so.

And if course the second fact remains true. Given the evidence available, there is no way to claim that the new system is an improvement for anyone. It's conceivable that the new points mechanics combined with the old scaling system and node leveling might be an improvement for casual players. But that's a fantasy; there is no evidence to suggest that demiurge wants to make that change. You might as well suggest that true pve (e.g. all gauntlet) would be better for players. It certainly would be, but there is no reason to think that demiurge will do it.

TxMoose

Vhailorx wrote:

You might as well suggest that true pve (e.g. all gauntlet) would be better for players. It certainly would be, but there is no reason to think that demiurge will do it.

don't forget the lowly farmers. all gauntlet all the time would be horrible. I enjoy gauntlet once in a while, but I want iso. I need iso. don't take my iso, dude...

revskip

Vhailorx wrote:

JVReal wrote:

Blah Blah Blah, outrage!

Nobody liked it! (except for 90% of the player base that do)

I'm competitive, I hate this change, ergo NOBODY LIKES IT!

You don't want top 10? Play whenever you want and the points shouldn't matter to you, even though you probably still want top 100... probably want to place as high as you can and diminished points will negatively impact that placement and you probably still want top progression, but because you don't matter to me personally, then points shouldn't matter to you since you are below me.

Waaaaah!

While i think it's true that the most competitive/engaged players are the most vocal and upset about these changes. I think that most of the critical posts about all of these threads have pointed out that the new system is worse for both competitive and casual players.

For competitive players they must grind a while lot more for the same placement/rewards. And they must face more, harder nodes to boot.

For casual players, they must clear more nodes per event to get the same prog rewards. And there are no more trivial nodes.

I love the idea of pve without a refresh timer. Gauntlet is great in part because I can play it at my own pace (except for than in re they stupidly gave out 10-packs for the top finishers). But that doesn't change the fact that this new system is just worse for players. Every kind of player.

For many casual players the trade off of not having to check in every 8 hours is worth the extra 1.5 clears to get the same rewards. And while you are respectful, many of the posters that he is lampooning just aren't. Anytime someone has said that they prefer the new system there are a handful of posters who begin flaming their opinion. It has popped up over and over during the tests.

The most frequent refrain being "well you aren't playing competitively so it doesn't matter when you do your clears." Except that the idea of what playing competitively entails is vastly different when you are trying to make top 2 versus top 10 versus top 20 versus top 100 etc. Just because many casual players that prefer the timer being gone doesn't mean they aren't competing for placement prizes and being dismissive of them by telling them that they could just play whenever they want and hit X placement is elitist and a giant turn off to players who aren't gunning for top 10. There is a difference in points between the person who gets 50th place and the person who gets 51st. Under the current system that is easier for someone who can log in every 8 hours. Under the new system that entry point is removed which is why many people who's schedules do not allow for that like it better.

I can get progression and placement that I am comfortable with in both systems. I prefer the new test system because it doesn't force me to play at certain intervals. I am fully aware that the most competitive people are still forced to play at certain intervals and I am sure that is rough. But catering to the whims of 10 out of 1000 people seems like a flawed plan.

Ultimately the devs are going to do what the playing metrics show is making the company the most money. If the top of the top of competitive players were all to leave that would probably negatively affect their bottom line since I would imagine many of those players are spending a lot of money. If however the game is making money without those people I am positive that they will let them walk away if they think they can extract similar value from the group that replaces them. And if they walk away someone else will replace them, that is the nature of any competitive game.

Crowl

Vhailorx wrote:

We know that the first test set the max prog reward significantly higher than it usually is.

We know that demiurge stated an intent to reduce that difficulty for the second test. But we have no idea how much they actually lowered it because rubberbanding was left on.

We will see how high it is set in prodigal Sun. I would guess it is more than 3x clears per sub because I think part of demiurge's goal is to reduce the number of cos being awarded per event. Is it fact? No. Is it supported by the evidence (i.e. the rest changes and demiurge's past actions)? I think so.

We have had two tests so far, one was set far too high and the other was set far lower for max progression, we will have a clearer picture of the situation after this next test. We could very well end up with progression requiring the same 4'ish clears as we do under the old system to hit progression, just with a bit more flexibility in when they are cleared.

They have made a lot of mistakes with this new system, but if fixed it could easily improve on the old system, we just need to complain about the parts that are actually broken rather than the system as a whole i.e. hammer them on stuff like the idiocy of the double grind that is optimal as a result of their changes to make the game more flexible.

Vhailorx

Revskip,

I just don't see an advantage for casual players under the new system.

In the old system 3 optimal clears per sub, or 4ish less than optimal clears per sub was enough for max progression. Max prog reward is almost always good for at least top 100 (some very competitive release events break this rule of thumb). That is a minimum commitment of 1-2 hours playtime per day.

It seems to me that there are (broadly speaking) 3 types of,pve players.

(1) The top 20 crowd that gets multiple covers in release events, and,competes for 4* covers in regular events.

