New Mission Difficulty For All Story Events *Updated

mckauhu

Overall looks nice changes, but I think it would been significantly better if all nodes becomes just increasingly difficult when you start getting 1 point for it so that there will be a time when you simply CAN'T beat it anymore!

__Adam

aesthetocyst wrote:

--Adam wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

revskip wrote:

...who just want to get check marks in one sitting and call it a day it is a superior system.

for anyone with a usable 5, the scaling for that short, little, easy to type phrase means 4 hours of grinding (for green checks...not 4X for most of the best rewards and progression - that is much shorter). you make it sound so much easier than what I experienced it was in reality.

But that's 4 hours of grinding no matter how you slice it. Why should the guy w/a 4 hour chunk get less rewards than the guy with 1+1+2 hour chunks? The current system is indefensible.

... and the change doesn't solve that problem, just flips it. Why should it favor those who CAN find massive chunks of play time, but not play throughout the day? Therefore, the new system is "indefensible". It will help some people, and hurt others, just like the previous system did.

What would solve the problem is a setup that TRULY let people "play on their own schedule". This ain't it. The closest this game has is the Gauntlet, and very rare, similar events, like Growth Industry.

Unless I'm missing something, it does fix the problem for progression rewards.

I'd agree that for placement rewards they have moved the problem more than solved it. Arguing that the old system was 'better' is pure hogwash.

__Adam

mckauhu wrote:

Overall looks nice changes, but I think it would been significantly better if all nodes becomes just increasingly difficult when you start getting 1 point for it so that there will be a time when you simply CAN'T beat it anymore!

The problem there is that there are teams that can essentially break the game i.e. winfinite. Sure, sometimes it takes a little luck to get it rolling but it would devolve into 'heal up, pray for a good board'.

TxMoose

enter pigpen. shovel **** around from one side to the other. back to the house and tell the old lady "that pigpen is tidied up nice!" I fully admitted before it was a **** laden pigpen, but yes, they moved the steaming pile to my side of it now.

Warbringa

Yeah I think this breaks as many things as it fixes....I know for me it will be worse. I can't afford to spend a giant block of time clearing nodes....under the old format I could play three times per day at around 30 minutes or so per clear and perhaps grind or not depending on the bracket....now you need to spend over double that time for sure to get decent placement. I also love the passive aggressive placement of critical rewards as the 7th prize on nodes. If you clear a node seven times shouldn't the reward be the best of the list not the worst???? Makes no absolute sense.

How about making the 7th clear of the hardest node at least a heroic token or event token? OR alternatively having the 7th clear of the hardest node on the 1st sub-event be a set 3* or 4* token so it gives a reason for players to join an event early instead of waiting to join late in an event to bracket snipe etc?

Also good luck with EofTS with all those ninjas....trying to do clears back to back to back to back...well you get the point will be terrible (oh yeah unless you have OML with yellow covers).

puppychow

PorkBelly wrote:

If you ask any top 10 pve player to state the worst part of the system, it is the final grind of each sub.

This change just doubled the amount of grinding you have to do in order to place well and made the nodes harder by the end.

From a competitive pve perspective, I can't see how they could have made it worse.

This is the primary reason why I quit competitive pve. The roll over from the final grind of a sub, to the beginning of the next sub to set the timer basically doubled the grind. I was spending 3-4 hours per sub as a competitive t10 player. the new format could require up to 7 hours from me in one sitting, and it's just not worth the hassle.

Warbringa

--Adam wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

revskip wrote:

...who just want to get check marks in one sitting and call it a day it is a superior system.

for anyone with a usable 5, the scaling for that short, little, easy to type phrase means 4 hours of grinding (for green checks...not 4X for most of the best rewards and progression - that is much shorter). you make it sound so much easier than what I experienced it was in reality.

But that's 4 hours of grinding no matter how you slice it. Why should the guy w/a 4 hour chunk get less rewards than the guy with 1+1+2 hour chunks? The current system is indefensible.

Actually no it is easily defensible if you have to now make 4 clears where you only had to make 3 clears under the old system. More clears=more time....see pretty easily defensible now isn't it.

puppychow

ngoni wrote:

Mal if you just wanted progression you didn't need to worry about the timers. Just clear 4-5 times each sub and you'd get there.

Tell me how easy that is AFTER you beat those level 500 goons!

Remember, difficulty has been UPPED for the harder nodes.

BlackSheep101

Warbringa wrote:

Also good luck with EofTS with all those ninjas....trying to do clears back to back to back to back...well you get the point will be terrible (oh yeah unless you have OML with yellow covers).

Now which character features prominently in EotS again? I forget...

__Adam

Warbringa wrote:

--Adam wrote:

TxMoose wrote:

revskip wrote:

...who just want to get check marks in one sitting and call it a day it is a superior system.

for anyone with a usable 5, the scaling for that short, little, easy to type phrase means 4 hours of grinding (for green checks...not 4X for most of the best rewards and progression - that is much shorter). you make it sound so much easier than what I experienced it was in reality.

