New Mission Difficulty For All Story Events *Updated

Seantw05

So is anyone looking forward to 8 clears in a row?

revskip

Seantw05 wrote:

So is anyone looking forward to 8 clears in a row?

I actually prefer doing them all in a clump rather than spread out over 8 hour increments. Get home from work, play for 2 1/2 hours, go to sleep. Wake up, play the DDQ and maybe do some PVP during the day.

BlackSheep101

deadtaco wrote:

Can you get more specifics about this? I was going to sell my lone 5* after the current PVP season as I am still getting into 3*s. It has helped me in PVP but ruined PVE for all intents.

Give Rocket & Groot a try and see how you fare. Things should be better, and then you can hold onto your 5*s. If not, complain loudly, because fixing the scaling issues caused by a lone 5* cover is probably the best goal of all these changes.

irwando

To achieve this goal we set out to accomplish 4 things: reduce the negative impact of having 5-Stars characters with a few covers, reduce playing the game around a schedule, reduce how long battles take, and improve high level players' ability to perform well in events. Out of the previous tests we have run, the last iteration of Meet Rocket & Groot had the most positive results in these four categories.

How are the devs so blind that you cannot see that you completely fail on this goal? As long as you have timers and regenerating points people can and will continue to optimize play schedules.

Do you even listen to yourselves?

Your testing was invalid and will be until you actually run this on a PvE even that includes a new character. Run than and see how many people grind that one point node and continue to play at very specific times.

Please hire a real game designer over there. And some testers who understand how the game is actually played. And while you're at it, someone who understands large-scale distributed systems who can do things like make sure scores are updated in real time.

Ralph-Wiggum

"David wrote:

Moore"]
However, in that test, a minority of players were repeatedly clearing low level missions for points to obtain an advantage over players who tried out more challenging missions. We do not want encourage this, as it is in opposition to our stated goals. To solve this issue, the minimum amount of points a mission is worth will be reduced to 1 point (down from 20).

Since placement rewards are relative, does it really make a difference if you gain 20 points or 1 point?

JVReal

To me the 24 hour timer sounds like it acts just like the 8 hour timer, if you clear it again after the timer starts, it adds another 24 hours. So you clear 4 times to get to highest difficulty, then clear a 5th to start timer. 24 hours. If you clear again, another 24 hours is added and point values decrease again. I don't understand how people are thinking they can clear to 1, then wait 20 hours and do it all over again...

Anytime there is a timer, 24 hour or whatever, people seeking placement will not be willing to play on their own schedule. You will have created an optimal play criteria and people will feel obligated to adhere to it for top placement. You create it that way, people will play it that way. If you don't want it that way, don't create it that way D3.

"I'm going to dig a hole, and place the rewards in the hole, you will need a ladder so you can climb in and out to get the reward, but I really don't want you to have to use a ladder or to go in the hole to get the rewards because people don't seem to like having to get a ladder and climb down holes."

Anyone stupid enough to grind a 1 point trivial node for placement can have it. If it takes you 2 minutes to play a trivial node, and you play non stop for 20 hours, you've only gained 600 points. Will you have gained more points by waiting 20 hours for points to refresh? I don't care. Who has 20 hours straight to grind a trivial node? If you do, go change your oil, clean the garage, organize your closet, mow the lawn, paint the house, clean the gutters, weed the flower bed or driveway, vacuum, do the laundry and countless other things that would be more important and 'fun' compared to grinding the same fight for 20 hours. Day 1, a month's worth of to-do lists done, lol.

GrumpySmurf1002

babinro wrote:

As with all of these tests I'll going into this feeling cautiously optimistic.

I love that you increased node rewards based on difficulty. Many of us (myself included) would have loved to see the rewards dished out based on enemy levels to promote leveling your roster. This strikes me as D3's way of meeting us down the middle. Much appreciated!

Removing the RNG nature of the rewards AND putting Crit Boost last?
Must be my Birthday! Everyone whose playing PvE for the ISO rewards thanks you for this player friendly change. The CP rewards being given out by 4 clears is amazingly player friendly as well!

