Why a new PvE system?

dider152

Will someone please explain? Why is there a need (at least in the heads of the developers) of a new PvE system? The decision to start all these tests seemed to come out of nowhere and we didn't really get an official reason why they were doing this. The old one was good enough, I thought.

To be optimal with the new system, you first have to grind down every node available to 20 points. For some reason, they thought it was a good idea to make nodes lose points as more time passes this time, so you'll have to grind it to get the maximum amount of points you need. When that's done, you have to pick the easiest trivial node you can and repeatedly play the node to get points in 20 pt increments. For example, if you are able to dedicate 8 hours to grinding such a node with a 1 minute clear time, you would be able to get 20 pts X 8 hours X 60 minutes = 9600 pts. A good point spread, but to be competitive the game now requires you to play even more hours of the game. With the old system, you had to play three times (when the sub started, 8 hours later, 16 hours later) and then grind for the last 2-3 hours before the end of the sub.

For people who want to be casual with the game and just play to collect progression, I can see the (limited) appeal. But to be competitive (because face it, that's pretty much what the game is about; if it was just about the progression then PvE would be pretty much like the Ultron/Civil War event format) you have to grind and grind the game, which is unappealing. I'm not clear what D3/Demiurge is trying to accomplish with their new system. Are they trying to appeal to the casual player, or to the more dedicated players?

For every competitive player who, right now, likes the new system, what do you think will happen when they do apply this new system (and they will, for better or worse)? The game will turn into a grindfest, and it will be even worse on the 48-hour subs. So I ask, why a new PvE system? Do you think they will actually apply a new system, or do you secretly hope they'll scrap it in the end?

Thevipper

Came out of no where? Lol hahaaa people hated the scailing and they have been advocating that. Casuals hated the 8hr refresh also.

Points draining? No they dont they increase like they was in the 8 hr timer after being hit 4x

You don't have to grind it to 20 points and grinding 20 pts thats the peoples choice and i feel like if someone wants to do that for a 4* then let them.

Seems to me they are trying to let people have a life if they want it now and still get the 25 cp. about 2-3 hrs of game play go to work, enjoy family time, final grind if they want, sleep then clear the next sub before work. Sure if its a new release you will need more time and more clears but its peoples choice and up to them.

DTStump

Thevipper wrote:

Seems to me they are trying to let people have a life if they want it now and still get the 25 cp.

Except this was possible before. The new system doesn't change a lot with regards to progression rewards.

SnowcaTT

DTStump wrote:

Thevipper wrote:

Seems to me they are trying to let people have a life if they want it now and still get the 25 cp.

Except this was possible before. The new system doesn't change a lot with regards to progression rewards.

I hit progression first time they introduced CP as the final progression - and never again, since I remembered PVE grind is terrible. I guess I'm one of those that "has a life" or something?

I didn't grind the 8 hour subs because of scaling and timing.
I didn't grind the 24 hour subs in original tests because of timing.

I -will- hit progression in this test. I love this test! I only lightly hit sub1 - scaled high and had lots of hood, no fun. Was on Sunday, I was busy with family. I heavily hit sub2 - scaled high but had lots of winfinite-easy nodes, and most importantly I had time to hit it....and by hitting sub2 heavily ONLY I'll pretty much hit progression. It totally lets you have a life with PVE - hit one day heavily or hit all three days pretty lightly!

I really like progression rewards needing only three clears, and don't expect it to last. It almost certainly will result in folks complaining they are bored after hitting progression since they "must" continue to grind for a lot of time with no more rewards; that's why that CP was way out there in the first place!

Lboogie

Under the old system I could always get progression with 3 clears a day and a few hits to get the cp. I ALWAYS finished t100 sub and event....except during these tests. We are beating a dead horse but the 8hr timer didn't force you to play. If you couldn't play 8 hours later play 9hrs later 10 hours later not at all...you could always play when you want... (I know this doesent apply to new release) this new method is forcing more play for Lower placement. I am usually ready for another round 8 hours later. I just dont get the big deal with the timer

SnowcaTT

Lboogie wrote:

Under the old system I could always get progression with 3 clears a day and a few hits to get the cp. I ALWAYS finished t100 sub and event....except during these tests. We are beating a dead horse but the 8hr timer didn't force you to play. If you couldn't play 8 hours later play 9hrs later 10 hours later not at all...you could always play when you want... (I know this doesent apply to new release) this new method is forcing more play for Lower placement. I am usually ready for another round 8 hours later. I just dont get the big deal with the timer

I actually think beating the dead horse is saying 8 hour timers let you play when you wanted to.

