Do we really want pve with only progression rewards?

atomzed

There are so many posts asking D3 to make pve rewards purely progression.

I actually think it's a bad idea. *put on flame protection suit*

Before you whack me, hear me out, this is my reasoning.

1) D3 wants the top rewards to be given out to a certain proportion of players. Typically only the top 1-5% receive the top rewards. This is a fact, and I don't foresee them changing this.

2) If they make pve purely progression, they will attempt to scale the difficulty higher so that only 1-5% of the population will get the reward. I expect the scaling to increase higher (even higher than EOTS), to the level of difficulty equivalent to the Gaunlet.

3) Even if they maintained the scaling, they are likely to tweak the progression reward numbers. Right now, if you click about 40% of the max score, you will hit the top progression reward. Can you imagine if they shift it upwards to 80% of max score? The grind will be even tougher.

In short, knowing D3 business model, they will make sure only a certain proportion of players get the top rewards. A progression only pve will likely become harder or become more grindy.

I rather they keep to the current reward structure of a mix of progression and placement. Maybe just increase more tiers of rewards for progression.

OneLastGambit

My scaling has never been higher than it was in EotS test (even bugged gauntlet was lower)

Your point about progression being raised so that the t1-5% are the only ones who can get the covers (an idea raised commonly) is a valid one but I disagree with the notion they shouldn't do it. Really the top prizes should go to the people who earn them. Now the people who can earn them should be the people with progressive rosters, the people who have built up their rosters over extended good performance. The idea that people with lesser roster should be able to win the best prizes is silly - they should be winning prizes according to their level and progress like everyone else.

The biggest reason why we should change to progression only (and the recent tests show the devs want it too) is it means you never have to play when you don't want to and you never miss rewards.

People keep complaining about the progression only system saying not everyone will be able to reach the end as they'll make it Really difficult...like gauntlet ? Yet nobody complains about gauntlet.

Hell I've never finished gauntlet but I like it. The difficulty feels fair (apart from when it was bugged) and I wasnt mad that I couldn't finish because the reason made sense...I hadn't progressed enough to finish it yet.

Imagine playing any game, literally any game and expecting to be able to get the best items/characters and get to the end of the game from the very start...seems silly to expect this.

tizian2015

atomzed wrote:

There are so many posts asking D3 to make pve rewards purely progression.

I actually think it's a bad idea. *put on flame protection suit*

Before you whack me, hear me out, this is my reasoning.

1) D3 wants the top rewards to be given out to a certain proportion of players. Typically only the top 1-5% receive the top rewards. This is a fact, and I don't foresee them changing this.

2) If they make pve purely progression, they will attempt to scale the difficulty higher so that only 1-5% of the population will get the reward. I expect the scaling to increase higher (even higher than EOTS), to the level of difficulty equivalent to the Gaunlet.

3) Even if they maintained the scaling, they are likely to tweak the progression reward numbers. Right now, if you click about 40% of the max score, you will hit the top progression reward. Can you imagine if they shift it upwards to 80% of max score? The grind will be even tougher.

In short, knowing D3 business model, they will make sure only a certain proportion of players get the top rewards. A progression only pve will likely become harder or become more grindy.

I rather they keep to the current reward structure of a mix of progression and placement. Maybe just increase more tiers of rewards for progression.

ad 1+2) then why in pvp the top-rewards are in the progression (btw. in other threads i´ve read to complaints, that 3*s not able to get 1000+1300 points, that its easy o get them even as a 3*, if your statement means, this progression is only for 1-5%, then its all, but not easy, esp. for a 3* player)? and second, its bad policy then, because these 1-5% are exactly the people who are already at the reward level (and beyond!). for others this means no progress (which is a problem, we all play the same events, the progression-needers battle against the ones who are already there). and if they scale higher, more will complaint and drop the game. look at the numbers. only 100000 people joined the eots-test, that means a lot. many of them will have joined just for a few quick rewards, many of them are the twinks of players. i know some players who have 1-3 twinks. if the main enters, the twinks join too. that means, that about 30000-50000 active players joined it (optimistically). which is not a good player base. if they scale higher, they loose players and will not get new, so the game dies, esp. if the whales realize, how overpriced the shop is, for only scaling as content. and this ist another problem. the whales are behind a wall in the moment, even players who drop "just" 100+ bucks in the game have no chance to get behind it. that is discouraging and this means no more money from these "little" whales.

