New Mission Difficulty Test: Enemy of the State *Updated

Hayek

Merrick wrote:

And upon further thinking, this is the stupidest thing ever.

Assuming you finish days 1-6, the entire event and placement will come down to who finishes day 7 the fastest.

Are you kidding? This is literally the best thing ever. On a 7 day PvE, they've just removed the play on a schedule out of 6 of the subs. Exactly what we've been asking for. What they shouldn't have done is increased the number of available clears. 6 clears per nodes in the new system would have been fantastic.

Gmax101

Having now done my first few clears.... I think it is a good idea poorly executed...

In an earlier post I flippantly suggested that the rewards are grouped in to tiers.

Having now seen the implementation, I think it might actually be a solution.

Firstly, the extra rewards are very very cool. It will reward people who want to grind. This is a good thing!

However, people really care about the Event Tokens and CP... ie the more interesting rewards.

So here's the thing. If 4 clears on every thing gets you the 25cp progression, lets set up a tier of 4. This would include the interesting high end reward (CP, 1000 ISO or Event Token), the Standard Token, maybe an average ISO reward and a boost reward.

This way anyone just getting the progression will get the interesting rewards, but also some of the smaller ones. (No, I don't know why there have to be poor rewards, but hey, this is what we have)

Then, once that is done for a node, the "Grind Mode" is opened. This includes extra ISO nodes... then people have a reason to grind and get something for it.

NOBODY should have to hit a steadily increasing node 15 times to finally get the CP.

But if they fix the randomness actually, its kinda cool.... but I am in the Champ 3* sweet spot and I can play whenever I want... AWESOME!


From a difficulty perspective, it seems about right. I think I will struggle for the final clearances... but that is about what I would expect for the hard/essential nodes.

Merrick

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

And upon further thinking, this is the stupidest thing ever.

Assuming you finish days 1-6, the entire event and placement will come down to who finishes day 7 the fastest.

Are you kidding? This is literally the best thing ever. On a 7 day PvE, they've just removed the play on a schedule out of 6 of the subs. Exactly what we've been asking for. What they shouldn't have done is increased the number of available clears. 6 clears per nodes in the new system would have been fantastic.

Obviously we will never agree. But I believe that how well a person plays during 6/7th of the event should actually impact their placement in the overall event.

Same with alliance ranking. The first place alliance shouldn't be the one who's players can go into slice 1.

MissChinch

I agree that it looks like there are some good ideas in this test that require a bit of refinement...

Time/schedule independence is very close to complete (I highly doubt ties are gonna be anywhere near the problem people expect)
The ability to play more and get more iso/rewards (I'm kinda surprised that has been met with such negativity)

If they don't allow ties in the placement, then just go back to having nodes bottom out at 1-5 points... placement is relative to the other players anyway that would have little impact on progression (read: wouldn't devolve into people grinding for points this way to hit progression goals cause the points would be nearly insignificant)

Theres a lot of concern surrounding the CP offered as a reward combined with increasing the number of rewards in the pool... That system in general isn't great for having outlier rewards either very good or very bad, increasing the size of the pool just exacerbates the problem. I'm greedy, and even for me a single CP isn't worth me banging my head against a wave node for 10+ times, (its just 1/25th of an LT, ok 1/20th of a classics pull) especially when youre gifted 25 CPs just by playing FAR less than 10+ times per node... so practically its way to small a prize to get bent outta shape over.

While I think that's sound advice, I'm sure people don't want to hear it, so I'd suggest that only ISO ever be rewarded from node completion, all the tokens, boosts and CP that are currently given as node rewards be sprinkled into the progression rewards. Instead of having each progression reward take increasing number of points, I'd like a lot of little rewards in there, toss the covers and little bonuses at us frequently closer resembling what happens in LRs.

bataglia

MissChinch

Merrick wrote:

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

And upon further thinking, this is the stupidest thing ever.

Assuming you finish days 1-6, the entire event and placement will come down to who finishes day 7 the fastest.

Are you kidding? This is literally the best thing ever. On a 7 day PvE, they've just removed the play on a schedule out of 6 of the subs. Exactly what we've been asking for. What they shouldn't have done is increased the number of available clears. 6 clears per nodes in the new system would have been fantastic.