But that's 4 hours of grinding no matter how you slice it. Why should the guy w/a 4 hour chunk get less rewards than the guy with 1+1+2 hour chunks? The current system is indefensible.

Actually no it is easily defensible if you have to now make 4 clears where you only had to make 3 clears under the old system. More clears=more time....see pretty easily defensible now isn't it.

Try addressing my point instead of your straw man.

Before X clears may, or may not, have been rewarded (based on timing). Now, everyone is equally rewarded for 4 clears.

The difference is quite clear.

GritsNGravy

This seems like a pretty solid setup. 1 point grinding on every node... Grind all down and then grind the easiest node until you win?

Better than first to clear wins, but still seems there's room for improvement.

__Adam

aesthetocyst wrote:

--Adam wrote:

Unless I'm missing something, it does fix the problem for progression rewards.

Yes, what you're missing is that, for the progression rewards, you could always play in one big grind if you wanted, and make it.
.

I didn't dodge anything; it's a red herring I refuse to entertain. What you seem to be missing is that, with proper timing, I could achieve the same rewards w/far less effort (or conversely, 'earn' greater rewards w/the same effort timed properly)

If X amount of clears in 8 hour increments barely gets you progression rewards, that same effort in one shot doesn't get those rewards. That is precisely what's broken under the current system. It is NOT a function of the # of clears, it's a function of WHEN you do those clears as well as the # of clears. What part of that don't you understand?? Don't 'dodge' it; show me where this is not true and I'll gladly adjust my play style due to your enlightening rebuttal and thank you for the insight. I'm serious. I doubt you can deliver.

A little story: I had a business trip that totally boned my normal play schedule. Since I was sitting in an airport I figured: 'why not grind some PQ?'. I did it in the dumbest way possible: I started the event ASAP and I picked the first trivial node and ground it to a green check mark. After that I proceeded to drain every node in the event in a similar fashion. I repeated this pattern for every sub in the event. The end result? I ended up pushing until the end of the event and barely made progression. My conclusion? "To hell w/that, it's just not worth the effort!"

In comes the next event. Lo and behold, my schedule matched the 'optimal' grind. I did each node 1x and didn't do it again for 8 hours, and hit every node 1x. 16 hours later I grinded (is that a word? ground?) each node to dust; pretty much how the competitive players play. That persisted for every sub of the event. The conclusion? I was able to hit the max progression reward w/o even fully clearing the last sub of the event. That was an eye opener.

Your claims are unfounded; timing matters. It's not psychological but a mathematical fact. The devs have seen fit to correct that and i'm grateful.

TLCstormz

carrion pigeons wrote:

The reality is that PvE is their least popular game mode by a lot, on average.

Uhm.......source? lol

__Adam

aesthetocyst wrote:

Why is the standard of excellence in this game mode grinding?

If they were to changed to a skill-based model, which rewarded excellence rather than sheer production, this metric might drop and the bean counters conclude it was a failure as the players were "obviously" not engaged.

I'd argue that a mode that was skill-based, and actually fun, rather than busywork, would be genuinely engaging, and offer more monetization potential.

The reality? The skill cap for this game is just too low for that model.

Do you honestly think that you're (not you personally, any given player) that much more skilled than the player base at large? That's nonsense. In a match 3 game the randomness of the board is a far more determining factor than the skill cap of the top 10% (pulled out of you know where) of the game. That basically leaves a few options:

1) Ability to exploit the point regeneration system (the current situation)
2) Roster Strength
3) Roster Depth

The devs have decided 1 is complete ****, which I applaud. (As an aside, I think that's an attempt to exploit people. MTG:PQ gives you 'free' booster pack in 8 hours intervals. Coincidence? I think not)

Points 2 and 3 totally cater to the whales, which monetarily makes a lot of sense for the devs. [/evil pinky]

So where do they go from here? If skill can't be the differentiation, what can? And, more importantly, how do they profit from that?

BlackSheep101

"----Adam wrote:

It is NOT a function of the # of clears, it's a function of WHEN you do those clears as well as the # of clears. What part of that don't you understand?? Don't 'dodge' it; show me where this is not true and I'll gladly adjust my play style due to your enlightening rebuttal and thank you for the insight. I'm serious. I doubt you can.

You seem to be under the impression that they're taking away the timers and changing nothing else about scoring. Points required for progression prizes will be higher. You will need more clears to reach 25 cp.

Your little story about the airport doesn't hold water unless you were in a new character release event or playing before they went to 7 rewards. Knocking out every reward in every sub gets you every progression prize, easily. Three full clears plus a grind at the end gets you every prize before the final sub in all but the shortest events.

Kolence

--Adam wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

Why is the standard of excellence in this game mode grinding?

If they were to changed to a skill-based model, which rewarded excellence rather than sheer production, this metric might drop and the bean counters conclude it was a failure as the players were "obviously" not engaged.

I'd argue that a mode that was skill-based, and actually fun, rather than busywork, would be genuinely engaging, and offer more monetization potential.