ad 3) to get in the top-placements you have to grind NOW for 60-80% of the points (for a chance!). with 40% you hit progression, but not a chance to get in the vet brackets for t100. a few weeks ago i was not in t300 with "just" full progression.

if they made full progression-rewards at a level of 50% of the points, maybe some sub-node progression rewards(rewards are fun), twitch the scaling a bit lower, not so many needed clears, so many people have the possibility to get a shot for good rewards, then many people will play this game, many people will have fun, many people will recommend this game to friends. in the moment i will not, and i have warned friends from playing it. i think others done the same.

keep away a big part of the playerbase from the high rewards is only a protection for the whales and a sign for the fear to loose these whales if they are nothing special and if they not feel like the kings/queens of the game. but if a game is only mainly supported by whales it will die, sooner or later. these are just some people, who are in the buyers clubs and know each other. if they decide to go, its over.

UncleSmed

Just going to respond to the title..

Yes.
Yes i do.

fight4thedream

That's a fair question to ask and you make a lot of good points.

But allow me to first answer your question with a question: Why is the development team running these tests?

The reason I ask this is because while the "old" PvE certainly was never a celebrated game format on the forum (excluding alliance boss battles) it was never one of the hot issues *cough* ISO drought, the Reign of RNGesus, character release rate, 3* Spidey buff*cough*

Yes, the current format is not without its flaws. If your RL routine does not somehow magically align with 8 hour refresh schedule, you can kiss those top rank rewards goodbye (barring bracket snipes and n00b brackets). And yes you have to grind approximately 3 hours at the end of a sub for those top rewards. But I think most of the forum community has come to accept it as the norm. In fact, we started out with crazier settings like 3 hour refreshes, community scaling and rubberbanding so many old timers have come to view the current PvE format as the least of all evils (you will also note it is they who are most vocal against the increased grind many of these tests will cause).

In a way, PvE has always been a work in progress.

But to return to my question, the most reasonable explanation I can come up with for the sudden testing spree is simple: lack of engagement of PvE events by the greater community (and when I say greater, I do in fact, mean the non-forum, casual player). This is all just speculation, but I do believe the development team believes the existence of the timer is a big turn off for the casual player. Many of these tests have been test runs of not having a timer. And the reaction was quite telling:

The informed player knows that it's totally possible to play PvE as you like and still hit full progression with the current timer point reduction system. These are the players who are either primarily concerned with the competitive nature of the game or at least interested in getting the most rewards with the least amount of effort and pointed out how each test increased grind levels for competitive players.

The uninformed player, on the other hand, thought by not playing in strict adherence to the timer they risked jeopardizing the final progression reward. These are the players who care more about progression than rank. Almost every time one of these timerless tests were run, you would have posters praising the devs for allowing them to play the game whenever they wanted even though this is totally possible under the current system.

Guess which team the majority of the player base belongs to? (Yes, I am aware there are exceptions and unique situations but I think these are fair generalizations no?)

So in theory, our non-forum going uninformed casual player begins an event unaware that the timing of their entry already affects their chance at top rank. If they are lucky they get a fresh bracket, if not they get a stinky three-day old bracket and despite their best efforts (while remaining casual mind you) have no chance at top 100 (unless they are in one of those mythic n00b brackets which is entirely possible if they are true casual players). They see after hitting a node that they have to wait 8 hours for the points to refresh so they decide to wait. Now here is where the magic happens:

If our theoretical non-forum going uniformed casual player is a real non-forum going uniformed casual player what do you think the chances are they are going to remember to come back and hit that node in 8 hours? They might do it if they really like Moon Knight but barring being a fan of the release character or character on offer, more likely than not they have totally forgotten about it until they have some free time and nothing else to do.

