New character release with the new PvE system

13»

Comments

  • Akari
    Akari Posts: 492 Mover and Shaker
    I played slice 5, took 10th with 85146 pts - beating out 11th by 12 points, not due to grinding 1 pt nodes, but more to a last minute whale on the infamous iw node. Sorry, skz570!

    Honestly, the work spent isn't too different, it's just that it's a lump sum all at once vs massively over scaled enemies, and now, with newly nerfed teamups. I do appreciate having my whole day free without squeezing a clear in between, but it comes at a costime of paying for it later on. I'm not sure which is better, but my overall placement has gone up a bit, perhaps due to people not trying as hard in this system?

    I voted for no real difference.

    Edit: my playstyle was suboptimal. For this event I did the initial clears but not speedily, taking 2+ hrs, sometimes 3, for clear because I got bored and distracted. For end grind I did the easy nodes sometimes as much as 3.5 hrs out to take some grind off, and then did a node at a time starting at 2.5-3 hrs out, not really straight playing, with lots of breaks. I've done this for every pve in new format and took within t10 for all of them so far.
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,495 Chairperson of the Boards
    Slice 4, T4 placement finsihed around 84k prejoin player.

    Traditionally, I'm a top 1/2 player who mercs for Top 10 alliance awards.

    Overall, this format doesn't really affect my time spent or effective placement ranks. The scaling has made the final grind much tougher, but in all honesty, I'll just focus on readjusting my timing. In terms of competitive play, the major change is that the scaling makes the last pass much longer to clear than the first pass. This in effect has thrown off how much time people plan and budget for play. This is minor issue that will resolve itself with more play and familiarity. The scaling on essentials was pretty brutal and I think its a mistake on D3 part to use the essetianls as a way to differentiate rosters and play.
  • OneLastGambit
    OneLastGambit Posts: 1,963 Chairperson of the Boards
    Slice 1: rank 132

    Reason: I didn't play competitively due to a lack of disposable time.

    Normally I rank t10 for almost all pve. I think people are confusing 2 issues here and equating them both as the same problem. The time design of pve isn't the issue in my opinion.

    Scaling is. The silly scaling makes grinding very tough on health packs even for developed rosters.

    I will add that I think even if I did have the time to play like I normally do I don't think I would have made my usual t20 for a new release. When it's not a new release the new way is better for sure, in the first event in New system I placed t10 with 4.6 clears per sub. Currently I'm t10 with 4.2 clears per sub- during wasp I was 132 with 3.9 clears per sub.
  • Sluggo
    Sluggo Posts: 504 Critical Contributor
    I finished 33rd in my s2v for the Wasp release, which is right in line with what I did under the old system.

    Under the old system: I'd do 3 clears every 8 hours, then grind a little at the end. Usually I'd clear easy nodes a total of 7x, and hard/essentials anywhere from 4-6x. This typically placed me top 50, including new releases.

    Under the new system: I do my initial 4 clears at a lazy pace (i.e. "when I feel like it"), then grind a little at the end. Like before, I clear easy nodes 7x, and the hard/essentials 4-6x, depending on how annoying they are. I continue to finish comfortably in the top 50.

    Overall, the new system is a net positive for me. I'm playing the same amount, my t50 placements haven't changed, and I have more freedom in when to play.

    I totally understand this new system is more work for players chasing top 10s, and would love to see placement eliminated and move 4*s to progression rewards, but I'm not holding my breath, because I suspect the developers philosophically believe competitive PVE is better for their business and don't want to abandon it.
  • acescracked
    acescracked Posts: 1,197 Chairperson of the Boards
    Esheris wrote:
    ...

    Have the Devs said anything about why they don't want to change the events to progression only rewards? Seems like a large amount of players would like to see this as well.

    Be careful with what you wish for. It seems like they have a set allocation for 4* cover rewards. The current placement pve system does that. You think scaling is bad in later clears of the new pve or stage 3 of gauntlet...what do you think they would have to do to limit multiple 4* cover rewards in a progression only pve?

    It would be nice if they expanded the 4* covers they give but that's not happening. If the forum noise does make a radical change to progression only story mode you better start saving your deadpool whales.
  • Esheris
    Esheris Posts: 216 Tile Toppler
    acescracked wrote:
    Esheris wrote:
    ...

    Have the Devs said anything about why they don't want to change the events to progression only rewards? Seems like a large amount of players would like to see this as well.

    Be careful with what you wish for. It seems like they have a set allocation for 4* cover rewards. The current placement pve system does that. You think scaling is bad in later clears of the new pve or stage 3 of gauntlet...what do you think they would have to do to limit multiple 4* cover rewards in a progression only pve?

    It would be nice if they expanded the 4* covers they give but that's not happening. If the forum noise does make a radical change to progression only story mode you better start saving your deadpool whales.

    Hmm well I've only ever used Deadpool Whales once and that wasn't on something very difficult. ^_^ (Not sure if you were actually talking to me with the "you think scaling is bad though!, I've been having a good time with it.)

    On topic, I don't go for Top 10 anymore so rewarding any extra 3*/4* covers on top of the 25 CP would just be bonus for me. I understand a good amount of people on the forums are the ones that shoot for Top 10, so I can see why you guys hate the new system.

