The False Dichotomy of the "New" PvE System

itstime1234

Stax the Foyer wrote:

LordXberk wrote:

Well, at least double ISO is a start, right? Hopefully it becomes the new norm (unlikely). I do think the 7 day event w/ double ISO and a new release that is needed to win the upcoming special event is going to be a helluva grindfest.

Double ISO is a fantastic thing, but it's tangential to these issues. It's a great benefit, and it helps everyone across the board, but it doesn't address the different needs of people at different stages of the game.

Your PvE rewards shouldn't be as dependent as they are on bracket luck, and trying to create a level playing field for four to five different tiers of players is a waste of the developer's time at this point. The old PvE structure is stretched impossibly thin at this point.

Scaling difficulty has to come with scaling rewards. The best way to do that is to eliminate personal scaling, and have events with fixed difficulty and appropriate rewards that reflect the difficulty of a given task. Double ISO is needed as the game has moved beyond the old ISO needs at every level, with the cover gain for new players being much greater than it was, but it doesn't mean that it fixes the other aspects of PvE.

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

TxMoose

itstime1234 wrote:

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

his point was the rewards need to scale with difficulty. sorry, but 2* players need a different level of reward than a 4* player does. but mpq insists that we all get thrown into the same player pools.

take care in praising the current 'test' due to easy progression. it is highly unlikely to stay at that low of a level. and when it increases and then drastically increases for a release, playing more optimally will be more important to you. then when you have to play pve 1 time a day (not whenever you like) and play it for 3-4 hours straight at sub end and subsequent flip to start the next sub. then come and rave about it then. sorry but I prefer my mpq hours spread over the day and to play this optimally, that isn't possible, where it was before.

itstime1234

TxMoose wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

his point was the rewards need to scale with difficulty. sorry, but 2* players need a different level of reward than a 4* player does. but mpq insists that we all get thrown into the same player pools.

take care in praising the current 'test' due to easy progression. it is highly unlikely to stay at that low of a level. and when it increases and then drastically increases for a release, playing more optimally will be more important to you. then when you have to play pve 1 time a day (not whenever you like) and play it for 3-4 hours straight at sub end and subsequent flip to start the next sub. then come and rave about it then. sorry but I prefer my mpq hours spread over the day and to play this optimally, that isn't possible, where it was before.

Why should 2*s get different rewards. Because you are not a 2*. Because Stax isn't a 2*. I am not a 2*. My roster is among the better ones out there but I am not in search of an advantage over others.

Where did I say its an easy progression, I said it has taken out the optimal grinding requirements. Now if I have 2 hours free, I can play PVE as oppose to a single run for 20 min. Ummmmm sorry to break it to you but chasing a 4* is already pretty brutal and I don't care if I get one or not. A 4* cover that I could care less for. Do I care about my punisher covers, or Spider-Gwen. Yay you ache for placement. Good for you. Don't worry about me, I am absolutely fine with not getting a single cover.

Obv you prefer the optimal model. Like I said you care about placement, and it provides you with an advantage over people who either don't want to be a slave to the game every 8 hours or have real life that doesn't allow them to play optimally. Advantage TXMoose. What a surprise someone advocating a playing style that benefits them.

Hope you see where I am going with this.

Stax the Foyer

itstime1234 wrote:

Stax the Foyer wrote:

LordXberk wrote:

Well, at least double ISO is a start, right? Hopefully it becomes the new norm (unlikely). I do think the 7 day event w/ double ISO and a new release that is needed to win the upcoming special event is going to be a helluva grindfest.

Double ISO is a fantastic thing, but it's tangential to these issues. It's a great benefit, and it helps everyone across the board, but it doesn't address the different needs of people at different stages of the game.

Your PvE rewards shouldn't be as dependent as they are on bracket luck, and trying to create a level playing field for four to five different tiers of players is a waste of the developer's time at this point. The old PvE structure is stretched impossibly thin at this point.