Conceded/agreed: to hit progressions [not to compete for T10] with 8 hour timers you do NOT have to immediately play at 8 hour increments. You (usually) do NOT have to grind the end!

But let's look at back-to-back 24 hour subs and see what you'd have to do for progression in 8 hour timers vs. 24 hour timers:

8 hour: Start - run nodes 2-3 times. +9 - run nodes 2-3 times. +10 - run nodes 2-3 times. +5 (refresh, didn't do ideal) - run nodes 2-3 times. +9 - run nodes 2-3 times. +10 - run nodes 2-3 times.

You had 12-18 runs of nodes, and had to play six times. You probably could have done a grind and played five times. Depending on the event it may take more or less node runs [and it's always hard to tell!]

24 hours (current): Start - run nodes 3 times. +32 (anywhere after 24): - run nodes three times.

That's it. That's all you had to do. You can play TWICE, -at any time during the day- (admittedly you have to play once each day...but before you had to play at least three times a day), and you'll hit progressions using this method.

I think the issue becomes the competitive nature, and the clumping that will occur with 24 hour timers. With 8 hour timers, anyone who could hit the event near the refreshes -and- grind the event each sub could T10...I expect it was not very many people that could have the time (and roster) to correctly be at the game at six specific times. Now to T10, you only have to be at the node at two specific times: once at the beginning of the node (which is easy, since you select the beginning/end times) and once before the end to grind it. Scaling/roster will limit the number that can do this - but it MUST be a vastly higher number that can compete for the very few top rewards.

Which is the real issue [still] - keep progressions as they are so anyone can get the current ones...but further along the -progression- lines put all the 4* rewards. No competitive nature [players request], still have to properly (time invested + number of clears) run the event to get rewards [devs desire?],

LordXberk

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!!!!!!

As others have observed, the idea of a 'play anytime' upgrade under the new and improved system is really misleading because it was always like that. I've missed 1 CP / LT reward in PVE since the start (by 1 node that I didn't finish before the timer, grrrrr) and have done both 8hr clears and 2 or 3 clears all at once - it doesn't matter. Play when you want already! I typically finish t50 or t100. As long as you clear every node 3-4x, you've been able to hit max prog. Under the new system, you still have to do that now (so no improvement), but in order to finish in the t100, you HAVE to clear 4x at sub start and do the end clear. It's MORE work for placement which we are already arguing shouldn't exist.

I'm in the middle of sub2 now (slice 4) and I've done somewhat optimal clears (done the most nodes a full 4 clears within the first couple of hours and an end grind), but I'm sitting at 200th. At this point under the old system (w/ less effort more spaced out), I'd be sitting at t50 - t100 right now. And, don't get me started on the 20pt easy node grinders (bots?). Oh, and dear Lord, what happens for new releases. I've never done it, but I'd have to consider bracket shopping at the end and just give up the CP and ISO for new releases.

On a positive note, I do think the scaling has gotten better; however, maybe I've just lowered my expectations after prior tests. I thought scaling was the point of the tests? Why combine so many changes so we can't evaluate one thing at a time?

Megdar

First, the new system is working.... It is harder to place top 100 because now more people can try it. You exactly prove your point, the old system was bad because it was asking for more dedication, so many people were not even trying, no they see their chance, so the competition is harder.

Maybe this does not please you to now have more competition, but this will please D3, more money for them.

Second, no you could not play when you wanted, because of scaling. If you grinded the node right away, it was broing as hell to do it 6 time, took lots of time and sometime the starting level was making it impossible, missing health pack. If you waited the end, the scaling was totaly overboard, often time, I was not able to hit the last node for the 1 CP, with scaling nearly 50% my level (level 200 roster with mob at over 300)

Yes right now, they will have to adjust progression number, I'll easly do double the progression by playing with less constrain then before.

SnowcaTT

Agreed, more people can try it and so it's more competitive. Can't even begin to recall how many times in the last six months I've read threads saying "Well, I missed one sub so I'm screwed". Now it's really hard to miss a sub.

I don't know that arguing for exclusivity is ever a winning argument in the long run. When we had three-hour refreshes those that could handle it (the crazy) certainly made a fuss about going to 8-hour subs; suddenly they had lots more competition. This is an argument that more time played should equal better rewards; while some agree many do not.