    Hopefully D3 can make a good system that the majority of us will like (Starting with adding tons more Iso please!).
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Spudgutter wrote:
    If it is taking longer, or is harder to place top 20, it just means that there are 20 other people willing to play longer to get that reward, right?
    The willingness of some to endure pain and suffering isn't an endorsement of anything...
  • acescracked
    acescracked Posts: 1,197 Chairperson of the Boards
    Esheris wrote:

    Hmm well I've only ever used Deadpool Whales once and that wasn't on something very difficult. ^_^ (Not sure if you were actually talking to me with the "you think scaling is bad though!, I've been having a good time with it.)

    ...

    Yea, the "you" was a general one icon_e_smile.gif. But basically they give out so many 4* covers throughout placement pve. To simulate that in progression only pve insane scaling would be required. Heck, that might sell more health packs and all ap boosts by players trying to clear the hardest nodes in progression only.
  • NighteyesGrisu
    NighteyesGrisu Posts: 563 Critical Contributor
    It's hell for new character releases. I used to be able to get into top100 with semi-casual play. I gave up on Wasp after the first sub.

    Though I don't think the stlye change itself is at fault (at least it improved the chances of reaching progression). it's just the reward structure that needs to be adjusted. Make the goals for 3/2/1 cover top20/top50/top200 or something.
  • Polares
    Polares Posts: 2,643 Chairperson of the Boards
    Well, looks like Devs agree with us, and the new scaling and the time commitment required for this new PvE system was clearly too much, especially for 4+ rosters.

    The reduction of one clear + less scaling will probably reduce the time needed for a 'perfect clear' which is good news. It should have never been more time requirement than before.
  • ViralCore
    ViralCore Posts: 168 Tile Toppler
    It's great that they listened and removed one clear and are reducing the scaling but let's keep pushing for them to remove 1-2 more clears. 5-6 clears sounds so much better than 8.
  • DTStump
    DTStump Posts: 273 Mover and Shaker
    aesthetocyst wrote:
    DTStump wrote:
    As much as I hated the system change, seeing that now I need to play more to get top 50 rewards (cf. icon_idea.gif below), I'm actually pretty reluctant in joining in on the "progression only" mantra.

    If the devs ever listen to it, they could screw things up even more. Like creating an impossible gauntlet-style format where only 1% of the playerbase can actually get to the best/meaningful rewards...

    You mean, like, the way things are now, with exactly 1% of the playerbase getting all three colors on new character releases?

    That wouldn't be worse, that would be the same.

    My experience was just as expected, as the setup made obvious ... even more time played, in fewer, but much longer sessions, for the same reward. That's going backwards.

    The changes just announced will make it a little less onerous, removing a clear. But still, meh. I'll be playing 4 clears "on my schedule", harhar.

    So you are basically saying things couldn't get worse reward-wise. Wanna bet? icon_e_wink.gif
  • Dudemon
    Dudemon Posts: 57 Match Maker
    The system is better, but the scaling is ludicrous, insane, laughable.

    Fix the scaling and most of the probs disappear. At least it would approach being fun again.

    NOT FUN. FIX SCALING.

    Dudemon
  • carrion_pigeons
    carrion_pigeons Posts: 942 Critical Contributor
    simonsez wrote:
    carrion pigeons wrote:
    I'm sure you all can come up with arguments that make good sense from a design perspective for why a less popular design is better
    The "less popular design" is currently leading this poll 59% vs. 22%, so stop pushing this fiction of yours.

    And you've already heard the argument, but you choose to ignore it. Optimal play that requires 5 consecutive hours of gameplay disqualifies the new format from being a "better" design.

    The "less popular design" was currently getting 1/5 as many people to play up to progression, so despite what any forum poll says, the actual population of the game has a different opinion.

    I'll invite you to recall that one major goal of having a new PvE system was to stop as many people from optimizing their score. Making it wildly impractical was always the only way they were going to get any people off that bus. The game IS better for people who don't want to optimize, and - from a design perspective - the choice to optimize is less supported gameplay and more of a necessary evil, in any case.
  • DTStump
    DTStump Posts: 273 Mover and Shaker
    carrion pigeons wrote:
    simonsez wrote:
    carrion pigeons wrote:
    I'm sure you all can come up with arguments that make good sense from a design perspective for why a less popular design is better
    The "less popular design" is currently leading this poll 59% vs. 22%, so stop pushing this fiction of yours.

    And you've already heard the argument, but you choose to ignore it. Optimal play that requires 5 consecutive hours of gameplay disqualifies the new format from being a "better" design.

    The "less popular design" was currently getting 1/5 as many people to play up to progression, so despite what any forum poll says, the actual population of the game has a different opinion.

    [citation needed]

    Also... it might have something to do with this:

    Thick as Thieves
    Old progression target: 50k or more
    New progression target: 33k

    Hearts of Darkness
    Old progression target: 55k or 59k
    New progression target: 42k

    The Hunt
    Old progression target: 54k
    New progression target: 44k

    But it's totally the new system that is making things easy for progression rewards.

    Edit: spelling

Categories