POLL: Meet Rocket & Groot - New PVE - Like/Dislike?

Phumade

BlackSheep101 wrote:

Polares wrote:

Difficulty is wrong again. Good rosters are again penalized, specially if you have buffed chars (like I do, having 4hor and Rhulk championed doesn't help me because they don't play well together but the systems adds the buffed levels of both)

Not seeing this. I have high levels in both and have no trouble pushing to 7/7 on every node.

I'm in a kind S5 bracket, and have been tied with people in the top 10 after starting 4 hours last and hitting each node 4 times in both the first and second subs. I took each node in the first sub to 7/7 but did not grind any further, and finished 9th. 1st and 2nd place appear to be grinding 20's to ensure their placement. I do see the potential for abuse, and feel they should make every node bottom out at 1.

The 25 cp is set ridiculously low. If ridiculously low gets me the cp less than halfway through the event, then a reasonable threshold should be obtainable with reasonable effort throughout the event.

I just think they need to give some philosophical thought to how they implement essentials and scaling. The matches are beatable but 5* level opponents deal damage at such absurd levels that one or two bad cascades can effectively end the match. Matches aren't fun when they are decided on cascade luck.

In addition, because the AI scaling is based on the top of my roster, I am really forced to use equivalent chars vs being able to play different styles. I.e. If the AI is gonna scale the goons to fight my OML and Phoenix, No combination of my 30 champed 3*s is gonna be competitive in that match.

Essentials need to be rethought in a world were 5* scaled chars can come into a match with over 30k health. It seems incredibly silly that your required to bring a 5K health 2* pocket knife, to a death match with rocket launchers.

The format gotten quite a bit better but the scaling needs to be tweaked a bit more.

Thevipper

Keep the progression and time schedule defently only part i like. scailing well sub 1 spoke alot didn't get all 4 clears on all nodes but i went in health pack dry also, in sub 3 i will know more but i feel a bit lower increase might be needed. Placement well my 99 days playing said try but never count your chickens till its hatched.

OneLastGambit

Ok well I tested the previous tests for t10 placement (right next to a normal pve for t10) and found I could hit t10 no problem and it didn't take ridiculous grinding.

I said (very recently) that I would use the exact same tactics as in previous tests (in which I placed t10 every time) to see how it might affect competitive play in a test pve where the prizes are good.


I'm currently 31st playing exactly as I did before , so placement during this test is more difficult that I can say for sure.

Now the part I am struggling with is why. Its very difficult to draw cause and effect here because of 3 factors which were no present before

1. The abnormally low max progression- in my opinion this shouldn't affect competitive play as those people tail off once they've got their prize.
2. The prize : cyke is a way better prize than the previous test prize (i believe it was falcap or Mr f not sure which)
3. The ability to grind for 20 points.

In my personal opinion I would still have expected to place t10 even with the better prize using the same tactics as previously - though I would've expected competition to be tougher.
I think the ability to grind for 20points is what's changed placement ability. That's only my opinion though - as I said direct cause and effect is not possible.

Overall I am in favour of the new system and final progression score. But personally I consider this test to be a failure by comparison to the others in terms of competitive play.

EDIT: the scaling is also wrong. I had two muscles and hood beat my full health PvP 300 oml, champed hb and fist on turn 5 because of a cascade.

It just needs to be slightly lower. 10 levels maybe

Jam_Adams

also, opinions need to be based NOT on how much you 'like' the newest iteration compared to the previous tests. of course this is the best iteration.

opinions NEED to be based on a comparison to the standard format (i.e. 8 hr. refresh).

i'm seeing some decisions on the poll based on the former, which just may lead to the devs considering this a win and making it final. before you click LIKE, please ask yourself if you'd be happy if the tests ended here and this latest iteration is the final result.

Quick Fire

Dislike.

It requires a grind at the beginning and the end which butt up against each other. I can't make that consistent of a commitment. I could play for a short time every eight hours. I was consistently top fifty. I can't pull top fifty in the new system. I'm sure someone else will benefit and that's good but it sucks for me personally.

Uncletas

Like but let me explain.

I am a progression PVE player. I do shoot for top 100 if possible but I don't even stress it if I don't get that. I am much more interested to get that CP at the end. Now with the old system, I would usually get the CP but it was a large grind. Typically 3 clears at certain times to get the most points plus some extra grinding. Worse recently with all the new characters as it was 4-5 clears to even get close. I understand that I could not wait for the timer, but that means even more grinding as I am not getting as many points.

With the new one, three clears on my schedule and I get 25 CPs? I will take that especially since the last time Rocket and Groot was run, I was wiping out on nodes with basically the same teams I am using now. This time, no wipes so far. So for max progression and easier/faster? Yes. IF it stays the same and it is 3 clears to get CP, I am in.