Now let's rewind with the non-timer test system....*rewind and press play* ...ssible if they are true casual players). They see after hitting a node that there are still max points! "Well gosh jolly I guess I will play it again," our theoretical non-forum going uniformed casual player thinks to themself. "I do have an hour to kill." And voila! Increased engagement.

We have to keep in mind that the vast majority of the player base does not play PvE competitively. The primary goal of these tests is to see if the removal of a timer increases user engagement. The other goal, as atomzed aptly pointed out, is how can they increase user engagement while maintaining the current cover reward distribution. And this is where things have gotten a bit ugly.

In accordance with my observations of these tests, it would seem that the development team would like to remedy the lack of timed clears with a grind-scaling system. They have been fiddling with the scaling and amount of necessary clears trying to hit that sweet spot where it hurts just enough to be bearable (or feel good if you're a masochist) but if one of the goals is to maintain the current cover reward distribution rate then unfortunately that will have to mean that the grind and the pursuant scaling will hit the "no fun" zone for most of us. Or as we have just witnessed, wacky races to finish all nodes the fastest.

With that said, I don't think the development team is trying to throw the competitive player under the bus. Otherwise, we wouldn't be on test 5 (or is it 6 now?) and they would have already implemented some non-timer version. Unfortunately, considering that most of the competitive players have mastered the current PvE system the likelihood of coming up with a new PvE format that pleases both groups of players is slim to none.

Probably what will happen is that a non-timer system will be implemented and the development team through some magical formula and tweaking will manage to keep competitive grinding within 3-4 hours per sub. The established competitive order will protest at first, some among their number will rage quit, others will go non-PvE and those that remain will try to adapt while a new batch of players who the system works for will rise and "figure it out". Or at least that's what the pessimist in me believes.

The optimist in me hopes for non-competitive story events that have scaling set to a tier system: Beginner, Normal, Hard, Deadly with each tier having their own respective rewards. The harder the difficulty, the better the rewards. Considering the ever increasing pool of 4* characters (and the current problem of their near obsolescence in the shadow of the 5* tier), I don't think it would hurt the game to be a bit less stingy with cover rewards. But I will stop myself here before my comments are labelled a "suggestion" (yeah I went there lol).

So to end this spiel, allow me to answer your question with an answer: yes, I do but only if it makes the game better. (But don't ask me how since that kind of talk gets threads moved )

DFiPL

atomzed wrote:

There are so many posts asking D3 to make pve rewards purely progression.

I actually think it's a bad idea. *put on flame protection suit*

Before you whack me, hear me out, this is my reasoning.

1) D3 wants the top rewards to be given out to a certain proportion of players. Typically only the top 1-5% receive the top rewards. This is a fact, and I don't foresee them changing this.

The rewards for The Hunt PVE's progression scale:

1x standard token
2x boosts (different varieties)
2 guaranteed 2* cover
1-2 additional 2* covers (depending on RNG)
2520 ISO
50 HP
1 guaranteed 3* cover
1-2 additional 3* covers (depending on RNG)
25 command points

The Hunt's placement rewards:

Top 50: at least 1 4* cover, at least 1000 ISO, 50 HP
50-100: 1 4* cover, 1000 ISO, 25 HP
101-200: 1 3* cover, 500 ISO, 25 HP

The rewards for Army of One's PVP progression scale:

1x standard token
3100 ISO
1x boost
1 guaranteed 2* cover
1-3 additional 2* covers (depending on RNG)
100 HP
1 guaranteed 3* cover
1-3 additional 3* (depending on RNG)
1 guaranteed 4*
1-3 additional 4* covers (depending on RNG)
25 command points

Army of One placement:

Top 50: at least one 3* cover, at least 50 HP, at least 1 CP, at least 1000 ISO
51-100: 1 3* cover, 25 HP, 500 ISO

Now, I mean, granted: new character release for The Hunt, so placement rewards look a little different than they might, but doesn't this strike you as fundamentally backwards? PVE, where you aren't fighting other users' rosters, has better placement rewards and worse progression rewards. A mode where you should be able to earn resources based on your play rather than based on what other users are doing instead puts RNGesus' thumb on the scale and reserves guaranteed progression for those who place highly.