I question the decision to INCREASE difficulty on required missions. I personally found them to be the MOST CHALLENGING as a 5* tier player. Clearly my experience wasn't shared with those at other tiers of play given this change. It does say slightly higher so maybe it won't be too bad.

Primary Concern

Limited Roster Events. I hope this was internally tested for limited heroic events because I have no faith in this new format transitioning well into those events. All of the test PvE's were dramatically more difficult than the old PvE format. Many of us already struggle heavily to get 7 clears within the old format. There's a serious risk that the new format will make that content feel completely unfair/unplayable for your veteran players. This is especially true if the 4* selection is poor (cho, elektra, IW, etc) and they need to approach as a 3* player with 5* tier scaling.

The change is outstandingly casual player friendly and horrifically competitive player unfriendly.

How well you perceive the change is inversely proportional to where you fall on that competitive scale.

fmftint

Before any system goes live, there must be a herioc test. This system with a restricted roster will be virtuakly unplayable for anyone but soft cappers

TxMoose

I've never been a fan of the tests and I won't enjoy this either. you've taken 2 short play sessions and a moderate play session and, for competitive play and releases, crammed them all into one long, extended play session that has to exactly straddle the sub flip time. this will be a health pack nightmare and they just nerfhammered what most of us use as our primary healthpack resource. additionally, removing the level cap will make this just ridiculous in the single, long play session. i'll never be able to arrange the ~4 hr play session this will require to place well. i'll just get releases in the pvp. other than topless scaling farming won't be bad, but not looking forward to the scaling.

PeterGibbons316

JVReal wrote:

I don't understand how people are thinking they can clear to 1, then wait 20 hours and do it all over again...

Because D3 is **** at communication and they said:

"Every time a mission is beaten past its maximum difficulty, it takes 24 hours for a mission to be worth the maximum amount of points again."
When they could have said....
"Every time a mission is beaten past its maximum difficulty, it adds 24 hours to the timer for a mission to be worth the maximum amount of points again."

Stax the Foyer

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

babinro wrote:

As with all of these tests I'll going into this feeling cautiously optimistic.

I love that you increased node rewards based on difficulty. Many of us (myself included) would have loved to see the rewards dished out based on enemy levels to promote leveling your roster. This strikes me as D3's way of meeting us down the middle. Much appreciated!

Removing the RNG nature of the rewards AND putting Crit Boost last?
Must be my Birthday! Everyone whose playing PvE for the ISO rewards thanks you for this player friendly change. The CP rewards being given out by 4 clears is amazingly player friendly as well!

I question the decision to INCREASE difficulty on required missions. I personally found them to be the MOST CHALLENGING as a 5* tier player. Clearly my experience wasn't shared with those at other tiers of play given this change. It does say slightly higher so maybe it won't be too bad.

Primary Concern

Limited Roster Events. I hope this was internally tested for limited heroic events because I have no faith in this new format transitioning well into those events. All of the test PvE's were dramatically more difficult than the old PvE format. Many of us already struggle heavily to get 7 clears within the old format. There's a serious risk that the new format will make that content feel completely unfair/unplayable for your veteran players. This is especially true if the 4* selection is poor (cho, elektra, IW, etc) and they need to approach as a 3* player with 5* tier scaling.

The change is outstandingly casual player friendly and horrifically competitive player unfriendly.

How well you perceive the change is inversely proportional to where you fall on that competitive scale.

I agree, but there's another dimension involved when it comes to the scaling issue.

Players with developed rosters will generally enjoy this less than players without developed rosters, due to the absurd scaling curves at high levels. Grinding nodes with level 500+ enemies is not a pleasant experience.

Doing it for the exact same rewards that a 1* roster is competing for is why I'm playing a lot more other games, and a lot less MPQ.

kmaroz

Soma wrote:

Great changes!
With the total points relatively capped, are there plans for max progression to be a static number of clears for each event going forward? (4 per sub since the CP is earned at that level)
Or will max progression still be varied each event?

Is it really following the order on the table or its actually random?