Now, please note, I am a progression player and that is what I am looking for. I know that a lot of people are looking at these and seeing how much time it takes to hit top 10, however, I would also say that if you are hitting top 10 that means you are the top 1% of your bracket. Most players will never get anywhere near there so it doesn't matter to them. But if you want to play to be that top 10, that is great, good luck, more power to you. That being said, I am also with those people that say prizes have to be changed and made better but that is for another topic.

Dragon_Nexus

I'm...actually not sure. This 2-day part has screwed me up.

I have been playing this like previous PvEs, doing a clear as the node starts at 10pm, another one before bed at about 3am, one around 1-2pm and then grinding before 10.
Now, I'm at the point where I did four clears by 2pm and I have a 24 hour countdown. I don't know whether to do a clear before bed or to wait for the full 24 hours and grind down then (I have work at 4pm and the sub will close before I get back).

I'm kinda enjoying this overall. I mean, I'm still playing past the 12 hour mark unlike the previous tests of this system. I just don't know how good it's going to be for placement for me. The old system on non-release events I'd usually finish top 50 just fine, but this one I'm currently at about 120th, unsure of whether I should do a clear or not.

I REALLY don't like the prospect of grinding the nodes down 4 times each as soon as they open and then coming back to grind them down a day later.

JamesV

I am very mixed on this.

I only really pay PVE for progression and sometimes the game's all consuming PLAY ME IF YOU WANT ANYTHING attitude is pretty toxic. I like where my difficulty starts, I like where they set progression for this PVE*, but I also see the bigger picture of how nasty this system can be for people who play competitive PVE. The PVE system tries too do to much and serve too many players and benefits to some pull from others. So while this event is working for me, I know it's going to impact others (up to and including alliance mates) when we have a new release under it.





* PVE progression should be a fixed value of 3x each node in a sub. It is ridiculous to have it keep shifting based on what lunar phase is occurring. Especially since the game uses 4 different formats of PVE/Story content (Growth Industry style events, Gauntlet, Deadpool Daily and "regular" story PVE events) and only the "regular ones" require some kind of shifting progression goal depending on if its a new release or not. Grinding for placement/dependency on any possible rubber banding should not impact the notion of "hey, complete this content get this reward.".

Evilgenius_9

Skygazing wrote:

Polares wrote:

Difficulty is wrong again. Good rosters are again penalized, specially if you have buffed chars (like I do, having 4hor and Rhulk championed doesn't help me because they don't play well together but the systems adds the buffed levels of both)

I'm actually having similar issues with the scaling and I don't even have any hugely boosted characters. Last event my top 4 were a boosted 361 Bobby, a 278 HB, a 272 JG, and a 265 SS.

My Bobby essentials capped out around 212, and the last node capped around 302.This wasn't much of an issue, since a 361 Bobby glides through just about anything, especially when paired with IM40.

My R&G scaling: Top 4 are a 278 HB, a 272 JG, a 271 Bobby, and a 271 XFW. Thoress essentials are capping at around 299 and final node is capping around 316.

With a boosted 4* last PvE I was facing 212/302 and with just regular 4*s this PvE I've been facing 299/316.

That's an insane difference, especially when you're facing down Hood. You can't tell me that finishing champing XFW made that much of an impact. I know that they said scaling would be "a bit higher" than current PvE, but having to face down a stupidly leveled Hood and maggia is nearly impossible without an equally boosted character. I managed to clear the fully scaled last node of sub 1 exactly once out of five attempts, after which I didn't even bother. And that required the slow stupidity of Hulk/MoStorm/KK, whereas the two attempts apiece I made with HB/IF/SW and Bobby/IM40/SW were all met with complete failure.

Scaling still needs to be tweaked, and despite personally capitalizing on the 20 point insanity, that needs to go too.

You are forgetting the not leveled, but 5 covered (and 3 powered) 5 stars you have according to the roster in your sig. They have stated they want people to level characters. I have a feeling your 5*'s are counting against you when added with the champed 4*'s.

Not saying it is correct, but just pointing out that it is probably part of the difficult scaling you are seeing.

KGB

I much prefer the new system. Assuming they ultimately settle on 4 full clears for progression (vs 3 in this test) and the game gives full points for the first 4 clears that tells me exactly how much work I have to do (4 clears, but only 4 and I can do them anytime).

I like to play in bursts like many others here have mentioned but sometimes I need to do 2 clears in one sitting. Under the old system I was punished for that since the points were lower on the 2nd clear. That meant I needed to do some extra grind at the end to make up the points which wasn't always possible.