I've argued for a long time that there should be -no- scaling, rewards should be available (in progressions) to those with the best rosters. Why should the 4*'s be won by 2* rosters in noob brackets? But that argument isn't one that D3 likes either, they want most everyone to have a chance to win most everything (apparently).

Why D3 wants everyone to win is you always have more new players (starters) than you have vets - they have to hook those newer players. The "best roster wins" argument doesn't fly with those starters - D3 likely has data showing the "most time played wins" argument doesn't work with them either.

MarvelMan

Megdar wrote:

First, the new system is working.... It is harder to place top 100 because now more people can try it.

Why is this the definition of working? Wouldn't more effort = more rewards be a BETTER definition?

Megdar wrote:

You exactly prove your point, the old system was bad because it was asking for more dedication, so many people were not even trying, no they see their chance, so the competition is harder.

Most of those people who quit wouldnt have been pushing for placement anyway. I rarely went for placement other than T50/T100 and I never quit. I also never had to play optimally to get it.

Megdar wrote:

Second, no you could not play when you wanted, because of scaling. If you grinded the node right away, it was broing as hell to do it 6 time, took lots of time and sometime the starting level was making it impossible, missing health pack. If you waited the end, the scaling was totaly overboard, often time, I was not able to hit the last node for the 1 CP, with scaling nearly 50% my level (level 200 roster with mob at over 300)

So you arbitrarily deciding that hitting a node 6 times was required means you couldnt play anytime? Why did you self impose that? I rarely hit nodes 6 times, and usually was T100. Maybe my roster is better than yours, but that has ZERO impact on how many times I have to hit a node. No, to place you had to play optimally. Always been that way, always will be. And generally rewards better rosters as they could clear the nodes faster with less damage taken....so the reward for progression within the game.

The difference is that now if you dont play optimally, or close to it, good luck getting T100. Them shoving all that optimal play time into the opening grind, which immediately follows the end grind, sucks.

The upsides of the "new" system are that scaling is transparent, and solely (after the initial level) linked to how many times you hit the node and that on 48 hour subs you only have to grind the start, one pass at ~24 hrs and then the end grind.

Crowl

MarvelMan wrote:

Megdar wrote:

First, the new system is working.... It is harder to place top 100 because now more people can try it.

Why is this the definition of working? Wouldn't more effort = more rewards be a BETTER definition?

The point is that the old system limited trying to hit t100 to less people, it is tougher to reach that level now because it has become more feasible for more people.

The problem with the idea that more effort = more rewards is that should relate to an increase in progression rewards e.g. adding the essential 4* into the rewards seems like a nobrainer by this point.

donnel

There might be a change to placement difficulty in t50/t100 due to added flexibility awarded with the new system, but if you hope to have a chance at the 4* covers, you're still obligated to block out 4 hours of time 2 hrs before every sub ends. There are still timers here, they're just longer (24h vs 8hr). In this sense the change feels rather unmeaningful.

LordXberk

Megdar wrote:

First, the new system is working.... It is harder to place top 100 because now more people can try it. You exactly prove your point, the old system was bad because it was asking for more dedication, so many people were not even trying, no they see their chance, so the competition is harder.

Maybe this does not please you to now have more competition, but this will please D3, more money for them.

Second, no you could not play when you wanted, because of scaling. If you grinded the node right away, it was broing as hell to do it 6 time, took lots of time and sometime the starting level was making it impossible, missing health pack. If you waited the end, the scaling was totaly overboard, often time, I was not able to hit the last node for the 1 CP, with scaling nearly 50% my level (level 200 roster with mob at over 300)

Yes right now, they will have to adjust progression number, I'll easly do double the progression by playing with less constrain then before.

Again, we've got multiple changes that make analyzing PVE changes more difficult.

First, I think the current (non-test) system has community scaling turned off, so hitting the nodes whenever you wanted was a feasible solution to hit max prog. I never called for doing 6 clears right away (or at all, unless you wanted t50 placement).

Second, the NEW system will require more dedication. You have to do more clears to get the same prizes. That is MORE dedication. Playing anytime you want is a falsehood. In order to get placement, you have to play for 3-4hrs at the end of each sub and beginning of next sub. At least w/ the 8hrs, you can spread out the grind and it is actually less of a grind. Plus, it's somewhat flexible - it won't kill your placement to do 6hrs or 10hrs unless you're t10).