Obviously we will never agree. But I believe that how well a person plays during 6/7th of the event should actually impact their placement in the overall event.

Same with alliance ranking. The first place alliance shouldn't be the one who's players can go into slice 1.

..They still total the points from all the subs to determine the event score, so in every single case except the one where multiple people play every single node for a week straight and never fail partially though a single wave node, how well a person plays is literally the ONLY thing impacting placement. In the current top brackets top 10 scores are never so close as to assume this is happening, I don't see how switching the format and increasing the number of times people have to play is going to motivate them to play that much more than they already do.

For the alliance scenario you mention, you have to have 40 people (two alliances worth) do exactly the same thing over these 7 days for your scenario to even be possible, let alone have that tie actually fall on the line where it would impact a reward. I've never seen a single top tier alliance come close to having scores that similar even after they do all the mercing...

Academically, I get it... there is the possibility of a tie and the tie breaker for placement purposes would be who got there first, and that sucks. Just take a look at any pve event, if youre in the top tier brackets go to the top 10 players right before the event ends and you'll see, even with rubberbanding its highly unlikely they are all doing the exact same thing.

Do save this post though and reply after the eots event ends with any ties you can find, if we could bet, I'd be willing to bet substantial (for me) ISO that you don't even see a single tie in alliances top 10, or your current alliance's 10 team window.

Hayek

Merrick wrote:

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

And upon further thinking, this is the stupidest thing ever.

Assuming you finish days 1-6, the entire event and placement will come down to who finishes day 7 the fastest.

Are you kidding? This is literally the best thing ever. On a 7 day PvE, they've just removed the play on a schedule out of 6 of the subs. Exactly what we've been asking for. What they shouldn't have done is increased the number of available clears. 6 clears per nodes in the new system would have been fantastic.

Obviously we will never agree. But I believe that how well a person plays during 6/7th of the event should actually impact their placement in the overall event.

Same with alliance ranking. The first place alliance shouldn't be the one who's players can go into slice 1.

Actually, I think we do agree on part of this Merrick (sorry if I came across as a ****). And maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works, so correct me if I'm wrong. But the way I see it is we just play when we want until day 7. Then, since everyone who does all the clears gets the same score, placement comes down to whoever does the last clear the fastest. Which does depend on how well someone plays. In the old system, the best players who could do the fastest clears would win anyway, because they could afford to wait longer to do that last grind. It seems to me that on the 7th day, it's the same deal, only you don't have to gauge how long it's going to take you to do the last grind and do the T minus time it takes you calculation. You just start when the sub starts.

I don't think what slice you join and how late you join it has any impact on your placement. For instance, in this first 2 day sub, you could join on the 2nd day no problem and you have the exact same shot at 1st place as anyone else, as long as you do all the clears. This also makes it easier for those PvE chat rooms that people use to join when brackets fill up. You don't actually have any advantage for being one of the 1st to join unless it's at the very end of a sub where people are not going to have enough time to finish all the clears.

wymtime

So this is the new PVE system if I understand it correctly. 24 hour sub you need to hit each node 8 times in a 24 hour time frame. Ca 48 hour sub you need to clear 15 times in a 48 hour time frame and after each clear the difficulty goes up. If you want to place well you just need to clear each node the required amount of times and the in the final sub be the first to clear each node 8 times. So in a 7 day PVE to place well you need to win roughly 80 matches a day. WOW if you get first in this event I say bravo that is an insane amount of nodes to clear even. Why do the devs think this is a good idea? How many clears does the average person play?

I usually clear each node 4 times and then finish off the trivial nodes for ISO and I think I play this game too much.

CT1888

Took a swing at the Jean essentials, took 13 goes to get both CP, so did the other two. My Jean is championed, so it was straightforward (took 2 caltrops in 15 matches) thanks to Mind over Matter wiping them out in one shot up to about round 11. 20/25 minutes all in with Scarlet Witch and IM40.
In Venom Bomb, that would've been horrible.
With a low covered 4*, that would've been nasty (unless I had a good 4* boosted).
Not sure how hard I'll try for the token I'm the wave node or Cps in final node. (will depend on how I get chasing 1000 in Hollowpoint Kiss)

I like the idea of where this is going though. I think.

