Where I'd like to see PvE end up

Tromb2ch2

After reading the forums I've realized that at least 99% of the player base is unhappy with PvE as it is now and I thought of what I would like to see happen.

The first obvious one is that the placement rewards should be progression because this isn't supposed to be PvP so why are we fighting with each other to get rewards?

For the next part I'd like to point out that I have maybe 10 3* championed with maybe 1 usable 4* (which is venom so not very good of a 4*). I believe scaling should be removed. I honestly never feel like I don't hit t10 because a certain match is too difficult but rather because I don't clear the matches in the optimum way to get the best rewards. Instead I think there should be nodes that frankly unless I get lucky, a 3* roster shouldn't be able to beat. So the nodes will have a set difficulty for all players regardless of the strength of their rosters. Not only will this make me want to actually strive to build a better roster, it will make it so only certain percentage will get the 4* from progression (the people who probably don't even need it), but it will also remove the thought process of should I sell my 5* so scaling isn't jacked up (which it kills me when my alliance mates sell them because they can't handle them yet...).

I think one of the progression points for every 4* release should be that 4* (one a little higher than the 25cp but below the placement rewards from the paragraph above that are still the 4* release). Most players do not have an open roster space or the HP on hand to slot them so everyone that gets the new 4* will have to fork out money to get a slot and 1 extra cover for a character won't change that much in the long run. This would be a quick way for them to make more money and make the player base a little happier.

And then the regular iso talk goes here.

I know not everyone will agree with me, just saying what I'd like to see.

hodayathink

This forum probably doesn't even make up 2% of the player base.

WEBGAS

hodayathink wrote:

This forum probably doesn't even make up 2% of the player base.

Maybe you are right, the forum is not the whole playerbase....but many players are quitting
(5 from only my alliance and I know for sure that they are not the only ones)

Even if we forumites were only 2 or 5% of the playerbase, it does'n mean that players who don't write on this forum are happy with the actual format of the game.
Devs should listen to our cries, because we loved this game and don't want it to implode

PROGRESSION REWARDS could be the solution for PVE.
Why don't give it a try for a few PVE and see what will happen?

hodayathink

WEBGAS wrote:

hodayathink wrote:

This forum probably doesn't even make up 2% of the player base.

Maybe you are right, the forum is not the whole playerbase....but many players are quitting
(5 from only my alliance and I know for sure that they are not the only ones)

Even if we forumites were only 2 or 5% of the playerbase, it does'n mean that players who don't write on this forum are happy with the actual format of the game.
Devs should listen to our cries, because we loved this game and don't want it to implode

PROGRESSION REWARDS could be the solution for PVE.
Why don't give it a try for a few PVE and see what will happen?

Because the last EotS test showed that no matter how high they place those progression rewards, it's more than likely that greater than 1% of the player base will reach it (considering something like 3% of the people that played it beat every node in that test).

If he would have said something like 99% of the hardcore player base is frustrated with PvE, then I wouldn't have an issue with it (because while I don't think the posters on this forum make up 99% of the hardcore players either, I do think the mentality of the posters here is going to match up with the mentality of most of the rest of the hardcore players). But there's a lot of people playing this game who aren't playing it hardcore, and most of this forum has no idea what they think about this PvE format (and the only reason I don't say all is because I do think there are some who can give anecdotes of people they know that play it casually).

DTStump

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

this isn't supposed to be PvP so why are we fighting with each other to get rewards?

Just to make one thing clear, the only ones calling story mode "PvE" are the players. D3Go refers to our "fake PvE" as story mode. Nobody from d3go has said that story is supposed to be strictly PvE, and versus should be strictly PvP.

Just something to keep in mind before saying stuff like "make PvE actual PvE!!!". There are no "false PvEs" in this game, simply because you don't see "PvE" written anywhere in the game. It's Story mode, and Story mode happens to have a PvP factor.

acescracked

WEBGAS wrote:

PROGRESSION REWARDS could be the solution for PVE.
Why don't give it a try for a few PVE and see what will happen?

For christsake, wish they would run Gauntlet a lot more. You can play those round 3 insanely scaled nodes to your heart's content. All the while I'm getting t10,t50 or t100 in story mode and hitting max progression.

Bowgentle

acescracked wrote:

WEBGAS wrote:

PROGRESSION REWARDS could be the solution for PVE.
Why don't give it a try for a few PVE and see what will happen?