Scaling difficulty has to come with scaling rewards. The best way to do that is to eliminate personal scaling, and have events with fixed difficulty and appropriate rewards that reflect the difficulty of a given task. Double ISO is needed as the game has moved beyond the old ISO needs at every level, with the cover gain for new players being much greater than it was, but it doesn't mean that it fixes the other aspects of PvE.

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

I don't want to leave anyone with leftovers. I want everyone to earn awards that will help them, commensurate with the difficulty of the challenge, just like 99% of other games out there. I don't want 4-star covers to be treated like gold, where if you've been successful enough to get into a veteran bracket, only 1% of the people in that bracket will ever earn a 4* cover, no matter how hard they play.

Like you, I only play for progression in most PvE events, if that, because I can't justify the amount of time it requires unless it's an alliance boss event. If they keep the super-low progression award threshold, it'll be a minor improvement for me (although that's due to the threshold lowering, not the new points system). But it won't be better for a lot of the people I know who play this game, who have their ability to earn a ranking award determined almost entirely by the luck of the bracket they're slotted into.

Plus, personal scaling only provides an even playing field within a bracket, and the current system is far from a level playing field. When you see people compare their brackets after an event, you realize just how stupid the current PvE system is. If you really want a level playing field, then there should be also be no separation between beginner and veterans brackets. That will get you a true level playing field, which I suspect that would be an unpleasant surprise for most people who aren't softcapping their rosters.

Stax the Foyer

itstime1234 wrote:

Obv you prefer the optimal model. Like I said you care about placement, and it provides you with an advantage over people who either don't want to be a slave to the game every 8 hours or have real life that doesn't allow them to play optimally. Advantage TXMoose. What a surprise someone advocating a playing style that benefits them.

Hope you see where I am going with this.

Yes. This thread is clearly full of people advocating for the same old grinding PvE system. You nailed it.

itstime1234

Stax the Foyer wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

Obv you prefer the optimal model. Like I said you care about placement, and it provides you with an advantage over people who either don't want to be a slave to the game every 8 hours or have real life that doesn't allow them to play optimally. Advantage TXMoose. What a surprise someone advocating a playing style that benefits them.

Hope you see where I am going with this.

Yes. This thread is clearly full of people advocating for the same old grinding PvE system. You nailed it.

Awww Sarcasm. Terrific debating skills.

itstime1234

Stax the Foyer wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

Stax the Foyer wrote:

LordXberk wrote:

Well, at least double ISO is a start, right? Hopefully it becomes the new norm (unlikely). I do think the 7 day event w/ double ISO and a new release that is needed to win the upcoming special event is going to be a helluva grindfest.

Double ISO is a fantastic thing, but it's tangential to these issues. It's a great benefit, and it helps everyone across the board, but it doesn't address the different needs of people at different stages of the game.

Your PvE rewards shouldn't be as dependent as they are on bracket luck, and trying to create a level playing field for four to five different tiers of players is a waste of the developer's time at this point. The old PvE structure is stretched impossibly thin at this point.

Scaling difficulty has to come with scaling rewards. The best way to do that is to eliminate personal scaling, and have events with fixed difficulty and appropriate rewards that reflect the difficulty of a given task. Double ISO is needed as the game has moved beyond the old ISO needs at every level, with the cover gain for new players being much greater than it was, but it doesn't mean that it fixes the other aspects of PvE.

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

I don't want to leave anyone with leftovers. I want everyone to earn awards that will help them, commensurate with the difficulty of the challenge, just like 99% of other games out there. I don't want 4-star covers to be treated like gold, where if you've been successful enough to get into a veteran bracket, only 1% of the people in that bracket will ever earn a 4* cover, no matter how hard they play.