Ebolamonkey84

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

And upon further thinking, this is the stupidest thing ever.

Assuming you finish days 1-6, the entire event and placement will come down to who finishes day 7 the fastest.

Are you kidding? This is literally the best thing ever. On a 7 day PvE, they've just removed the play on a schedule out of 6 of the subs. Exactly what we've been asking for. What they shouldn't have done is increased the number of available clears. 6 clears per nodes in the new system would have been fantastic.

Obviously we will never agree. But I believe that how well a person plays during 6/7th of the event should actually impact their placement in the overall event.

Same with alliance ranking. The first place alliance shouldn't be the one who's players can go into slice 1.

Actually, I think we do agree on part of this Merrick (sorry if I came across as a ****). And maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works, so correct me if I'm wrong. But the way I see it is we just play when we want until day 7. Then, since everyone who does all the clears gets the same score, placement comes down to whoever does the last clear the fastest. Which does depend on how well someone plays. In the old system, the best players who could do the fastest clears would win anyway, because they could afford to wait longer to do that last grind. It seems to me that on the 7th day, it's the same deal, only you don't have to gauge how long it's going to take you to do the last grind and do the T minus time it takes you calculation. You just start when the sub starts.

I don't think what slice you join and how late you join it has any impact on your placement. For instance, in this first 2 day sub, you could join on the 2nd day no problem and you have the exact same shot at 1st place as anyone else, as long as you do all the clears. This also makes it easier for those PvE chat rooms that people use to join when brackets fill up. You don't actually have any advantage for being one of the 1st to join unless it's at the very end of a sub where people are not going to have enough time to finish all the clears.

Which time slice you join could potentially affect alliance ranking, not personal. If there are 20 people who get all possible points in slice 1, then they cannot be ranked lower than an alliance that does the same in slice 5, since the tiebreaker is who reached that point total first.

Placement comes down to whoever does the last clear the fastest and has enough time to do it all at the beginning. If someone takes 3 hours to do 9 clears and spreads it throughout the 24 hours, they would lose to someone who took 6 hours to clear but was able to do it upfront.

PeterGibbons316

wymtime wrote:

if you get first in this event I say bravo that is an insane amount of nodes to clear even. Why do the devs think this is a good idea? How many clears does the average person play?

You talk about what it takes to be the one person that plays more than all others, and then in the very next sentence compare that level of play to the average person.

That's the whole point. You make the maximum amount of points available outside the reach from the average player.....because NOT EVERYONE IS MEANT TO EARN THAT REWARD. It's meant for ONE person to earn it.

This is pretty much what PvE has always been - a place to reward players tiered by time spent playing a particular event - where beginners and vets can compete together. It seems backward, but from all the complaints I have been hearing on the quantity of play required it sounds like they nailed it.

Hayek

Ebolamonkey84 wrote:

Hayek wrote:

Merrick wrote:

Obviously we will never agree. But I believe that how well a person plays during 6/7th of the event should actually impact their placement in the overall event.

Same with alliance ranking. The first place alliance shouldn't be the one who's players can go into slice 1.

Actually, I think we do agree on part of this Merrick (sorry if I came across as a ****). And maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works, so correct me if I'm wrong. But the way I see it is we just play when we want until day 7. Then, since everyone who does all the clears gets the same score, placement comes down to whoever does the last clear the fastest. Which does depend on how well someone plays. In the old system, the best players who could do the fastest clears would win anyway, because they could afford to wait longer to do that last grind. It seems to me that on the 7th day, it's the same deal, only you don't have to gauge how long it's going to take you to do the last grind and do the T minus time it takes you calculation. You just start when the sub starts.

I don't think what slice you join and how late you join it has any impact on your placement. For instance, in this first 2 day sub, you could join on the 2nd day no problem and you have the exact same shot at 1st place as anyone else, as long as you do all the clears. This also makes it easier for those PvE chat rooms that people use to join when brackets fill up. You don't actually have any advantage for being one of the 1st to join unless it's at the very end of a sub where people are not going to have enough time to finish all the clears.