(2) the top 100 crowd. This groups plays 1-2 hours a day, gets 1 cover in release events, and targets the max prog reward in every event (i usually fall into this group).

(3) everyone else. This group plays whenever they can, skips subs/nodes frequently and generally never gets anything above a 3* from placement or prog rewards. They average less than 3 clears per node per sub.

The new system is clearly worse for the top 20 crowd. I would argue that it's also worse for the top 100 crowd.

But I fail to see how it's any better for my group #3. They still won't get 4* rewards or cp because they just don't play enough. They won't "lose" points because they play when they have time without regard to the timers. But that is true for everyone else too, and placement is about relative scoring. So there isn't likely to be any improvement in placement. So at best it's treading water (without considering scaling).

TxMoose

I'm not sure why, but some think 5 clears in the new system is better than 3.5 optimal clears in the old (which can be equivalent of 5 sub-optimal clears). play the old system any time you want, get every node to 5/7 rewards pulled, and I'm fairly certain you'll get to progression in the standard (non-release) events. the new system does not give you the option of cutting down 5 clears to 3.5, AND every clear takes significantly longer, is less fun, AND requires only your best characters. I don't understand the love for the new system unless they drastically cut scaling and progression levels. however, it seems that some enjoy it, so I won't say that NOBODY likes it.

edit: after further thought, other than release events I completely ignore/discount placement. if you are chasing 3* covers, not sure where 5 clears of sub-optimal play puts you, but not t50 I don't think. my experience was a crapload of work was required to finish t50 in the previous tests. unless you were a 3* player (or less) with no 4s leveled. we'll see how this test goes.

revskip

Vhailorx wrote:

Revskip,

I just don't see an advantage for casual players under the new system.

In the old system 3 optimal clears per sub, or 4ish less than optimal clears per sub was enough for max progression. Max prog reward is almost always good for at least top 100 (some very competitive release events break this rule of thumb). That is a minimum commitment of 1-2 hours playtime per day.

It seems to me that there are (broadly speaking) 3 types of,pve players.

(1) The top 20 crowd that gets multiple covers in release events, and,competes for 4* covers in regular events.

(2) the top 100 crowd. This groups plays 1-2 hours a day, gets 1 cover in release events, and targets the max prog reward in every event (i usually fall into this group).

(3) everyone else. This group plays whenever they can, skips subs/nodes frequently and generally never gets anything above a 3* from placement or prog rewards. They average less than 3 clears per node per sub.

The new system is clearly worse for the top 20 crowd. I would argue that it's also worse for the top 100 crowd.

But I fail to see how it's any better for my group #3. They still won't get 4* rewards or cp because they just don't play enough. They won't "lose" points because they play when they have time without regard to the timers. But that is true for everyone else too, and placement is about relative scoring. So there isn't likely to be any improvement in placement. So at best it's treading water (without considering scaling).

For me it is a wash, I prefer not being penalized for doing my clears all at once or spread out but otherwise it isn't a big deal either way. I have been hitting top 20 or top 50 since I moved up to vet brackets and the time sink isn't that big of a deal for me yet because I am still going through the 2*-3* transition and am mostly just hoarding everything I get until I have enough iso to make the jump to 3* with a wide enough roster to be able to stay in that top 20-50 range. My alliance is competitive and expects me to put up X amount of points and I like them so I oblige.

But for someone whose job precludes the 8 hour windows or who has children or for whatever other reason can only play once per day it is a huge improvement. And honestly even for the people who don't have that going on who wants to be forced to set an alarm every 8 hours or be penalized by losing points. While I am not at the top of the competitive bracket I have lost out on top 20 and top 50 before by a handful of points that happened when I couldn't hit the 8 hour timer perfectly and enough other people did 4.5 clears more optimally than I did which is a silly mechanic.

There are things that I think need improving in the new system, scaling (which they seem to be tweaking in each test run so I'm hopeful there), dropping the total amount of nodes given full points before decay from 6 to 5 I think would be nice, and bringing back at least 1 or 2 trivial nodes so I can playtest with my weakest characters would also be nice. I simply prefer the new system to the old one because the timer being removed makes sense and the transparency of the scaling is a positive for me.

rbdragon

JVReal wrote:

It's ridiculous to expect them to grind for hours on end, it's ridiculous, but they do it anyway. They know it's crazy to do it, but they still do... why? Because they want top placement and have created in themselves a "need" that they will fulfill regardless of how insanely it "makes" them grind. Yet they do it. And because all the rest of the top 10'ers have that same mentality, they are egging each other on. It's a bidding war... and their remorse at the end comes back as negative feedback because they can't accept that they spent an insane amount of time and energy (and sometimes money) on something that shouldn't cost that much time and energy. Can't blame themselves, or fellow grinders... so it must be the format! God forbid they have some accountability for their own actions.

There's two reasons to play a game - to have fun and to win.