PVP, where you're actually competing against other users' rosters, has stronger progression rewards than placement rewards. Now, I mean, I kind of get WHY there's a focus on progression rewards in PVP.

Especially with the 5* meta, there has to be a carrot to entice the higher end players to keep playing in PVP, if for no other reason than to keep points in the pool for other users.

But it's still fundamentally backwards. If you play PVE, your ability to progress is limited by RNGesus and by the actions of other users. You might need the 3* cover that's given out for placement, but if enough people are playing harder than you, even if you've been playing diligently, you're stuck with the 2* reward. PVP, the stronger your roster is, the less you need to play to achieve those higher end rewards. Maybe you race to 1300 and then walk away because you aren't concerned with placement. Maybe you are concerned with placement and so fiddle with shields. Whatever.

The point is, to the extent that progression rewards are valuable, they appear to be more so in the mode that should be more explicitly about placement. The mode that should be more about the time you spend playing, the reward pool is tilted towards placement.

What D3 *will* do and what D3 *should* be doing are two separate things here. You may be correct that D3 won't because they want to gate rewards, but this whole reward structure is still fundamentally backwards.

Despite that, I don't mind if D3 want a placement system in PVE. What I mind is a scenario where progression rewards are harder to obtain, or a continuation of the status quo, where progression rewards for PVE events are inferior compared to those in PVP.

atomzed

OneLastGambit wrote:

People keep complaining about the progression only system saying not everyone will be able to reach the end as they'll make it Really difficult...like gauntlet ? Yet nobody complains about gauntlet.

Hell I've never finished gauntlet but I like it. The difficulty feels fair (apart from when it was bugged) and I wasnt mad that I couldn't finish because the reason made sense...I hadn't progressed enough to finish it yet.

There is a difference between gauntlet and the typical pve.

In Gaunlet, you only need to clear each node once, and you will meet all the progression rewards. Can you imagine grinding Gauntlet difficulty 5 times to get top progression? I think it will be more difficult than the EOTS standard.

Another difference between Gauntlet and pve is that D3 insist to use scaling to "level the playing field". This is one of their design philosophy (not that I totally agree with it); I believe that when it is switched to pure progression, they will still use scaling to give different players "a challenge".

The problem with Pve is multifold. D3 insist on (1) fix percentage of top rewards and (2) the whole player population compete in the same prizes and (3) scaling to ensure that the players face a "challenge".

Changing the reward structure without changing the design philosophy will not solve the pve problems.

This is why I am worried that they will increase the scaling tremendously if they switch to a pure progression format.

atomzed

@fight4thedream, Glad you understood my point (tbh I was expecting more flaming lol). You hit the nail when you said that d3 wants to find a sweet spot which is grindy but yet people will play it. Personally I hope they introduce tier plays (such as pro league) to distinguish between the different class of players. But implementation will be very difficult I suspect.

@DfiPL, if you read my post carefully, I am actually in agreement to giving more progression tiers within pve. Maybe add a guaranteed 4* cover as progression reward? Maybe give more 3* covers?

What I am against is to make pve purely progression based, and removing the placement rewards. Because if d3 do that, they will make progression reward soooooo hard to achieve, that everyone suffers. (I only play Gauntlet nodes for one run, I won't bother to clear all the nodes for the rewards...so I am genuinely worried if I have to grind Gauntlet nodes 5x)

wymtime

I will say this if they make everything progression in PVE they could get more casual players to play more. Even if they switched to the EOTS format, maybe 7 clears or just locking survival nodes after 1 clear. With fixed points you could just say max points gets you max prizes. More top players would get max points and casual players would feel like they could get the max prizes if they did more clears. If they are stopping because they are out of health packs they can always feel like once they get a deeper roster they can do it.