More importantly with a middling roster (44 characters consisting of 4 1*, 8 2*, 22 3* and a 10 4*) I rarely have all 3 essential characters (this is the rare event I do). Under the old system if you weren't doing optimal timed clears (impossible for me) it meant I was always getting less than full points from my clears so the amount of grinding needed to make up for the missing essentials was hard to calculate and meant lots of extra grinds for ever less points. I'll still have to do extra clears under the new system but at least on all the nodes I'll have the right number of points for progression to start out with after 4 clears so I just have to make up the missing essential points.

That said, I sympathize with T10 competitive players because it's obvious this new system is going to make it harder to get top scores in competitive play.

KGB

P.S. One other thing for veteran players to consider when comparing scores in non-veteran brackets. Most of us don't have all the essential characters (as I noted above) so that's one reason our overall scores are lower than your brackets where you have all the essential characters. Just missing 1 character can lower scores by thousands of points (tens of thousands on a 7 day event or wave node essentials).

like1tiger

I really dont like it.
Its nice to hit progression after a day and a half but what then?
The only way to get in the t100 is to spend all day grinding and grinding the same nodes over and over for no rewards.

Anyone who has all day to grind a 20 point node will rank higher then everyone else. so now instead of playing for 1-3 hours a day you have to play 12+ hours and grind node after node for 20 points... this is so amazingly stupid

Skygazing

Evilgenius_9 wrote:

Skygazing wrote:

With a boosted 4* last PvE I was facing 212/302 and with just regular 4*s this PvE I've been facing 299/316.

Scaling still needs to be tweaked, and despite personally capitalizing on the 20 point insanity, that needs to go too.

You are forgetting the not leveled, but 5 covered (and 3 powered) 5 stars you have according to the roster in your sig. They have stated they want people to level characters. I have a feeling your 5*'s are counting against you when added with the champed 4*'s.

Not saying it is correct, but just pointing out that it is probably part of the difficult scaling you are seeing.

Even if that is true, it doesn't change how ridiculous the scaling is. Even if I had enough ISO to push my two most-covered (1/3/1 Phoenix and 2/2/1 SS) to their limits, I doubt that would be enough given that their most reliable trait will still be match damage.

My point is that whatever scaling algorithm they are using here is too harsh for my roster. I'm fine with fighting enemies of that level if I have even just one solid boosted 4* to work with, but there's something intensely wrong when two of the best combos/synergies in the game are getting wiped from full on multiple attempts.

sinnerjfl

Dislike.

I don't like the huge block of grinding required to place well and have given up on that already.

Small clear every 8h was a way better deal than grinding for 2 hours + more grind at the beginning. UGH.

Azoth658

Definitely an interesting box of reactions with the divide coming from progression earners and placement players generally.

I wonder if they moved those top 10 rewards onto the progression system after the CP whether people would still be having the same reaction?

But taking a step back from our own views it looks like in general over half (comfortably) see this as a good PVE format.

Therefore this is a success on part of the developers.

You can't please everyone with your changes even if you handed out rewards like sweets you'd have hardcore players fuming that people don't have to earn them anymore. So the question is are more than half your player base happy with the changes.

Now I know this is a forum poll but let's be honest the hardcore prevail here more so than the casual player and it is the casual players that benefit.

I imagine (as we don't get told) that the developers aims are not to force you to grind for hours etc but to keep as many people as possibly playing the game (more chance for purchases). They know the whales won't leave, they are too invested like any good addict. But those players that might put in a few pounds here and few dollars there, will leave if they don't continue to get the same enjoyment as they were doing.

As they moved to the 4* tier people firmly in 3* territory got more and more frustrated at the lack of progression and many players dropped out of the game . How do they resolve such a problem? (the champion system and LTs). PVE participation starts to drop and developing a new PVE takes too long for them, so give the casual players who are dropping off a reason to stay and that's a quality of life change.

I understand the frustrations from those who play competitively to try and make the most of the current rewards system but think of the majority of players. (The 990 you score above in every PVE).

This system is a step in the right direction to giving casual players a place to play whenever they want and earn good rewards (a progression only system). Let PVP be where competitive people play for placement rewards. Heck create a PVP/E area in there for people to play PVE on a competitive scale.

donnel

The takeaway personally from the poll is that folks are 50/50 in favor vs. against/indifferent. Indifferent means the proposed changes are not a clear improvement vs status quo, so why do something that's moves us laterally?

One key benefit folks are pointing to is lower progression, but I don't know if we should associate that with the changes. It was not mentioned as a feature of new pve structure in the notes. They need engagement in order to do proper testing after all.