BlackSheep101

aesthetocyst wrote:

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:

Since placement rewards are relative, does it really make a difference if you gain 20 points or 1 point?

That value in and of itself is trivial. Its how that value interacts with the rest of the scoring setup that can be gamebreaking.

If its too high in relation to the least valuable node, it can be exploited. With some nodes starting as low as 100pts, a 20pt floor is too high.

This. You shouldn't be able to skip a clear on one of the hardest nodes by grinding a trivial node a few times.

Stax the Foyer

aesthetocyst wrote:

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:

Since placement rewards are relative, does it really make a difference if you gain 20 points or 1 point?

That value in and of itself is trivial. Its how that value interacts with the rest of the scoring setup that can be gamebreaking.

If its too high in relation to the least valuable node, it can be exploited. With some nodes starting as low as 100pts, a 20pt floor is too high.

Exactly. Which is why the painfully obvious solution to this is to add a couple of zeros to every point node and progression reward. 2 zeroes should be safe, 3 seems like the smart move.



n.b. to any developers who read this and consider this fix. Please add the same number of zeroes to the nodes and the progression rewards. Thank you.

GrumpySmurf1002

Stax the Foyer wrote:

Players with developed rosters will generally enjoy this less than players without developed rosters, due to the absurd scaling curves at high levels. Grinding nodes with level 500+ enemies is not a pleasant experience.

Well yeah, and I find it funny that one of the goals mentioned in the tests, specifically "players with more developed rosters should have an advantage" is not accomplished, but they went ahead anyway.

Stax the Foyer wrote:

Doing it for the exact same rewards that a 1* roster is competing for is why I'm playing a lot more other games, and a lot less MPQ.

But they updated the tacos!

OneLastGambit

The scaling will massively discourage grinding after 7 clears.

Having played all the tests and placed t10 in all of them I can say that I never cleared more than 7 times in any test and still managed t10, the reasoning is that only a small few will be able to clear more than 7 and they will very likely get hit hardest by scaling.

So while many lament the death of the old system this new one actually levels the playing field and shortens the gap between top 10% and everyone else.

I imagine that if a poll were taken it would something like...

In favour of change - a large portion of low level and casual players

Against change - the top 10%

GrumpySmurf1002

My last note on this:

When you run a new release under this system, please immediately review your data from the tests and compare it to the new release PvE, and see if you still feel your goals are being met.

I'm taking the under.

JVReal

OneLastGambit wrote:

The scaling will massively discourage grinding after 7 clears.

Having played all the tests and placed t10 in all of them I can say that I never cleared more than 7 times in any test and still managed t10, the reasoning is that only a small few will be able to clear more than 7 and they will very likely get hit hardest by scaling.

So while many lament the death of the old system this new one actually levels the playing field and shortens the gap between top 10% and everyone else.

I imagine that if a poll were taken it would something like...

In favour of change - a large portion of low level and casual players

Against change - the top 10%

It only scales for the first 4 clears, so if you can handle the 4th clear, you can handle the 7th.

simonsez

I think the biggest problem solved by these changes will be people who've been thinking, "I'd kinda like to try Pokemon Go, but playing MPQ takes up enough of my time"

firethorne

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

Stax the Foyer wrote:

Players with developed rosters will generally enjoy this less than players without developed rosters, due to the absurd scaling curves at high levels. Grinding nodes with level 500+ enemies is not a pleasant experience.

Well yeah, and I find it funny that one of the goals mentioned in the tests, specifically "players with more developed rosters should have an advantage" is not accomplished, but they went ahead anyway.

Indeed. The overall goal of making an equatable competiton for everyone, "no matter if you just started the game or are a seasoned veteran," is inherently asinine.

Either in overall placement, or simple node clearing rewards, it makes no sense. One person's clearing a level 20 node and another's clearing a 250, yet both giving our 70 ISO is just stupid. Repeat that scenario 350 times over and apply to placement rewards.

The real solution world be to scrap placement. As long as it exists, they'll never solve playing the game on a schedule and grinding. Competitive placement is completely antithetical to what they claim they want, but they don't seem to get it. Shocker