I personally like the competitive aspect of this game, but going progression only has way more positives then drawbacks. If the goal is to get casual players to feel like they can progress and do well progression only is the way to go.

Look at PVP and how many casual players score 300-500 the gap between those players and the top players is huge and the casual players don't feel like they will ever get to that level.

SnowcaTT

fight4thedream wrote:

But to return to my question, the most reasonable explanation I can come up with for the sudden testing spree is simple: lack of engagement of PvE events by the greater community (and when I say greater, I do in fact, mean the non-forum, casual player). This is all just speculation, but I do believe the development team believes the existence of the timer is a big turn off for the casual player. Many of these tests have been test runs of not having a timer. And the reaction was quite telling:

Totally agree.

Other big turn-offs for casual players: lots of time/resources invested for limited (or no!) rewards. THAT is why PVE should be progression only, and THAT is why PVE shouldn't have crazy scaling.

If they decide that a few 4* rewards to the top few who grind that tough scaling for a week is the way to go (in a world where 4*'s don't matter to much) - they'll never get much player investment in time or money.

The Herald

My progression is currently limited to Daily Deadpool, and light mining of the current PvE and PvP.

Without the new Champion system I would probably have quit the game.

It is uncompromising in how grindy and pointless the game is when you're neither a long term player nor a mega whale. I have a shop to run, I have other projects to work on, I cannot dedicate all day every day to failing at getting top spots.

Gauntlet and bosses are fun, because they have definite goals.

Everything else this game does is an exercise in futility for the most part.

DFiPL

atomzed wrote:

@DfiPL, if you read my post carefully, I am actually in agreement to giving more progression tiers within pve. Maybe add a guaranteed 4* cover as progression reward? Maybe give more 3* covers?

What I am against is to make pve purely progression based, and removing the placement rewards. Because if d3 do that, they will make progression reward soooooo hard to achieve, that everyone suffers. (I only play Gauntlet nodes for one run, I won't bother to clear all the nodes for the rewards...so I am genuinely worried if I have to grind Gauntlet nodes 5x)

What you're missing is that those are two sides of the same coin. They aren't going to make progression harder by increasing scaling. That drives away the casual player. What they're after is the sweet spot that keeps the casual player playing (and hopefully spending) without making it rain.

Whether the solution is progression-only with a concomitant bump in the value of the progression rewards, or additional tiers of progression rewards to add 3* covers, 4* covers, whatever else, the way they'd make it harder would be by raising the ceiling on what it takes to reach max progression.

You say you're afraid they'll just increase the difficulty if the system shifts to progression-only, but what you're missing is that they can do that just as easily if new progression tiers are added, and they wouldn't have to touch scaling to result in the same outcome.

A progression-only system would likely be one where you'd have to hit max points available to get the top reward. Makes sense, no? There's your difficulty boost. If you want the 25 CP, or whatever the top reward would be in that system, you need to get the maximum number of points available in the event. Simply adding more tiers would, in all likelihood, have a similar outcome. There'd be higher-value prizes in the mid-tier range, but getting the 25 command points would require more effort than it does now.

atomzed

DFiPL wrote:

A progression-only system would likely be one where you'd have to hit max points available to get the top reward. Makes sense, no? There's your difficulty boost. If you want the 25 CP, or whatever the top reward would be in that system, you need to get the maximum number of points available in the event.... but getting the 25 command points would require more effort than it does now.

And will you want that? That the 25 command points require you to grind 100% of the points?

Maybe it's a yes for you, but that is exactly why I am sounding out the caution about changing it into a pure progression based system.