The reality? The skill cap for this game is just too low for that model.

Do you honestly think that you're (not you personally, any given player) that much more skilled than the player base at large? That's nonsense. In a match 3 game the randomness of the board is a far more determining factor than the skill cap of the top 10% (pulled out of you know where) of the game. That basically leaves a few options:

1) Ability to exploit the point regeneration system (the current situation)
2) Roster Strength
3) Roster Depth

The devs have decided 1 is complete ****, which I applaud. (As an aside, I think that's an attempt to exploit people. MTG:PQ gives you 'free' booster pack in 8 hours intervals. Coincidence? I think not)

Points 2 and 3 totally cater to the whales, which monetarily makes a lot of sense for the devs. [/evil pinky]

So where do they go from here? If skill can't be the differentiation, what can? And, more importantly, how do they profit from that?

In the new system timers remain present (if only extended to a full day instead of 8 hours), so the "ability to exploit the point regeneration system" as you put it, still remains part of the skill needed to "place well" in a pve...

__Adam

BlackSheep101 wrote:

"----Adam wrote:

It is NOT a function of the # of clears, it's a function of WHEN you do those clears as well as the # of clears. What part of that don't you understand?? Don't 'dodge' it; show me where this is not true and I'll gladly adjust my play style due to your enlightening rebuttal and thank you for the insight. I'm serious. I doubt you can.

You seem to be under the impression that they're taking away the timers and changing nothing else about scoring. Points required for progression prizes will be higher. You will need more clears to reach 25 cp.

Your little story about the airport doesn't hold water unless you were in a new character release event or playing before they went to 7 rewards. Knocking out every reward in every sub gets you every progression prize, easily. Three full clears plus a grind at the end gets you every prize before the final sub in all but the shortest events.

[/quote]

So my 'little' story isn't true... unless it is? Gratz on that.

My point wasn't if it does or doesn't hit progression rewards; I hit it in both cases. The point is: it took a HELL of a lot less effort in one case than the other. Can I make that any clearer?

__Adam

Kolence wrote:

--Adam wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

Why is the standard of excellence in this game mode grinding?

If they were to changed to a skill-based model, which rewarded excellence rather than sheer production, this metric might drop and the bean counters conclude it was a failure as the players were "obviously" not engaged.

I'd argue that a mode that was skill-based, and actually fun, rather than busywork, would be genuinely engaging, and offer more monetization potential.

The reality? The skill cap for this game is just too low for that model.

Do you honestly think that you're (not you personally, any given player) that much more skilled than the player base at large? That's nonsense. In a match 3 game the randomness of the board is a far more determining factor than the skill cap of the top 10% (pulled out of you know where) of the game. That basically leaves a few options:

1) Ability to exploit the point regeneration system (the current situation)
2) Roster Strength
3) Roster Depth

The devs have decided 1 is complete ****, which I applaud. (As an aside, I think that's an attempt to exploit people. MTG:PQ gives you 'free' booster pack in 8 hours intervals. Coincidence? I think not)

Points 2 and 3 totally cater to the whales, which monetarily makes a lot of sense for the devs. [/evil pinky]

So where do they go from here? If skill can't be the differentiation, what can? And, more importantly, how do they profit from that?

In the new system timers remain present (if only extended to a full day instead of 8 hours), so the "ability to exploit the point regeneration system" as you put it, still remains part of the skill needed to "place well" in a pve...

I'm talking progression; placement is still a cluster.

__Adam

--Adam wrote:

BlackSheep101 wrote:

"----Adam wrote:

It is NOT a function of the # of clears, it's a function of WHEN you do those clears as well as the # of clears. What part of that don't you understand?? Don't 'dodge' it; show me where this is not true and I'll gladly adjust my play style due to your enlightening rebuttal and thank you for the insight. I'm serious. I doubt you can.

You seem to be under the impression that they're taking away the timers and changing nothing else about scoring. Points required for progression prizes will be higher. You will need more clears to reach 25 cp.

Your little story about the airport doesn't hold water unless you were in a new character release event or playing before they went to 7 rewards. Knocking out every reward in every sub gets you every progression prize, easily. Three full clears plus a grind at the end gets you every prize before the final sub in all but the shortest events.

So my 'little' story isn't true... unless it is? Gratz on that.

My point wasn't if it does or doesn't hit progression rewards; I hit it in both cases. The point is: it took a HELL of a lot less effort in one case than the other. Can I make that any clearer?[/quote][/quote][/quote]

Let me be perfectly clear: Tying progression rewards to timers is idiotic.

Does it make sense now?

Crowl

GritsNGravy wrote:

This seems like a pretty solid setup. 1 point grinding on every node... Grind all down and then grind the easiest node until you win?

Better than first to clear wins, but still seems there's room for improvement.

To avoid the grinding an easy node as much as possible being a valid approach they should simply lock the easy nodes once you have got all the rewards from them, if somebody wants to use the grind a single node method to score highly then make them do it on a non-trivial node instead.