Daily Reminder Devs: Eliminate Competitive PvE

irwando

Hmm, no front page post on this yet today, so why not?

How did I get screwed today? I dare visit a friend, making me two hours late on a clear and missing my full grind (only 3-4 times instead of 5-6) each. So now I've slipped from 10-12th place down to 30th; competing for 3 covers dropped to likely only 1, because good luck gaining that much ground at the top during a new character release. And the worst part? I still need to play and grind to make sure I don't slip too far, so I don't lose the cover completely and screw myself and my team for Civil War II.

So stop screwing with tests. Any test that includes an unlimited grind and doesn't focus on establishing a non-competitive PvE is a fail. So what if more people get covers? They'll need HP for slots and ISO to level them so you'll make your money.

Linkster79

If story events go progression only I hope folks realise it will go one of two ways.

1. Gauntlet only style where only the best rosters and those with every essential can obtain the top rewards. Those with developing rosters will either be scaled out or won't have all the required characters to complete events.

2. Events stay as is with a refresh timer and the placement rewards get added above the top end of the progression ladder. I would imagine those extra rewards will be at around 2x - 2.5x, possibly even 3x current progression standards and will still require optimal play time. Using this system means alliance rewards need to be scrapped so as to remove any possible competitiveness.

The game model requires that somebody has to miss out, I don't know why but it just does.

hodayathink

Linkster79 wrote:

If story events go progression only I hope folks realise it will go one of two ways.

1. Gauntlet only style where only the best rosters and those with every essential can obtain the top rewards. Those with developing rosters will either be scaled out or won't have all the required characters to complete events.

2. Events stay as is with a refresh timer and the placement rewards get added above the top end of the progression ladder. I would imagine those extra rewards will be at around 2x - 2.5x, possibly even 3x current progression standards and will still require optimal play time. Using this system means alliance rewards need to be scrapped so as to remove any possible competitiveness.

The game model requires that somebody has to miss out, I don't know why but it just does.

You forgot this one:

3. Only the covers are added as progression rewards, and not the tokens for the sub-events or the placement ISO that you would receive for both the main events and the sub-events. So the ISO shortage gets even worse.

slidecage

irwando wrote:

Hmm, no front page post on this yet today, so why not?

How did I get screwed today? I dare visit a friend, making me two hours late on a clear and missing my full grind (only 3-4 times instead of 5-6) each. So now I've slipped from 10-12th place down to 30th; competing for 3 covers dropped to likely only 1, because good luck gaining that much ground at the top during a new character release. And the worst part? I still need to play and grind to make sure I don't slip too far, so I don't lose the cover completely and screw myself and my team for Civil War II.

So stop screwing with tests. Any test that includes an unlimited grind and doesn't focus on establishing a non-competitive PvE is a fail. So what if more people get covers? They'll need HP for slots and ISO to level them so you'll make your money.

wrong cause you can easy make 2000 HP a month just doing pve. i have enough slots that i could stop playing and still have enough till july 2017


dont see why people have a problem with PVE.... i cant play booo hoo guess what i cant make 1000 in PVP so i think that should be lowered to 300 pts so everone gets the 4 star in pvp.

i was in 1st in pvp but i fogot to shiled now im 109th so i can make the same complaint your making about missing 2 hours in pve.

said it once an say it again only way to fix pve

2 grinds 1 3 star
3 grinds 2 3 stars
4 grinds 25 cp
5 grinds 3rd 3 star
6 grinds 4 star
7 grind 4 star
8 grind 4 star

if you think your getting covers with less work then that your just kidding yourself


how are you going to screw yourself for war.. hear the same complaint on the first run and none got screwed

acescracked

I hate Gauntlet more than competitive pve. I hope pve doesn't go that route.

I do dislike setting an alarm for clears, and grinding nodes to 1 at the end of each sub as well. But replacing current competitive pve with gauntlet or impossible to hit progression is worse.

Starsaber

slidecage wrote:

irwando wrote:

Hmm, no front page post on this yet today, so why not?

How did I get screwed today? I dare visit a friend, making me two hours late on a clear and missing my full grind (only 3-4 times instead of 5-6) each. So now I've slipped from 10-12th place down to 30th; competing for 3 covers dropped to likely only 1, because good luck gaining that much ground at the top during a new character release. And the worst part? I still need to play and grind to make sure I don't slip too far, so I don't lose the cover completely and screw myself and my team for Civil War II.

So stop screwing with tests. Any test that includes an unlimited grind and doesn't focus on establishing a non-competitive PvE is a fail. So what if more people get covers? They'll need HP for slots and ISO to level them so you'll make your money.

wrong cause you can easy make 2000 HP a month just doing pve. i have enough slots that i could stop playing and still have enough till july 2017


dont see why people have a problem with PVE.... i cant play booo hoo guess what i cant make 1000 in PVP so i think that should be lowered to 300 pts so everone gets the 4 star in pvp.

i was in 1st in pvp but i fogot to shiled now im 109th so i can make the same complaint your making about missing 2 hours in pve.

said it once an say it again only way to fix pve

2 grinds 1 3 star
3 grinds 2 3 stars
4 grinds 25 cp
5 grinds 3rd 3 star
6 grinds 4 star
7 grind 4 star
8 grind 4 star

if you think your getting covers with less work then that your just kidding yourself


how are you going to screw yourself for war.. hear the same complaint on the first run and none got screwed

Then start calling it what it really is, Grind PVP instead of pretending that it's PVE.