Like you, I only play for progression in most PvE events, if that, because I can't justify the amount of time it requires unless it's an alliance boss event. If they keep the super-low progression award threshold, it'll be a minor improvement for me (although that's due to the threshold lowering, not the new points system). But it won't be better for a lot of the people I know who play this game, who have their ability to earn a ranking award determined almost entirely by the luck of the bracket they're slotted into.

Plus, personal scaling only provides an even playing field within a bracket, and the current system is far from a level playing field. When you see people compare their brackets after an event, you realize just how stupid the current PvE system is. If you really want a level playing field, then there should be also be no separation between beginner and veterans brackets. That will get you a true level playing field, which I suspect that would be an unpleasant surprise for most people who aren't softcapping their rosters.

Yes. I 3* Sentry has far more value to them than a 4* Thor. Would you be ok if they said anyone with 4 Champed 5* got rewards that were 5* covers? Is that a fair treatment to you or I? I don't think so.

AdamMagus

Well said!

Various38

I'm with Stax on this one about scaling. PVE should be treated like Prologue in the fact that they are both supposed to be training wheels. I see a person's progression through the game as; Play the pre-prologue intro > Play prologue to get you up and running with some decent characters > Play PVE to help bolster your roster > Play PVP to get the best/fastest rewards. PVE should be treated more like training wheels on a 2 wheeled bike. You get your rewards and they may not be the best, but as you play through it starts to get easier and then you move on to a greater challenge. The greater challenge being PVP. Set difficulty could help with this and with people complaining about the challenges getting too hard for their growing rosters. If you go back to play prologue right now, the difficulty has not changed and you can see the effect of having a better roster. PVE should be just the same as that. DDQ is like that. Growth industry type events are like that. Why can't regular PVE be like that? This promotes someone growing their roster instead of gimping to get away from insane levels. In this model, I say that if you can't beat the whole event then improve your roster and try it again the next time. You should find the event gets easier, not harder. Putting everyone in the same bracket (aka no Veteran, Noob, Specialists, whatever) makes this point by letting your roster grow itself. If you try to skip a transition, then most likely you will suffer under this model. But that suffering lets you earn your due, prizes, and everything else unlike being lucky to land a soft bracket.
Now with that being said, I do also think that the rewards should be reflected through the progression on both personal and alliance sides. Everyone gets something with no one being left out. 1-2* transitions can be rewarded at the 2* level and if lucky enough maybe a 3*. 2-3* transitions can reach the level intended for that type of roster with no problem usually. 3-4* rosters can reach that coveted CP/4* reward without much fight, but may fail to get to the ultimate reward, whatever that may be. 4-5* rosters will find it challenging but doable, if their roster is strong enough, to reach the ultimate reward. If you are hanging out in PVE still after you are in 5* land then you get what you get. In my opinion, you should have moved to PVP by then. In that case, I'm not talking about the weak 5* rosters (1-3 covers).
The biggest problem with all of this is that most people may decrease their play time and not give D3 extra money in the process. Those that want a bracketed PVE would/should move to PVP with the added story type events there also. In the PVP story events, you can gain better rewards, still have a bracket leaderboard, and face a harder challenge alongside the regular PVP events.

TxMoose

itstime1234 wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

How is eliminating personal scaling the best. Maybe you should edit that and say best for you as it would provide you with a big advantage over the average player. Hey lets make the game harder on the weaker players so I can claim all the rewards and leave them with the leftovers.

Also, not sure what survey you took, but many (including myself) are only after the progression rewards. By removing the refresh timer, it allows people to play on their own time as oppose to some artificial time schedule. People that want the top prizes will have to work for it more since they cannot get a leg up on others thanks to sub optimal clearing.

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

his point was the rewards need to scale with difficulty. sorry, but 2* players need a different level of reward than a 4* player does. but mpq insists that we all get thrown into the same player pools.

take care in praising the current 'test' due to easy progression. it is highly unlikely to stay at that low of a level. and when it increases and then drastically increases for a release, playing more optimally will be more important to you. then when you have to play pve 1 time a day (not whenever you like) and play it for 3-4 hours straight at sub end and subsequent flip to start the next sub. then come and rave about it then. sorry but I prefer my mpq hours spread over the day and to play this optimally, that isn't possible, where it was before.

Why should 2*s get different rewards. Because you are not a 2*. Because Stax isn't a 2*. I am not a 2*. My roster is among the better ones out there but I am not in search of an advantage over others.

Where did I say its an easy progression, I said it has taken out the optimal grinding requirements. Now if I have 2 hours free, I can play PVE as oppose to a single run for 20 min. Ummmmm sorry to break it to you but chasing a 4* is already pretty brutal and I don't care if I get one or not. A 4* cover that I could care less for. Do I care about my punisher covers, or Spider-Gwen. Yay you ache for placement. Good for you. Don't worry about me, I am absolutely fine with not getting a single cover.

Obv you prefer the optimal model. Like I said you care about placement, and it provides you with an advantage over people who either don't want to be a slave to the game every 8 hours or have real life that doesn't allow them to play optimally. Advantage TXMoose. What a surprise someone advocating a playing style that benefits them.

Hope you see where I am going with this.

players should all get rewards that benefit them. I think mpq metrics will show that double iso next week will be excessive for most of the players in the game, but it won't be excessive for many forumites that make up the top 2-5% of the game. extra iso as a 2* or early 3* player would be nice, sure, but I don't ever remember thinking the iso rewards were broken at that level of the game when I went through. I was focused on covers because the iso flow for that level was appropriate. I didn't even consider needing more iso. I currently do think the iso flow is out of whack because of the 4* leveling costs. I think 3* players having a harder time making 1K (thanks to boosted 4s and logan) is a much more pressing need for them than iso is. I don't think there is anything deficient in the 1* to early-mid 3* portions of the game.

where did you say easy progression?

TL:DR - Progression easier...

what many don't get is BOTH models have "optimal". you were somehow not ok with your inability to play the previous model optimally but are apparently aok with playing this tested model non-optimally (my guess is most of this is due to a low progression). if you don't play the beginning of every sub to the timer and then grind the end of the sub, you're sub-optimal just like making a clear on the previous model at 6 or 10 hours.

I could play the old model closer to 'optimal' than the newer one, yes. you can't play either optimally but have a pretty strong opinion that one is vastly superior, even though it doesn't really benefit you, and you don't care about placement. sure I care about placement. the pull of this game plays to our competitive natures. not really going to apologize for that one.

I see where you're going but it still doesn't make sense to me. clearly I have an opinion about something that will benefit me, but I know scores of players that hold the exact same opinion, for exactly the same reason. I like to play several times throughout the day and don't like stacking all my pve play into one sitting. doing that doesn't make anything 'better' for me. when they have these tests, they want feedback of what we think and I think we are all trying to do just that. what I don't get is you seem to be stumping for a change that doesn't allow you to play any more optimally.

edit: TL/DR = I'm of the opinion that game structure that encourages small bursts of play here and there throughout the day is more healthy than one that encourages long, never-ending play at one extended sitting.

TxMoose

Various38 wrote:

PVE should be treated more like training wheels on a 2 wheeled bike. You get your rewards and they may not be the best, but as you play through it starts to get easier and then you move on to a greater challenge.

I completely agree here. problem is once they injected LTs into pve, it required the top portion of the game, many who had written off pve (like me) to re-engage pve and pursue the premium rewards. this makes things generally harder for those who really could use those 3* covers more. before LTs were put into pve the game had the exact progression you mention - prologue to pve to pvp. now its prologue to pve to everything.

Stax the Foyer

itstime1234 wrote:

Yes. I 3* Sentry has far more value to them than a 4* Thor. Would you be ok if they said anyone with 4 Champed 5* got rewards that were 5* covers? Is that a fair treatment to you or I? I don't think so.