Since there's really no end game in MPQ the only way to "win" is to amass the best roster possible. Right now, the best (not easiest per say) way to do that is to place high in PVE as it gives more covers as rewards. So to say that those of us who are competitive in PVE have created a need within ourselves to place highly is ridiculous. MPQ has created this need due to there desire to continue to make 4* covers rare despite the fact that there are over 25 in the game now. If they weren't so tight-fisted, perhaps "top 10'ers" wouldn't feel the need to grind like this - especially with new cover releases. Like I said in an earlier post - these tests don't show the truth unless it's done with a new release - something I'm both dreading and expecting soon.

Why aren't there PVP events where the 3* reward is replaced by 4* and the 2* replaced by 3*? Why isn't there a 4* DDQ? Well we know the reason to both is $$$ - but these are both relevant to my point.

If you're playing just to have fun - great! These timer changes probably are better for you. But let's be honest - more than likely the vast majority of the competitive players are also the mast majority of high paying customers - the one's you really don't want to lose. These are the players I've be most interested in hearing from.

ElAkkra

TxMoose wrote:

every clear takes significantly longer, is less fun, AND requires only your best characters. I don't understand the love for the new system unless they drastically cut scaling and progression levels. however, it seems that some enjoy it, so I won't say that NOBODY likes it.

Both previous tests sped up my first 3 clears and allowed me to use far more of my roster than currently. And my 3 "optimal" clears were no longer at the whim of scheduling conflicts or bad wifi. So for me, it's already a vast improvement. When a single clear takes an hour and you can only use the same 3 characters for 5 of the nodes, that's a heavy time commitment, and it uses up most of your healthpacks, preventing any further grinding.

Yes, the 4th clear started to become more restrictive, and I only picked off a few nodes for the 5th, but we don't yet know where the progression reward is going to end up - the first test was way too high, the second test was broken by rubber-banding. Will it be 5 clears? 6? 3? No-one knows and the developers aren't telling, which I've previously stated is my major problem with these tests - they're not communicating their expectations of playtime / clears to get progression or placement rewards. If the scaling was such that anything beyond the 7th clear was impossible, no-one would be obsessing about "must clear 6 times in the first 2 hours" as placement would purely be based on how far you could push (or a few lucky individuals who got good boards), but because we don't know the developers intentions all we're doing is speculating.

Vhailorx

Revskip,

If you will forgive me do,tpressing the point, in your post you start by saying that the timer change doesn't make much difference for most people, but still identify it at the huge improvement in the new system that justifies the whole change. You then list at least 3 major problem (scaling, number of hits before point decay, trivial nodes).

Why jump to a new system where the improvement doesn't make,much difference for you and there are several significant problems?

You cite jobs and children as key reasons that no timer is an improvement (and those things certainly do affect free time available for gaming). But you haven't addressed my argument that unless you can/want to play 1-2+ hours a day, the point is kind of moot whether or not there are real life factors in pkay)

MissChinch

If they're really into revamping PvE, I'd be for giving 3 attempts per node before they're locked out, regardless of completion. No concept of point decay or point refresh. No rubberbanding. One team up node per sub where the heros are provided at the same level for every person that experiences scaling after each completion with no limits on how many times it can be tried.

I'd like players only concerned with progression rewards to be able to get those with no regard to the timing of their clears. (in the 8 hour system simply clearing three times back to back didn't get it done, they would have had to time their clears more optimally, or spend more time... in the 24 hour system they upped the number of clears required to be a more substantial time requirement)for sake of argument I'd like progression rewards to be calculated in this hypothetical system at two successes for every node including the team up one across all subs.

I'd like players playing for placement to have some element other than timing introduced, and I'd hate for it to be how much money they spend in health packs, making the optimal path require a perfect clear rate IMO is the better option, bad boards will suck but RNG is always going to be a part of the equation.

Giving everyone an equal playing field in the team up node provides for a more fair way for the super competitive placement folks to compete, for that single node heros will be the same and scaling will be the same and its one that can be completed over and over with opponents scaling up on success until its too hard to finish.

Ties are fine, though I doubt across 1000 participants and 3+ subs there would be large number of ties if the points per node are chosen in an increasing manner while minimizing common multiples. Possibly clumped near the top, but I don't see that as a problem, just give the rewards out to anyone that's tied for the proper placement (if 5 people complete each sub perfectly and none of them can grind the team up node any more than the other, then give em all the top tier prize)

if they want suggestions on how to tweak the current implementation without anything too drastic: lose the refresh timer completely, keep the point drop mechanic, but let it kick in after 2-3 clears... keep a 1-20 point floor on each node depending on difficulty. The progression folks that are interested in gross number of points will find value regardless of timing and the placement folks that are interested in relative score will find value in the low points that others might not get once the node has been hit several times. Reduce the complexity rather than increase it, however unless scaling is amazingly good certain roster types will have an easier time of it no matter what framework is used.