For christsake, wish they would run Gauntlet a lot more. You can play those round 3 insanely scaled nodes to your heart's content. All the while I'm getting t10,t50 or t100 in story mode and hitting max progression.

I was considering slowing down to allow him to get T5 in Hulk but I think I just changed my mind

WEBGAS

Bowgentle wrote:

acescracked wrote:

WEBGAS wrote:

PROGRESSION REWARDS could be the solution for PVE.
Why don't give it a try for a few PVE and see what will happen?

.

I was considering slowing down to allow him to get T5 in Hulk but I think I just changed my mind

I am touched by your generosity, Bow, but it doesn't matter: I only need that black cover, so I won't push myself over

mpqq

You do realize that removing the competitive nature of PVE would mean the end of the flow of iso, hp, and tokens from PVE alliances and placement (daily and end). There's one non-competitive PVE event, the Gauntlet. It lasts 7 days, but you only get 3 different 3*'s and a 4*. There's no extra iso and hp from the alliance or placement. In short, that non-competitive is long and inefficient for progress. It's not a good model to follow. There is no remove competition and everyone wins scenario. If players win, then the developers lose. I'm pretty sure, the developers want it the other way around. There's probably a quote about that somewhere. Anyways, the developers have a quota to reach, and re-balancing around non-competitiveness would probably lead to a poor player effort/reward ratio.

Calnexin

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

After reading the forums I've realized that at least 99% of the player base is unhappy with PvE as it is now

Hyperbole noted. Speaking as a miniscule mote on a dusting of the perentage, I'm not unhappy with PvE right now. In the Hulk I reached progression halfway through the event (with dedicated play). I'm still pursuing progression, but I'm happy to know that I can reach the top progression prize without dedicating my life to the game for a full week.

firethorne

mpqq wrote:

If players win, then the developers lose.

...

Anyways, the developers have a quota to reach, and re-balancing around non-competitiveness would probably lead to a poor player effort/reward ratio.

Where have they mentioned this quota? Have they ever officially started that they cannot have too many happy players making progress, or has it just been inferred from vague yet troubling statements like "You're supposed to lose," and the like? I get that people could easily assume the devs don't want players happy based on the continual ISO shortage that has been complained about for ages and never addresses in any meaningful way, but I thought the devs mainly remained silent on such matters.

The Herald

I would settle for new stories.

But I would love an extra layer on progression to shoot for now the CP has come down to a nice level. Something like the Essential 4 start getting a cover at the points bracket of 4 clears on every node (plus one clears and 2 clears for waves) through the whole event. A you-did-everything-to-the-minimum-we-want incentive.

mpqq

firethorne wrote:

mpqq wrote:

If players win, then the developers lose.

...

Anyways, the developers have a quota to reach, and re-balancing around non-competitiveness would probably lead to a poor player effort/reward ratio.

Where have they mentioned this quota? Have they ever officially started that they cannot have too many happy players making progress, or has it just been inferred from vague yet troubling statements like "You're supposed to lose," and the like? I get that people could easily assume the devs don't want players happy based on the continual ISO shortage that has been complained about for ages and never addresses in any meaningful way, but I thought the devs mainly remained silent on such matters.

I suppose I should clarify, "If players win, then the developers lose." It's about profit. OP was mentioning about increasing the availability of rewards; however, if that comes to pass, then developers would lose potential sales. Only a certain percentage of players are able to get rewards in order to encourage competition between players. Competition can increase the purchase of health packs. Furthermore, players who didn't receive rewards may purchase tokens to get those rewards. In short, quotas foster competition. If you start giving away too many freebies, then you start to lose profits.

This MPQ "happiness" quota that you've mentioned. I assume that you're mixing the "You're supposed to lose" and "quota" statements, which have no relation. I refered to "You're supposed to lose" as a joke. Not some sinister plan that the developers have hatched to keep a certain amount of players miserable. So, I really don't know where you're going with this. But it does sound like a conspiracy: "Developers purposely make gamers unhappy"...