Many forum posters seem to believe that pve will become better if it becomes pure progression. But if that change entails more grinding, harder scaling and longer playing time.... Will it still be worth it?

While I prefer the certainty of progression rewards, I don't want them to increase the difficulty Nor scaling too much.

Bowgentle

Are there still people around who remember when they had 3 XF covers as the top progression rewards in one PVE?
Nobody got enough points to reach those.

So, yes, shifting to progression only will likely mean grinding to the maximum number of points available.

But you know what?
I'd still prefer that to competing with the other 30 crazies that always are in my S2 bracket.
At least I'm guaranteed the rewards if I clear the nodes.
With the placement rewards I can clear everything perfectly and still never make t2 because I lose out to rosters with champed 5*s and/or softcappers.

With progression only its up to me if I want to put in the effort to get 3 covers.

DFiPL

atomzed wrote:

DFiPL wrote:

A progression-only system would likely be one where you'd have to hit max points available to get the top reward. Makes sense, no? There's your difficulty boost. If you want the 25 CP, or whatever the top reward would be in that system, you need to get the maximum number of points available in the event.... but getting the 25 command points would require more effort than it does now.

And will you want that? That the 25 command points require you to grind 100% of the points?

Maybe it's a yes for you, but that is exactly why I am sounding out the caution about changing it into a pure progression based system.

Many forum posters seem to believe that pve will become better if it becomes pure progression. But if that change entails more grinding, harder scaling and longer playing time.... Will it still be worth it?

While I prefer the certainty of progression rewards, I don't want them to increase the difficulty Nor scaling too much.

Kinda depends, you know? If progression-only becomes "the progression rewards are unchanged, but now you need max clears to get the 25 CP," that's torchfork territory.

If progression-only turns into "okay, we're adding more 3* and 4* guaranteed covers to the progression ladder, but getting 25 CP requires max clears," I'd probably be okay with that. That would essentially be 'here, you can have progress, but if you want a shot at a 5* cover you're going to have to work for it." Would I take being able to reach one specific 4* cover every event with 25 CP to spend on a legendary token as the "work for it if you want it" top prize? Sure. I'd still be making progress, and if I had the time or the inclination, I could go for the big kahuna.

As things stand right now, most events I haven't been able to earn the 25 CP/legendary in the last couple months, and there largely isn't anything else in the progression rewards that really helps me, except for the half the time the 3* cover is useful to one of my champions.

So, yes, even if max clears were necessary for 25 CP, as long as a guaranteed 4* cover were added somewhere in the progression prior to the 25 CP, it'd be an improvement for me.

tizian2015

atomzed wrote:

DFiPL wrote:

A progression-only system would likely be one where you'd have to hit max points available to get the top reward. Makes sense, no? There's your difficulty boost. If you want the 25 CP, or whatever the top reward would be in that system, you need to get the maximum number of points available in the event.... but getting the 25 command points would require more effort than it does now.

And will you want that? That the 25 command points require you to grind 100% of the points?

Maybe it's a yes for you, but that is exactly why I am sounding out the caution about changing it into a pure progression based system.

Many forum posters seem to believe that pve will become better if it becomes pure progression. But if that change entails more grinding, harder scaling and longer playing time.... Will it still be worth it?

While I prefer the certainty of progression rewards, I don't want them to increase the difficulty Nor scaling too much.

Is there only the possibility between 40%/60% now and 100% in the future? No! So stop please to fear people, that only the perfect grinding will give the maximum progression reward with a only progression system. What d3 will do if pve is only progression, no one knows, even you. From the eots-test there a numbers, 100000 people joined, 325 reached full points (0,3%). So if d3 wants 1-5% to get all rewards, the numbers would have been lesser than 100%. And why should the 25 cp get to the top of a 100% perfectpoints-system? they are now at 40%, why should it be changed in an only progression system? I dont understand that. If the 25cp are the top reward, then it should stay there, see no reason why change.