Third, maybe the competition will ramp up. Maybe it's bcs ppl don't give up after missing one clear (although they still won't be playing optimally unless they grind at sub beginning). Maybe it's bcs the scaling stops after a certain amount. Maybe it's bcs there is a 20pt node you can clear ad infinitum. Who knows, bcs they made all these changes simultaneously.

Fourth, good luck w/ the 'doubling max progression and not playing w/ any time constraint' argument. You might have a bit more flexibility in when you play (which I argue is an illusion); however, you'll be playing much, much longer. Also, enjoy grinding the 7/7 nodes for 'double max progression' and getting ZERO rewards. As it stands, only 2-3 of the rewards are really worth anything as it is. I'd love to play each node ~10x for nothing.

Lastly, this brings me to the point that I really want to make - I don't care how the system is set up; however, if the devs want me to play more, then they need to find a better reward structure. I refuse to double my PVE time for the same craptacular rewards.

smkspy

Because they screwed everything when 5 stars were created.

Megdar

I did not grind 4h in the last hour, I've done each node at 7, at time I wanted, without checking for the 24 hours timer, and I was top 100.

With the 8 hours, I was not able, node were too hard in the end. I don't know if they removed the comunity scaling, but I've seen node that I succeeded going down in level so... I also seen node jumping 100 level after I've cleared it.

I've disregarded 8 hours cooldown in previous event, I was bearly making progression, and I was not even making top 100, so experience of everyone change...

MarvelMan

Crowl wrote:

MarvelMan wrote:

Megdar wrote:

First, the new system is working.... It is harder to place top 100 because now more people can try it.

Why is this the definition of working? Wouldn't more effort = more rewards be a BETTER definition?

The point is that the old system limited trying to hit t100 to less people, it is tougher to reach that level now because it has become more feasible for more people.

The problem with the idea that more effort = more rewards is that should relate to an increase in progression rewards e.g. adding the essential 4* into the rewards seems like a nobrainer by this point.

Might just be me, and its entirely empirically based on my experiences with the test pves, but it feels a whole lot harder to hit T100 now. If it requires more effort, even spread out, wouldnt THAT be more restrictive on who can hit T100? Higher placement now requires that the time you can put in be more coalesced into a block. That seems restrictive as well, to those who can sit for 3-4 hours at sub change over.

Ill defer to aes for the math, but it seems the difficulty of each placement tier is exponentially harder than the previous, so maybe this is a good thing for those seeking to hit T250.

Calnexin

SnowcaTT wrote:

Why D3 wants everyone to win is you always have more new players (starters) than you have vets - they have to hook those newer players. The "best roster wins" argument doesn't fly with those starters - D3 likely has data showing the "most time played wins" argument doesn't work with them either.

Gaming socialism.

You can't create a game in which the top-tier always dominate. If you want to keep a robust playerbase you have to hand out rewards to lower-tiered players so they can do something in the game besides get their butt kicked by vets. The top of the pile will contain a solid base that contributes monetarily on a regular basis, but if you want it to grow you need new blood - both for direct dollars and as prey for the top of the food chain.

So - they hand out higher-tier rewards for lower-level play to entice the lower-level players to keep playing, and maybe entice a few dollars out of their wallet in the process.

PvP seems like a pretty pure concept - you reach max on that by having the best roster and being at least moderately skilled in the core gameplay. PvE is the place where you catch up. The top tier don't need the rewards being offered (though they often take them, regardless). The lower tier really need those 3* covers, HP, and Iso influx.

Smudge

LordXberk wrote:

Under the new system, you still have to do that now (so no improvement), but in order to finish in the t100, you HAVE to clear 4x at sub start and do the end clear. It's MORE work for placement which we are already arguing shouldn't exist.

I'm in the middle of sub2 now (slice 4) and I've done somewhat optimal clears (done the most nodes a full 4 clears within the first couple of hours and an end grind), but I'm sitting at 200th. At this point under the old system (w/ less effort more spaced out), I'd be sitting at t50 - t100 right now. And, don't get me started on the 20pt easy node grinders (bots?). Oh, and dear Lord, what happens for new releases. I've never done it, but I'd have to consider bracket shopping at the end and just give up the CP and ISO for new releases.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but this part is not entirely true. It's bracket dependent. So far, I have done the following in slice 4 (I am in U.S. Central Time so subs flip at 22:00 local time for me)...

Sub 1: Hit all nodes 7x and the team-up node 5x all at once with about 6 hours remaining in the sub. I did not start playing at the start of the sub, nor did I do anything after my clears. No grinding 20 point nodes. I finished the sub in 27th.
Sub 2 (so far): Hit most of the nodes 4x last night after the sub started, but fell asleep before I could get to essentials and trivials. I finished those this morning to 4x. I plan to let them refresh to full tonight/tomorrow, clear the remaining grind to 20 points and be done. Right now, I am at 89th in the sub which I attribute to more people not stopping at the 4x point. Based on this information alone, if you choose to dedicate the time to the start 4x clear and then do the end grind, you will likely have a significant advantage.

My score of 28K is still good for 34th overall in my bracket at this point, and it'll only improve when I finish my clears tonight and tomorrow.

What all of this highlights to me is that they're testing a ton of things, but a key variable they're failing to test is the bracketing system. Your experience of being in 200th (is that 200th overall, or just 200th in sub 2 by the way? very very important distinction as I'm 89th sub 2, 34th overall...) is vastly different from my experience in my vet bracket.

It is even more important to take a different look at the bracket system when it is new release time. I don't have the wool pulled over my eyes; don't think that for a moment. While this test system has been a dramatic improvement over the previous three in my opinion, I know full well how much new character releases will suck if this were to be rolled out as the new norm.

LordXberk

Smudge wrote:

LordXberk wrote:

Under the new system, you still have to do that now (so no improvement), but in order to finish in the t100, you HAVE to clear 4x at sub start and do the end clear. It's MORE work for placement which we are already arguing shouldn't exist.

I'm in the middle of sub2 now (slice 4) and I've done somewhat optimal clears (done the most nodes a full 4 clears within the first couple of hours and an end grind), but I'm sitting at 200th. At this point under the old system (w/ less effort more spaced out), I'd be sitting at t50 - t100 right now. And, don't get me started on the 20pt easy node grinders (bots?). Oh, and dear Lord, what happens for new releases. I've never done it, but I'd have to consider bracket shopping at the end and just give up the CP and ISO for new releases.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but this part is not entirely true. It's bracket dependent. So far, I have done the following in slice 4 (I am in U.S. Central Time so subs flip at 22:00 local time for me)...

Sub 1: Hit all nodes 7x and the team-up node 5x all at once with about 6 hours remaining in the sub. I did not start playing at the start of the sub, nor did I do anything after my clears. No grinding 20 point nodes. I finished the sub in 27th.
Sub 2 (so far): Hit most of the nodes 4x last night after the sub started, but fell asleep before I could get to essentials and trivials. I finished those this morning to 4x. I plan to let them refresh to full tonight/tomorrow, clear the remaining grind to 20 points and be done. Right now, I am at 89th in the sub which I attribute to more people not stopping at the 4x point. Based on this information alone, if you choose to dedicate the time to the start 4x clear and then do the end grind, you will likely have a significant advantage.

My score of 28K is still good for 34th overall in my bracket at this point, and it'll only improve when I finish my clears tonight and tomorrow.

What all of this highlights to me is that they're testing a ton of things, but a key variable they're failing to test is the bracketing system. Your experience of being in 200th (is that 200th overall, or just 200th in sub 2 by the way? very very important distinction as I'm 89th sub 2, 34th overall...) is vastly different from my experience in my vet bracket.

It is even more important to take a different look at the bracket system when it is new release time. I don't have the wool pulled over my eyes; don't think that for a moment. While this test system has been a dramatic improvement over the previous three in my opinion, I know full well how much new character releases will suck if this were to be rolled out as the new norm.

Very fair point on the bracket type. I know it matters, but didn't want to further complicate the discussion. I'm in Slice 4 and pretty sure a heavy vet bracket. I played a bit more at lunch and sitting at 145th w/ 25k for the entire event. At 155th w/ 14k in sub2.

And, again, my point is that it's forcing me to play thru an end grind and 4x start to be somewhat optimal. This is a much worse outcome for anyone wanting placement and it doesn't necessarily help the progression. All this positive energy about the test would be almost as high if they just lowered the max progression w/o any other changes.

Scaling and reward structure changes are definitely needed. Changing to a 24hr clock is highly debatable.