Another thing is that depending on your slice and bracket, you could do the same amount of work as someone else but get a higher or lower reward based solely on how active other people in your bracket were. Going to pure progression is the only way to ensure that two people who put the same amount of clears in get the same rewards. And that's completely discounting bracket snipers at the end of the event who get high placement by putting in the least possible effort.

Azoth658

acescracked wrote:

I hate Gauntlet more than competitive pve. I hope pve doesn't go that route.

I do dislike setting an alarm for clears, and grinding nodes to 1 at the end of each sub as well. But replacing current competitive pve with gauntlet or impossible to hit progression is worse.

People aren't asking for the Gauntlet here. People want the current PVE (new PVE / whatever) but with those top 10 placement rewards after the current 25CP.

Gauntlet when the scaling is not off the wall is fun to challenge your puzzling skills to beat high level teams once in a blue moon.

I won't set my alarm for a PVE and I can't clear fast enough at the end of events to hit those top 10 scores. So I for one would love having to clear a node 7 times for 3 4* covers

irwando

Azoth658 wrote:

acescracked wrote:

I hate Gauntlet more than competitive pve. I hope pve doesn't go that route.

I do dislike setting an alarm for clears, and grinding nodes to 1 at the end of each sub as well. But replacing current competitive pve with gauntlet or impossible to hit progression is worse.

People aren't asking for the Gauntlet here. People want the current PVE (new PVE / whatever) but with those top 10 placement rewards after the current 25CP.

Gauntlet when the scaling is not off the wall is fun to challenge your puzzling skills to beat high level teams once in a blue moon.

I won't set my alarm for a PVE and I can't clear fast enough at the end of events to hit those top 10 scores. So I for one would love having to clear a node 7 times for 3 4* covers

All of this. I happen to like Gauntlet but it can be frustrating. More of the team based events would be perfect.

I see no reason that more covers it there is bad. If people are earning a lot of covers quickly they'll need ISO and Hp - so let covers drive other sales!

firethorne

Azoth658 wrote:

People aren't asking for the Gauntlet here. People want the current PVE (new PVE / whatever) but with those top 10 placement rewards after the current 25CP.

I think most people realize that we're not asking for insanely challenging gauntlet type events. The problem, we expect the devs will try to make them, even though everyone knows that's not what we want. The devs will probably try to implement such things while still technically under a non-competitive structure. They are famously stingy, and if they were to make a change, it is a safe bet that the change would be right in line with the 0.1% deserve to get a meaningful reward mentality.

Ultimately, yes, competitive PvE is moronic. But, it mostly managed to work though the 3* meta, because even at mild level competitive play, you were still making roster progress. Now, were in a 5* meta, but the rewards haven't changed. The same level of play no longer gets you anything you need. That is what needs to change. If we were making 4 and 5 star progress through moderate competition, threads like this wouldn't exist.

There are a number of scenarios I can imagine where they'd implement some form of true PvE, where still only the top few who played the game like a full time job would have a sense of progress.

Merrick

There is only way I'd be in favor of dropping the competitive aspect of story events. (And please remember it is not the devs that call it PVE. That is a term you have given it). And that is if every event had a locked alliance with alliance progression goals.

Otherwise, dropping the competitive aspect would greatly reduce the amount of ISO, hero points, and command points we aquire and diminish the role of alliances.

Smudge

Merrick wrote:

There is only way I'd be in favor of dropping the competitive aspect of story events. (And please remember it is not the devs that call it PVE. That is a term you have given it). And that is if every event had a locked alliance with alliance progression goals.

Otherwise, dropping the competitive aspect would greatly reduce the amount of ISO, hero points, and command points we aquire and diminish the role of alliances.

Why can't the rewards be rolled into the progression system as discussed but keep alliances competitive? Why is it always "all or nothing?"

Besides that, we already have boss events with progression rewards. It shouldn't be that difficult to implement that system into the current story mode all around, though I disagree on the locked alliance. If we kept alliance competitive, there would be no need for that. Locking for story events where there is alliance progression, perhaps, but I'm still not sold on that. If you don't have stable alliance members for current story events, why should you have to have it for a new model that isn't boss style?

Merrick

If there are progression rewards for the alliance, (& the rewards are decent) the alliances would have to be locked. Otherwise, a few players could go to 50 or 100 different alliances, just to drop off points.

Cartz

It needs to fairer. Im in a sub where im doing 2-3 clears. Not even waiting for full refresh and im 19th. Its a vet bracket but the lazy one that sometimes shows up. How is that fair for someone who will doubke my overall score and get worse rewards. Due only to when they joined. Ridiculous.

BearVenger

irwando wrote:

Hmm, no front page post on this yet today, so why not?

How did I get screwed today? I dare visit a friend, making me two hours late on a clear and missing my full grind (only 3-4 times instead of 5-6) each. So now I've slipped from 10-12th place down to 30th; competing for 3 covers dropped to likely only 1, because good luck gaining that much ground at the top during a new character release. And the worst part? I still need to play and grind to make sure I don't slip too far, so I don't lose the cover completely and screw myself and my team for Civil War II.

So stop screwing with tests. Any test that includes an unlimited grind and doesn't focus on establishing a non-competitive PvE is a fail. So what if more people get covers? They'll need HP for slots and ISO to level them so you'll make your money.

Thanks for the reminder. I dared go grocery shopping and cooked dinner for my wife last night, accepting that such a moment of weakness would make the difference in one WM cover and the *chance* of two covers.

I'm sure such a moment was what each dev was hoping for when they went to mobile programming school.

revskip

Linkster79 wrote:

If story events go progression only I hope folks realise it will go one of two ways.

1. Gauntlet only style where only the best rosters and those with every essential can obtain the top rewards. Those with developing rosters will either be scaled out or won't have all the required characters to complete events.

2. Events stay as is with a refresh timer and the placement rewards get added above the top end of the progression ladder. I would imagine those extra rewards will be at around 2x - 2.5x, possibly even 3x current progression standards and will still require optimal play time. Using this system means alliance rewards need to be scrapped so as to remove any possible competitiveness.

The game model requires that somebody has to miss out, I don't know why but it just does.

Add to that the additional covers added to the end of the progression tree would have to be gated behind points that keep very similar ratios of covers released. Right now 1% of a bracket gets a single 4* cover while 0.2% receive 3+ covers. Any change that made it all progression would keep those ratios in tact since they are benchmarks that the dev use to keep people spending money. People like to advocate for all progression without realizing that all progression would mean hitting each node 12+ times to hit the top prizes. And that wouldn't even be a static thing. After each event they would be able to tweak that up to keep those ratios consistent. So if one event was grinded down and more than 1% hit the 4* cover the next event would require even more clears.

Gari

There already is an option. It's called a sandbox.

hodayathink

irwando wrote:

I see no reason that more covers it there is bad. If people are earning a lot of covers quickly they'll need ISO and Hp - so let covers drive other sales!

Except that if all you played was PvE (and I mean all you played, even excluding DDQ), right now, as long as you finish top 50 every day, you'd make more than 2000HP per month, which is what you'd need to keep up with the new releases if you were at the max cost per character slot. Especially since they removed the ability to whale covers, you can make all the HP you'd ever need just by playing PvE, let alone any casual play of PvP (i.e. getting as high as you can without spending on shields) or getting HP from taco tokens.

OneLastGambit

[/quote]

You forgot this one:

3. Only the covers are added as progression rewards, and not the tokens for the sub-events or the placement ISO that you would receive for both the main events and the sub-events. So the ISO shortage gets even worse.[/quote]

Why do people keep assuming the sub awards just vanish in progression? The sub awards just become progression rewards for that sub instead.

johnmcclane

Cartz wrote:

It needs to fairer. Im in a sub where im doing 2-3 clears. Not even waiting for full refresh and im 19th. Its a vet bracket but the lazy one that sometimes shows up. How is that fair for someone who will doubke my overall score and get worse rewards. Due only to when they joined. Ridiculous.

this.
this is one of the most unfair things in a game, or in life in general. Making the same effort and getting rewarded with something worse.
"You joined at 5PM and made 90k points? Here, that's a 3-covered new 4* for you!"
"And for you that made 92k points and joined at 10PM, there's a shiny single 3* cover that you should already have!"

WEBGAS

Cartz wrote:

It needs to fairer. Im in a sub where im doing 2-3 clears. Not even waiting for full refresh and im 19th. Its a vet bracket but the lazy one that sometimes shows up. How is that fair for someone who will doubke my overall score and get worse rewards. Due only to when they joined. Ridiculous.

This is one of the major issue of PVE....It's not fair.
At the end of the event, people with half of my score, in other brackets, get always a best placement.
This is ridicoluos, hence the need to make PVE with progressive rewards only.

Wolarsen

by irwando » Mon May 23, 2016 12:29 am

And the worst part? I still need to play and grind to make sure I don't slip too far, so I don't lose the cover completely and screw myself and my team for Civil War II.

I agree plenty with your post; I have children and you never know when one will fall sick or just get an afternoon of difficult homework, and it sucks if it happens on the 5th day of an event...

But regarding your coment on screwing Civil War if you miss completely new WMachine cover, remember one of the nice things of the event is you can clear required nodes on the opposite side with a different character. Yes, you will miss some points of not clearing that node on the proper side, but the loss will be minimal compared with a boss fight.