Stax the Foyer

mpqq wrote:

You do realize that removing the competitive nature of PVE would mean the end of the flow of iso, hp, and tokens from PVE alliances and placement (daily and end). There's one non-competitive PVE event, the Gauntlet. It lasts 7 days, but you only get 3 different 3*'s and a 4*. There's no extra iso and hp from the alliance or placement. In short, that non-competitive is long and inefficient for progress. It's not a good model to follow. There is no remove competition and everyone wins scenario. If players win, then the developers lose. I'm pretty sure, the developers want it the other way around. There's probably a quote about that somewhere. Anyways, the developers have a quota to reach, and re-balancing around non-competitiveness would probably lead to a poor player effort/reward ratio.

Just because the gauntlet awards are



doesn't mean that has to be the model for progression PvE. We don't need to be limited to a choice between two incredibly outdated rewards systems.

There could be a reward system that was actually fair, and reasonable, and reflective of the current state of the game.

I mean, there won't be. That seems pretty clear at this point. But there could be.

FierceKiwi

Stax the Foyer wrote:

There could be a reward system that was actually fair, and reasonable, and reflective of the current state of the game.

I mean, there won't be. That seems pretty clear at this point. But there could be.

I was about ready to ask if you were one of those crazy people on my Facebook page that still insist Bernie Sanders can win (you know we can like launch a write in campaign or something). Then I got to the end and was relieved to see you weren't delusional

Tromb2ch2

Actually I wasn't proposing a scenario where more people would get more covers because all the rewards were progression. If you looked through my post I mentioned that I only wanted a certain % of the player base (unfortunately the whales) to even be able to obtain the max progression rewards because I wanted to remove scaling all together and have fixed difficulties per nodes. This would actually encourage people to build up their rosters so they can get the better rewards instead of some people never spending iso so that their scaling doesn't get too high.

For a rough example a 2* roster (with none championed) will be able to reach high enough to get like one of each 2* covers. A filled out 2* roster will be able to get a cover for the 3* required character. A developing 3* roster will get all 3* covers. A championed 3* roster will get a 4*. So on and so forth. But the ability to get to the higher tier will require more effort.

Also as far as the whole alliances will lose out of the extra alliance rewards, I'd like to see an alliance progression like the boss events in every event.

carrion_pigeons

I do think there ought to be room for very challenging nodes. Gauntlet is a masterpiece compared to every other PvE. I don't understand the appeal of grinding out the same fights 4-6 times per day.

As for the age-old arguments of "PvE shouldn't be PvP" and "the game is too stingy at the high end", well, I agree wholeheartedly, but obviously somebody doesn't.

mpqq

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

Actually I wasn't proposing a scenario where more people would get more covers because all the rewards were progression. If you looked through my post I mentioned that I only wanted a certain % of the player base (unfortunately the whales) to even be able to obtain the max progression rewards because I wanted to remove scaling all together and have fixed difficulties per nodes. This would actually encourage people to build up their rosters so they can get the better rewards instead of some people never spending iso so that their scaling doesn't get too high...

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

...
The first obvious one is that the placement rewards should be progression because this isn't supposed to be PvP so why are we fighting with each other to get rewards?
...

?? Maybe I don't understand where you're coming from, but the current progression reward system is really easy to obtain. Even if you don't have essentials, I'm certain you could hit maximum progression rewards. Then you want placement rewards to be allocated into the progression reward system? Easier progression probably means players will get those placement rewards; therefore, player would get more covers.

Tromb2ch2

Well I wanted them to be tacked on at the end of the current progression where only people with better rosters would be able to achieve based on the difficulty of the non-scaled nodes.

carrion_pigeons

mpqq wrote:

Tromb2ch2 wrote:

Easier progression probably means players will get those placement rewards; therefore, player would get more covers.

There's a difference between "players get more covers" and "more players get covers". If every single player gets one cover, then nobody's life really got any easier. The difference to a person's roster between having a 1 cover character and not having the character is small.

Crowl

mpqq wrote:

?? Maybe I don't understand where you're coming from, but the current progression reward system is really easy to obtain. Even if you don't have essentials, I'm certain you could hit maximum progression rewards. Then you want placement rewards to be allocated into the progression reward system? Easier progression probably means players will get those placement rewards; therefore, player would get more covers.

Players seeming to progress by getting more covers is not actually a bad thing.

Think about how many 4*'s there actually are now, it would take almost a year to cover all the existing ones if you got max progression every time, in that time another 2 dozen characters would have been released and you would still need far longer still to fully champion that first group anyway.