Which time slice you join could potentially affect alliance ranking, not personal. If there are 20 people who get all possible points in slice 1, then they cannot be ranked lower than an alliance that does the same in slice 5, since the tiebreaker is who reached that point total first.

Placement comes down to whoever does the last clear the fastest and has enough time to do it all at the beginning. If someone takes 3 hours to do 9 clears and spreads it throughout the 24 hours, they would lose to someone who took 6 hours to clear but was able to do it upfront.

Ah, yes. Great point on the alliance ranking. They would have to implement some sort of timer with the scoring to make it fair. Though I personally don't think multiple alliances are going to get 20 members to perfect clear all subs, it is possible. You could say - just have all your members join S1 since there's no penalty for joining 9h late, but that could make the last sub dash inconvenient for some.

As far as placement coming down to whoever does it faster at the beginning of the last sub - good. There's gotta be some way to make it competitive. I do wish they'd make at the very least the last sub only require 5 or 6 clears instead of 8 or 9. But the more clears there are, the better it reflects player skill in clear speed. Someone calling you or a game crash during your clear will be less impactful.

wymtime

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

wymtime wrote:

if you get first in this event I say bravo that is an insane amount of nodes to clear even. Why do the devs think this is a good idea? How many clears does the average person play?

You talk about what it takes to be the one person that plays more than all others, and then in the very next sentence compare that level of play to the average person.

That's the whole point. You make the maximum amount of points available outside the reach from the average player.....because NOT EVERYONE IS MEANT TO EARN THAT REWARD. It's meant for ONE person to earn it.

This is pretty much what PvE has always been - a place to reward players tiered by time spent playing a particular event - where beginners and vets can compete together. It seems backward, but from all the complaints I have been hearing on the quantity of play required it sounds like they nailed it.

I got top 10 in the Hawkeye PVE and didn't play nearly as hard or as much as this new PVE test feels like will be required.

My question is how do the devs want us to play this test. With what they have done there has to be some grander vision. My first reaction is it is requiring more play time to place well, and a final clear that is truly insane since you have to make 80 clears in one sitting to garuntee placement. If I am wrong I am wrong please enlighten me as to the vision D3 has for PVE?

TheAxis

Top rewards are suppose to be for those that earn it, over the course of the event. Not from a mad dash on the last day. This event goes against everything we've done since the beginning.

For these reasons, and several others, Groot, Axe, Battle Cats, italia, and a few other T10 alliances will be boycotting this event. Our members will farm it only.

Our hope is that D3 will see that those alliances that consistently work the hardest, deserve the best rewards.

PeterGibbons316

wymtime wrote:

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

wymtime wrote:

if you get first in this event I say bravo that is an insane amount of nodes to clear even. Why do the devs think this is a good idea? How many clears does the average person play?

You talk about what it takes to be the one person that plays more than all others, and then in the very next sentence compare that level of play to the average person.

That's the whole point. You make the maximum amount of points available outside the reach from the average player.....because NOT EVERYONE IS MEANT TO EARN THAT REWARD. It's meant for ONE person to earn it.

This is pretty much what PvE has always been - a place to reward players tiered by time spent playing a particular event - where beginners and vets can compete together. It seems backward, but from all the complaints I have been hearing on the quantity of play required it sounds like they nailed it.

I got top 10 in the Hawkeye PVE and didn't play nearly as hard or as much as this new PVE test feels like will be required.

My question is how do the devs want us to play this test. With what they have done there has to be some grander vision. My first reaction is it is requiring more play time to place well, and a final clear that is truly insane since you have to make 80 clears in one sitting to garuntee placement. If I am wrong I am wrong please enlighten me as to the vision D3 has for PVE?

You and everyone else. We are all playing the same game, and just because people were clearing optimally under the last system doesn't mean they will continue to do so under the new system. The only thing that would require you to play more for the same placement is other people playing - not the system itself.

I can't speak for D3, but my belief is that they don't want everyone finishing every node. They are replacing placement being determined by how well you can adhere to a schedule to placement being determined by total time playing during an event. Yeah sure the absolute top spot couldbe determined by your ability to play to a schedule on the last day, but I think they are counting on not even having more than a handful of people that even clear everything throughout the entire event.