OneLastGambit

atomzed wrote:

@fight4thedream, Glad you understood my point (tbh I was expecting more flaming lol). You hit the nail when you said that d3 wants to find a sweet spot which is grindy but yet people will play it. Personally I hope they introduce tier plays (such as pro league) to distinguish between the different class of players. But implementation will be very difficult I suspect.

@DfiPL, if you read my post carefully, I am actually in agreement to giving more progression tiers within pve. Maybe add a guaranteed 4* cover as progression reward? Maybe give more 3* covers?

What I am against is to make pve purely progression based, and removing the placement rewards. Because if d3 do that, they will make progression reward soooooo hard to achieve, that everyone suffers. (I only play Gauntlet nodes for one run, I won't bother to clear all the nodes for the rewards...so I am genuinely worried if I have to grind Gauntlet nodes 5x)

But you know why progression is easy to achieve currently?

It's not the top prize. 4* covers are. So in a progression system that implements both of these rewards the 25cp will still not be the top prize...the 4* covers will. So if you're a 25cp kinda guy it won't affect it.

atomzed

OneLastGambit wrote:

But you know why progression is easy to achieve currently?

It's not the top prize. 4* covers are. So in a progression system that implements both of these rewards the 25cp will still not be the top prize...the 4* covers will. So if you're a 25cp kinda guy it won't affect it.

4* covers are the top prize? Not in my opinion.

And in D3 perspective, they probably think that 25 CP is the top reward. Look at pvp, they pegged the 4* cover at 1000 points, and 25 CP at 1300 points.

Having said that, several responses to this thread have indicated that they believe that D3 will not increase the scaling nor the grind, even if they convert it to a pure progression format.

I sincerely hope it will be the case.

PorkBelly

In answer to your question, Yes.

Ultron, Galactus, & Civil War are all entirely progression based and they are easily my favorite PVEs.

If they can just port that model over to individual rather than alliance rewards, it would be very close to perfect, in my opinion.

OneLastGambit

atomzed wrote:

OneLastGambit wrote:

But you know why progression is easy to achieve currently?

It's not the top prize. 4* covers are. So in a progression system that implements both of these rewards the 25cp will still not be the top prize...the 4* covers will. So if you're a 25cp kinda guy it won't affect it.

4* covers are the top prize? Not in my opinion.

And in D3 perspective, they probably think that 25 CP is the top reward. Look at pvp, they pegged the 4* cover at 1000 points, and 25 CP at 1300 points.

Having said that, several responses to this thread have indicated that they believe that D3 will not increase the scaling nor the grind, even if they convert it to a pure progression format.

I sincerely hope it will be the case.

I see your point but 4* covers are far less achievable than 25cp so in my opinion that makes it top reward. That's just my opinion though.

If they just use the gauntlet model I'll be happy. One clear of every node for max prpgression. If the nodes are tough then that's fine because there'll be no grinding unless you want the extra rewards.

If we have placement then we will always have a grind. It might be at the end of a sub or beginning but there's always a grind when there's placement, which is why I'd rather not have it.

abmoraz

PorkBelly wrote:

In answer to your question, Yes.

Ultron, Galactus, & Civil War are all entirely progression based and they are easily my favorite PVEs.

If they can just port that model over to individual rather than alliance rewards, it would be very close to perfect, in my opinion.

My only regret in life is that I can only this post a single thumbs up. If I could rate it 100 times, I would.

The sad fact is, those 3 "Alliance-based" events are on the 8-hr refresh cycle, yet next to no-one complains about "having to play every 8 hrs" on them. The reason? No points drop-off and no placement rewards.

These events have:
1. High quality/quantity of progression rewards
2. 8hr refresh... yet still a feeling of being able to play at your own pace whenever you want
3. No placement rewards
4. Good chances at 3 and 4 star cards without flooding the player base with them
5. Better rosters do better because the scaling is based on the event time and not the individual's roster

THIS IS EVERYTHING THE PLAYERS HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR.