A simple scaling solution

Wil88

What if scaling was based purely on how many health points you finished your last node with?

Those with high levels chars, and those who stunlock and heal back to full health would scale higher and quicker than those who don't have a healer, or who just manage to squeak out a win with 2 characters downed.

I think it would promote more variety in characters used as well, you'd probably stop seeing so much Spidey in these events if people knew that their next node would be that much harder if they finished full health.

Certainly it would stop situations like finding all characters Lvl 167 in the first node of the event when your highest character is a buffed Ares 125.

Unknown

That would be nice....
Oh wait it's already like that.

Unknown

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

Eddiemon

Wil88 wrote:

What if scaling was based purely on how many health points you finished your last node with?

Those with high levels chars, and those who stunlock and heal back to full health would scale higher and quicker than those who don't have a healer, or who just manage to squeak out a win with 2 characters downed.

I think it would promote more variety in characters used as well, you'd probably stop seeing so much Spidey in these events if people knew that their next node would be that much harder if they finished full health.

Certainly it would stop situations like finding all characters Lvl 167 in the first node of the event when your highest character is a buffed Ares 125.

Then we'd just stop healing back at the end of the battle, and heal in the prologue. Get Ares to injure himself or Hulk to harm the whole team before finishing the enemy. Someone with a decent roster would be able to ensure a scaling lower than yours.

I'd go find the node with M Storm and poke her repeatedly with a stick after killing off her teammates. Or let one green rocket explode for 4800 damage and almost kill all my team.

Eddiemon

pasa_ wrote:

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

No, whatever the issues with scaling it still beats the living heck out of mindless grinding. I love this game but if I need to play 10 hours a day to compete then I quit.

Unknown

pasa_ wrote:

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

As someone who used to play before scaling existed ... hell no.

Unknown

I'm actually thinking scaling with no rubberbanding can work, as long as you provide some catch up missions that do rubberband like The Hulk.

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

pasa_ wrote:

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

No, whatever the issues with scaling it still beats the living heck out of mindless grinding. I love this game but if I need to play 10 hours a day to compete then I quit.

Mindless grinding could be addressed in a dozen good ways, most of them suggested many times over.

Why people keep thinking in false dichotomies?

Eddiemon

pasa_ wrote:

Eddiemon wrote:

pasa_ wrote:

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

No, whatever the issues with scaling it still beats the living heck out of mindless grinding. I love this game but if I need to play 10 hours a day to compete then I quit.

Mindless grinding could be addressed in a dozen good ways, most of them suggested many times over.

Why people keep thinking in false dichotomies?

Because none of those dozen good ways were actually any rational person's definition of 'good'. They mainly involved a complete denial that grinding exists. Or claim that for no rational reason people won't grind once there are no obstacles to grinding. Or tried to redefine grinding as something other than having to play 4+ hours per day. We've seen what happens when there is no scaling in the original Hulk releases and they were terrible. People lost half their Christmas breaks to the grinding monster.

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

Because none of those dozen good ways were actually any rational person's definition of 'good'. They mainly involved a complete denial that grinding exists. Or claim that for no rational reason people won't grind once there are no obstacles to grinding. Or tried to redefine grinding as something other than having to play 4+ hours per day. We've seen what happens when there is no scaling in the original Hulk releases and they were terrible. People lost half their Christmas breaks to the grinding monster.

Reports are mixed on that "terrible" from the forums I gather the folks who now sit with several 141s call it terrible and those in the second line or below liked it. A quite wider population. But that debate is really pointless, I'm happy to accept that grinding is not a good goal and if *only* the play time is the factor it will not be good. You can kill grinding quite simple: forget resets, and limit the point yield to less repeats. Say if only 2 repeats yield point and no resets it sets a sensible upper bound, right?

Nodes can be with static levels, but a variety of them, and bringing in different rules (buffs, locks) that create competitive difference.
Also the ties could be handled the "fair" way, granting all equal points the same (better) prizes, what would just eliminate problems bound to event timing. You could just *really* play what you like, when you like, how you like and get the same result for the same victories.

That's just one approach. The idea about purely personal scaling also makes sense, where every win adds to levels of that node and to the local prizes too -- the limits need some more work.

The suggestion group about scrapping position prizes also makes sense keeping to only progression.

IMO the position you state above that all suggestions were all that 1-dimensional is more than unfair.

Unknown

Having everyone tie for every reward doesn't solve any problems, because it doesn't work in D3's favour at all to send out 3 covers to 10,000 players.

Unknown

jozier wrote:

Having everyone tie for every reward doesn't solve any problems, because it doesn't work in D3's favour at all to send out 3 covers to 10,000 players.

Not hard to make nodes in a way it not be possible. Actually that is the part even their excel-sheet minded folks could get right.

Meanwhile from the Sim thread:

Phantron wrote:

They really need to reexamine what's going on with the lack of activity in hard (nearly identical total points despite missions worth twice base) and how the PvE scaling + rubberband affects that. It's one thing to not encourage grinding, but grinding shouldn't put you in a worse position than not grinding, which is what is happening right now.

For the record: in this tournament I personally played barely and exploited all the "tech", have 97/99 personal scaling and if just keep on playing have top10 combined in the pocket (likely #1) and position in subs only limited by the amount of non-roster guys (have at least one in both). I see why this "sit back and just win" style is impressive.

But I still think it is bad, it is ultimately unfair in countless ways and while it does provide the prizes, it definitely lacks any fun. Maybe the time measure is low, but to me this feels the nothing-but-grind right after the first round.

And I'd rather fight all the other nodes if just to see how it works -- but must resist the temptation. If a game forces the strategy to not play it, it's the antithesis of what it supposed to stand for.

That's how the high command took my daddy^Wgame from me.

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

pasa_ wrote:

Eddiemon wrote:

pasa_ wrote:

Even simpler scaling solution: scrap it for good.

No, whatever the issues with scaling it still beats the living heck out of mindless grinding. I love this game but if I need to play 10 hours a day to compete then I quit.

Mindless grinding could be addressed in a dozen good ways, most of them suggested many times over.

Why people keep thinking in false dichotomies?

Because none of those dozen good ways were actually any rational person's definition of 'good'. They mainly involved a complete denial that grinding exists. Or claim that for no rational reason people won't grind once there are no obstacles to grinding. Or tried to redefine grinding as something other than having to play 4+ hours per day. We've seen what happens when there is no scaling in the original Hulk releases and they were terrible. People lost half their Christmas breaks to the grinding monster.

You're the one who "redefined grinding" as "playing a single node in a sub three times over the course of the sub"

Unknown

Scaling and rubberbanding are a necessary evil in this type of game. It's just a matter of tuning the knobs enough to make it fun while still providing a challenge.

Unknown

UncleSam wrote:

Scaling and rubberbanding are a necessary evil in this type of game. It's just a matter of tuning the knobs enough to make it fun while still providing a challenge.

To be fair, "this type of game" should be clearly defined as "competitive PVE". If there were no rank rewards in PVE, only progression, this would be a moot point. In such a scenario, rubberbanding would be gone, as would the community scaling, leaving only the personal scaling in place, which is a far more manageable beast.

Eddiemon

pasa_ wrote:

Reports are mixed on that "terrible" from the forums I gather the folks who now sit with several 141s call it terrible and those in the second line or below liked it. A quite wider population. But that debate is really pointless, I'm happy to accept that grinding is not a good goal and if *only* the play time is the factor it will not be good. You can kill grinding quite simple: forget resets, and limit the point yield to less repeats. Say if only 2 repeats yield point and no resets it sets a sensible upper bound, right?

I don't have 'several 141's'. I call it terrible. Putting peopeo who disagree with you in some special group so you can dismiss their point of view doesn't make your case any more valid.

Nodes can be with static levels, but a variety of them, and bringing in different rules (buffs, locks) that create competitive difference.
Also the ties could be handled the "fair" way, granting all equal points the same (better) prizes, what would just eliminate problems bound to event timing. You could just *really* play what you like, when you like, how you like and get the same result for the same victories.

So that would be original Hulk. Been there, ground that. Hated by many. This 'good' idea was already tried and disproved. It ruined a lot of people's Christmasses.

That's just one approach. The idea about purely personal scaling also makes sense, where every win adds to levels of that node and to the local prizes too -- the limits need some more work.

How does this one make sense?
There are two ways it can go. Firstly I get more event points if I face higher scaled enemies, so you can kiss progression rewards and placement awards goodbye.
Or secondly, and this is I think more likely your angle, you can grind the same event points on easier opponents turning it into a grinding competition. Same as 'good' suggestion one.

The suggestion group about scrapping position prizes also makes sense keeping to only progression.

Yes, so now I don't have to get more points than my opponents, I have to beat some static targets. Which means yet again grinding to get anything worthwhile because they only want .1% of participants to get a 4* and .5% to get 2 covers. So they need to set those static targets at the point where 99.5% of people will give up out of boredom because they removed the challenge of scaling.

IMO the position you state above that all suggestions were all that 1-dimensional is more than unfair.

No, they are all grinding. You just choose to avoid working out what you have to do to 'win' in each case by only offering a suggestion and never extrapolating to its logical solution. All your solutions to scaling are grinding in a different coat of paint.

Eddiemon

gamar wrote:

You're the one who "redefined grinding" as "playing a single node in a sub three times over the course of the sub"

Doesn't sound like something I said,

Might it have been from the suggestion 'let us clear each node twice in each sub before you start the scaling'? Thereby requiring everyone to complete every node an additional two times to what they have to do now to get the same result? I'm not sure how that doesn't meet a definition of pointless grinding.

If it wasn't that then I am unsure where you are getting the reference.

Unknown

You seem just snip the points -- in hulk there was reset every X hours and nodes gave points many times. There is a substantial difference grinding-wize if a node can give you points 20 times or 10 or 5 or 2. If you actually think it's no difference elaborate.

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

gamar wrote:

You're the one who "redefined grinding" as "playing a single node in a sub three times over the course of the sub"

Doesn't sound like something I said,

Might it have been from the suggestion 'let us clear each node twice in each sub before you start the scaling'? Thereby requiring everyone to complete every node an additional two times to what they have to do now to get the same result? I'm not sure how that doesn't meet a definition of pointless grinding.

If it wasn't that then I am unsure where you are getting the reference.

Why on Earth would it require everyone to complete the node two extra times? For people who just want to complete the nodes once or twice, they can, and for people who want to compete for covers, they already have to get way more points than you would recieve for doing that, so absolutely nothing would change

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

No, they are all grinding. You just choose to avoid working out what you have to do to 'win' in each case by only offering a suggestion and never extrapolating to its logical solution. All your solutions to scaling are grinding in a different coat of paint.

Ok, for you it seem an important aspect, please provide some working definition or write around or give examples so we have common ground to discuss. It shows that different people have different meaning for this term that confuses the conversation.

Unknown

I'll boil it down to 5 points - Scaling works because:

1) It prevents botting
2) It's an equalizer for those with a lot of time to play versus those that have less time to play
3) It cuts down on the need for grinding across the board
4) It makes a user face a paywall (ie. healthpacks) more often (probably the most important aspect from a developer standpoint)
5) It equalizes the fairness among players with varying rosters/experience.


So, if your solution can be better than all 5 of those aspects, then I'd be willing to listen.