TheAxis wrote:

Top rewards are suppose to be for those that earn it, over the course of the event. Not from a mad dash on the last day. This event goes against everything we've done since the beginning.

For these reasons, and several others, Groot, Axe, Battle Cats, italia, and a few other T10 alliances will be boycotting this event. Our members will farm it only.

Our hope is that D3 will see that those alliances that consistently work the hardest, deserve the best rewards.

Please don't do this, you will only make it worse. You are exactly the people they are looking at for this test. They want to see how many people are willing and able to put in the time to clear all nodes in every sub. If done correctly the number of people willing to do that is 1. And the number of clears/node would rise until that number is 1.

Xzasxz

Is the motto of all the changes: "grind more and harder"? Do You really believe this is the way to go? To whom do You address it? No-lifers?

GrumpySmurf1002

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

This is pretty much what PvE has always been - a place to reward players tiered by time spent playing a particular event - where beginners and vets can compete together. It seems backward, but from all the complaints I have been hearing on the quantity of play required it sounds like they nailed it.

The problem is that the bracketing system creates imbalance in reward vs time, just as it always has.

The 5/10/20 people willing to do what it takes to grind any system to infinity get stuck together, and only 1 of them gets the prize. Meanwhile the new player, the tanker, the bracket shopper, and a bunch of other player types get put into a different bracket, and for less effort get more.

So it goes back to the overall point -> placement rewards in PvE need to go the way of the dodo. The people willing to do 75 or 123 clears can then get the rewards without worrying about who did it faster or what time they did it, and people that do less work get less rewards.

CT1888

wymtime wrote:

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

wymtime wrote:

if you get first in this event I say bravo that is an insane amount of nodes to clear even. Why do the devs think this is a good idea? How many clears does the average person play?

You talk about what it takes to be the one person that plays more than all others, and then in the very next sentence compare that level of play to the average person.

That's the whole point. You make the maximum amount of points available outside the reach from the average player.....because NOT EVERYONE IS MEANT TO EARN THAT REWARD. It's meant for ONE person to earn it.

This is pretty much what PvE has always been - a place to reward players tiered by time spent playing a particular event - where beginners and vets can compete together. It seems backward, but from all the complaints I have been hearing on the quantity of play required it sounds like they nailed it.

I got top 10 in the Hawkeye PVE and didn't play nearly as hard or as much as this new PVE test feels like will be required.

My question is how do the devs want us to play this test. With what they have done there has to be some grander vision. My first reaction is it is requiring more play time to place well, and a final clear that is truly insane since you have to make 80 clears in one sitting to garuntee placement. If I am wrong I am wrong please enlighten me as to the vision D3 has for PVE?

Who knows, maybe the are looking at how hard people will grind to gauge where to set points to eliminate placement rewards and move them into progression awards.

Ducky

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

TheAxis wrote:

Top rewards are suppose to be for those that earn it, over the course of the event. Not from a mad dash on the last day. This event goes against everything we've done since the beginning.

For these reasons, and several others, Groot, Axe, Battle Cats, italia, and a few other T10 alliances will be boycotting this event. Our members will farm it only.

Our hope is that D3 will see that those alliances that consistently work the hardest, deserve the best rewards.

Please don't do this, you will only make it worse. You are exactly the people they are looking at for this test. They want to see how many people are willing and able to put in the time to clear all nodes in every sub. If done correctly the number of people willing to do that is 1. And the number of clears/node would rise until that number is 1.

Or they see that no one will play their new format and thus scrap it. Can't keep a game alive if nobody is willing to play it.

Niopoik

A lovely tale of in-game RNG goodness: 15 attempts on the hardest survival node to get the EotS token to drop, meaning multiple passes through +300-level opponents. (I have just started the 4* transition, so this was brutal scaling.) I drew a 2hor . Honestly, you just have to laugh...

...fortunately, I can laugh with you. I used a champed IF, a 285 BSSM, and the current "special" Vision (also champed). I only got hit twice in 15 matches. But now I need a nap.