If they beat a challenge that requires that kind of roster to win, then sure, that's absolutely fair. Why would it not be? That is how almost every other video game in the world works. Do something harder, get something better. Use that something better to do something even harder.

Do you think that the alliance progression on the Civil War event was unfair? That's something that gave a 5* reward. Not everyone could get it. Should they have been able to?

Various38

Tx, that's what I'm saying. They moved it from being a pond for the smaller fish to thrive to an ocean for them to get eaten. I do think that the 4/8/12 hour refresh is the optimal way to design the competitive story modes, but the new test would be more optimal for the true "PVE" story mode (no leaderboard).

Also

If they beat a challenge that requires that kind of roster to win, then sure, that's absolutely fair

<---this.

Argon Flame

Maybe this is the case FOR scaling.

They already have a scaling factor for PvE, why can't that ALSO be applied to your rewards?
As you level your characters the rewards get better. Each player at their respective tiers gets rewards that best suit them.

itstime1234

Stax the Foyer wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

Yes. I 3* Sentry has far more value to them than a 4* Thor. Would you be ok if they said anyone with 4 Champed 5* got rewards that were 5* covers? Is that a fair treatment to you or I? I don't think so.

If they beat a challenge that requires that kind of roster to win, then sure, that's absolutely fair. Why would it not be? That is how almost every other video game in the world works. Do something harder, get something better. Use that something better to do something even harder.

Do you think that the alliance progression on the Civil War event was unfair? That's something that gave a 5* reward. Not everyone could get it. Should they have been able to?

The civil war event was fine with me. While there was some level of optimization required, it wasn't be at your game when it resets. Also, I have never complained about progression rewards. The people that have an issue with this new system are people that are going to have a tougher time placing since more people can be competitive now.

Civil war is not an ongoing event. You say if they have the roster then its fine, but how many times do veterans complain about a level being too difficult. Happened in gauntlet, happened in earlier testing and will happen again. So if there was a 5* reward in which only someone with a maxed green goblin could get, everyone would be going crazy complaining.

Just because this board is skewed towards more veteran teams doesn't mean it matches the populations position. Look at DPDQ, many newer players quit when the difficulty got increased.

Stax the Foyer

itstime1234 wrote:

The civil war event was fine with me. While there was some level of optimization required, it wasn't be at your game when it resets. Also, I have never complained about progression rewards. The people that have an issue with this new system are people that are going to have a tougher time placing since more people can be competitive now.

Civil war is not an ongoing event. You say if they have the roster then its fine, but how many times do veterans complain about a level being too difficult. Happened in gauntlet, happened in earlier testing and will happen again. So if there was a 5* reward in which only someone with a maxed green goblin could get, everyone would be going crazy complaining.

Just because this board is skewed towards more veteran teams doesn't mean it matches the populations position. Look at DPDQ, many newer players quit when the difficulty got increased.

You're reading nonsensical motivations into the part of the people against the system. If they were able to play competitively under the old system, they'll be able to play competitively under the new system, as well.

It'll shuffle things around a little bit at the top end, maybe, but somebody not hitting T50 under the old system isn't going to be able to suddenly jump to T10 under the new system. The spacing between players will reduce, but because it's ranking awards (the fundamental issue), that won't make any real difference for placement. It's just a different, less convenient schedule that's required for an optimal clear.

It's one thing to complain about a tough node when it's all or nothing. If you can't beat Clash of the Titans that week, you get nothing. If you can't finish the Gauntlet, the other progression prizes usually aren't worth much. If you have a setup like Civil War, where you might miss the 5* IM cover but still get a couple Hulkbuster covers, that stings a lot less. (Sorry to the Team Cap folks who got Falcap covers)

Various38

**SideNote**
Falcap cover person here...Don't really regret it since HB was already maxed but not even close to championing though.

itstime1234

Stax the Foyer wrote:

itstime1234 wrote:

The civil war event was fine with me. While there was some level of optimization required, it wasn't be at your game when it resets. Also, I have never complained about progression rewards. The people that have an issue with this new system are people that are going to have a tougher time placing since more people can be competitive now.