I don't believe the changes are a net benefit for all players.
- For placement, some roster types win while other roster types lose (more accurate scaling means everyone can be semi-competitive). They're not changing the rewards themselves. It's been asked over and over, but why should a 2* roster be competing with a 4* roster for 4* covers? That extra cyclops cover holds completely different value for a low level roster with none of his covers vs. a 3* roster in transition vs. a 5* roster going for champion levels. Yet we're all treated the same, competing relentlessly for the limited rewards the game offers.
- For timing/flexibility, this very much depends on whether you care about placement. If not, play practically whenever you want regardless of pve format, and the same # of clears as the average person will get you there. If you do care about placement, let's keep in mind top 100 is 10%, so even at this level we're talking about a rather selective group. Changes that allow more people to compete for rewards makes it more likely that events become more intense/grindy than it was before.

To sum, up, they haven't changed the aspect of PVE that makes it a tremendous time suck for competitive players. Maybe they've opened up competition for rewards through scaling and timers, but where there are winners there are also losers. I would much rather see development on issues the majority of players see as problematic, rather than a minor revision that makes it look like we're incrementally moving forward.

kaelad

aesthetocyst wrote:

Well .... casting about for something positive to say ... it's a better iteration on the same godawful time suck than the last three tests were.

Still, compared to the prevailing 8hr refresh setup, it's a step in the wrong direction, IMO. Encouraging fewer but longer play sessions = yuck. If we must have a grindcentric game mode, I prefer it in smaller bits.

This is, after all, a mobile game....right? Y'know, play on the go it bite-sized bits?

sinnerjfl wrote:

Dislike.

I don't like the huge block of grinding required to place well and have given up on that already.

Small clear every 8h was a way better deal than grinding for 2 hours + more grind at the beginning. UGH.

These two quotes echo my sentiments. The change is great for those only concerned with progression, but for those looking for placement it's not. If I had all 3 essentials, I could easily get top 100 with just 3 clears/sub, no grinding. Add a little grinding and I could climb to top 20/50. Now the only way that seems possible with the new optimal play for placement would be to play for 2-3 hours when the sub opens then grind at the end. Just way too much time all at once to play a mobile game. I liked the first few tests because I could play when I wanted to, but I guess I'm too used to good placement rewards now that are too hard for me to get now. I used to be in the Love camp, now in the Dislike.

Bulls

It doensn't take much more time to play than our current model, it's not way harder to be in top 10 playing optimally than it's now. So far Im after 4clears in sub3 and that's my time commitment to this event:
sub1 - 72minutes for first 4 clears, 93minutes 4 end clears
sub 2 - 54 minutes for first 4 clears, 18minutes for 1 clear 24h later, 62 minutes 4 end clears
sub 3 - 49 minutes for first 4 clears, final grind - tomorrow and Im not gonna spend more than 1.5h on it.
Total it will be ~8h spent on competitvly playing during 4 days long event. I've finished both sub 1 and bub 2 in top 10, most likely that will be my placement in sub 3 and overal. I also didn't hit 20 points node even once and I'm not planing to do before end. My scores would be enough to finish in top10 in any other slice for sub 1, if it will be correct for sub 2 we will see when I get data from players playing in other slices when sub 2 will get to the end there.

Overal if they're planing to stick to competitive pve I belive this one is better than what we have now. Probably taking down bottom line from 20 to 10 would chill out nay-sayers a bit but I don't think it's nessessery.

Konman

"indifferent"

PVE in general is a sucky grind fest no where near worth the time investment.

PeterGibbons316

I went with Love it for 3 reasons....

1.) The max progression was considerably lower. I don't often play PvE for placement, and the amount of time I had to commit to the event seemed much more reasonable to me (still haven't hit max progression yet, but I can already tell that it will be easily reached around the start of the final sub for me.)

2.) The format is better than the previous tests. Only having to clear 4 times to start the timer is an improvement, and allows me to continue to play in my preferred time slice and still be able to clear optimally should I feel the need to be more competitive.

3.) The scaling is MUCH better. I agree with Malcrof that high level rosters don't seem to be penalized nearly as badly as previous test runs. I just recently champed my Phoenix and PvP has become a nightmare on healthpacks (seems backward right?), and so not only do I need to be able to clear PvE without healthpacks, I need to do it without having to use my Phoenix........and I was able to with ease. Phoenix/Rulk was my PvP A-team and I made an effort to get through PvE clears without using them at all, and didn't struggle one bit. It was very refreshing to be able to use many of my 4*s (JG/Cyke/SWitch were effective, as well as XFW/XFDP/Mystique and Iceman/XFDP/IM40) and not have to resort to winfinite to get through tougher nodes without using my 5*s (although OML/IF did come in handy on a couple of occasions).

So yeah, overall I'm pretty happy with this new format......so long as the scaling remains similar. It's the right time commitment and the right amount of challenge for me to still be able to use my 4* roster despite having a champed 5*.