Civil war is not an ongoing event. You say if they have the roster then its fine, but how many times do veterans complain about a level being too difficult. Happened in gauntlet, happened in earlier testing and will happen again. So if there was a 5* reward in which only someone with a maxed green goblin could get, everyone would be going crazy complaining.

Just because this board is skewed towards more veteran teams doesn't mean it matches the populations position. Look at DPDQ, many newer players quit when the difficulty got increased.

You're reading nonsensical motivations into the part of the people against the system. If they were able to play competitively under the old system, they'll be able to play competitively under the new system, as well.

It'll shuffle things around a little bit at the top end, maybe, but somebody not hitting T50 under the old system isn't going to be able to suddenly jump to T10 under the new system. The spacing between players will reduce, but because it's ranking awards (the fundamental issue), that won't make any real difference for placement. It's just a different, less convenient schedule that's required for an optimal clear.

It's one thing to complain about a tough node when it's all or nothing. If you can't beat Clash of the Titans that week, you get nothing. If you can't finish the Gauntlet, the other progression prizes usually aren't worth much. If you have a setup like Civil War, where you might miss the 5* IM cover but still get a couple Hulkbuster covers, that stings a lot less. (Sorry to the Team Cap folks who got Falcap covers)

All things being equal someone getting top 10 will have to work harder for top 10 as they do not have the inherent advantage of many doing suboptimal climbs. Unless you have empirical data suggesting otherwise its common sense. If I do 3 matches suboptimally and you do 3 matches optimally, you place higher. Throw away the timing issue and we are now tied, you can still beat me but it takes more than 3 matches. The fact that I am not being negatively impacted due to not adhering to some made up timer increases my score to where we both did the same work and are in the same place. So if you want to beat me now, you will have to work a little bit harder.

Will top everyone in top 100 remain there, doubtful since many people had higher scores strictly off the back of the optimal climb. That is it. Not sure how you can argue that.

And I wasn't talking about the 4* event. I am talking about how the wave node was changed to being more random with some days being much harder and how many transitioning people got quite angry at this. Same thing if you say I can beat this node and you cant give me more prizes.

Ducky

itstime1234 wrote:

TL:DR - Progression easier, placement harder. Personal scaling evens the playing field.

Except it doesn't. If scaling was linear then it would even out. But it isn't, it's exponential. So as levels are increased they get inherently harder and also take longer to kill. So now you are faced with a longer, harder grind while people who are facing lower level opponents can clear them faster. This means that their grinds are shorter which results in more points if both parties are playing optimally (discounting hitting the trivial node ad nauseam).

delita007

Successful video games have almost always functioned the same way since their invention. You start very fledgling and battle easy goons or complete simple tasks. You then gain levels or better weapons or stronger magic, etc. as you work your way up against harder challenges which reward better prizes til the end. Obviously the f2p model necessitates that there is never an end, but they should follow the same progression of tougher challenge, better rewards ad infinitum. This game has now created an attainable 5* tier of playable character, a 5* tier of difficulty if your roster is strong enough, yet never broken from the 3* reward tier. What is supposed to be the draw of playing crazy hard content? The only events to ever get it right in this game have been cw/ultron/Galactus, especially cw that ended in a 5* cover. There was no need for personal scaling or any fancy algorithms either. Boss got stronger, which in turn weeded out weaker rosters, and almost every person got a reward commensurate with their in game level as they were organically scaled out by the event. It was a perfect video game difficulty:reward ratio and it makes every other suboptimally designed event/mode in this game super frustrating. They have proven they can hit the nail on the head, which makes it that much worse when they miss the target by so much.

Cliff notes: There are a million examples of successful video games out there and almost none of them have a difficulty to rewards ratio as poor as MPQ.