Ranty placement topic. New releases need to change

GrumpySmurf1002

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

The idea of not wanting to give too much away seems strange to me.

It's even stranger when you put in context. Remember, they changed buying covers from HP to CP because their expressed goal was they wanted to discourage people from using money (I guess they meant small amounts?) to bypass phases of the game.

So they discourage (light) whaling your way through, but they won't give out enough covers to make any character worthwhile to have at release. Quite the plan to get people excited about a character.

Fightmastermpq

I'm just baffled at the level of competition for what seems to be a bottom tier 4*. I might have had the toughest bracket out there (S4 opening), but this was my experience.....

- I finished all my opening grinds in under 1h (I think one was ~45 min, the others 50-55).
- First sub I closed in under 45 minutes and that was good for 12th
- Second sub I only had 30 minutes for final grind because life and took everything to green checks, trivials got a 7th
- Third sub I tried to close in 45 minutes, but couldn't get the 7th on a couple nodes
- Final sub I gave myself a full hour and just barely got through it (70k+ Mags in Business Partners, and 70k+ Moonstone in Wasp node took forever)

Finished with over 91k and took 50th. Merced out for a second green cover.

The number of people playing at or very close to optimally is absurd, and I agree that rewards should be expanded to match these efforts.

WEBGAS

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

I definitely don't agree with changing placement for 10 clears a day. That's WAY too grindy.

"

Maybe I have not been clear enough : I suggested to put 1 cover as progression rewards for those who clear all the nodes 8 times, 2 covers for 9 clears, 3 covers for 10 clears. No timers . No urging to grin as fast as you can.
This way everyone will have the chance to get those covers if they manage to do the 10 clears during the 24h sub.
Is It much more efforts? Yes but without the timing you should be able to play whenever you want and not feel like a race against time.

Actually we are doing 7 clears but are forced to do an initial grind of 4 clears...then wait as long as you can and then doing another grind of 3 clears followed by other 4 clears for the next sub...I find this way TOO GRINDY

Blergh

WEBGAS wrote:

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

I

Maybe I have not been clear enough : I suggested to put 1 cover as progression rewards for those who clear all the nodes 8 times, 2 covers for 9 clears, 3 covers for 10 clears. No timers . No urging to grin as fast as you can.

I like the idea of changing to a progression based system, but I think it would pose a major problem for D3 when it comes to alliances.

The only way you could get alliance rewards would be through another progress based system. To stop people jumping around with their high score and triggering alliance rewards all PVE would be locked for the event. Just like boss events.

Although there are a vocal group on the forum that wants this, I think there are an equal number of people and alliances that would hate this change as it would mean a reduction in there alliance rewards for PVE or PVP as a lot people switch between the two types of alliances as consistent hybrids are rare.

Then there are people like me, who has no idea how often they are going to play due to life and would rather stay alliance-less than drag eveyday down for 7 days. And prefer to join when they know they can contribute.

Might be more potentail upset to changing PVE that there first seems kind of thing.

Dragon_Nexus

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

The idea of not wanting to give too much away seems strange to me.

It's even stranger when you put in context. Remember, they changed buying covers from HP to CP because their expressed goal was they wanted to discourage people from using money (I guess they meant small amounts?) to bypass phases of the game.

So they discourage (light) whaling your way through, but they won't give out enough covers to make any character worthwhile to have at release. Quite the plan to get people excited about a character.

Yeah there's a real juxtaposition here betweemn "Here's our new character! Try out the loaner. Like it? Compete hard and earn the covers!" and "Yeah but not too many covers. Wouldn't want you to max them out within 6 months or anything."

You know, I've had a few characters I've levelled up and used in a PvE and I have to re-learn how they work because it's been so long since I used their 13 cover loaner in their debut event. Punisher Max was a good example. I was surprised to find I suddenly had 11 covers for him and he was usable, so I put a little ISO into him and found he was *beastly*. But it had been so long since his release I'd just forgotten all about him. In that respect I get little to no encouragement to get covers for these new characters because they're useless for the longest time and a huge ISO sink, so I simply forget they exist.

And that's a shame, because I'm SO glad there's a good 4* Carol Danvers now, but I wonder if she'll be usable before the summer.

WEBGAS

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

You know, I've had a few characters I've levelled up and used in a PvE and I have to re-learn how they work because it's been so long since I used their 13 cover loaner in their debut event. Punisher Max was a good example. I was surprised to find I suddenly had 11 covers for him and he was usable, so I put a little ISO into him and found he was *beastly*. But it had been so long since his release I'd just forgotten all about him. In that respect I get little to no encouragement to get covers for these new characters because they're useless for the longest time and a huge ISO sink, so I simply forget they exist.

And that's a shame, because I'm SO glad there's a good 4* Carol Danvers now, but I wonder if she'll be usable before the summer.

Exactly how I feel.....maybe I am too addicted to this game because each new release I force myself to compete, in order to get those 3 covers....and then that character (good or bad it was) is parked on a shelf collecting dust in company of all his/her friends for a very long time.I am asking : what is it worth for?

Dragon_Nexus

Updated the main post, since it's happened again.

ClydeFrog76

For some unknown reason the devs have designed "PVE" to only truly reward those players who can assign specific blocks of time at *very* specific times. If you can't do that, you get scraps. Always.

It's so disrespectful to such a massive part of the player-base that it actually beggars belief. I love this game, and have pretty much played it constantly since it launched, but there is SO MUCH about it that makes me question my loyalty.

Cover distribution and the meagerness thereof is right at the top of the list.

TimGunn

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

For some unknown reason the devs have designed "PVE" to only truly reward those players who can assign specific blocks of time at *very* specific times. If you can't do that, you get scraps. Always.

...

Yeah, better than the old way with 8 hour timers. Had to be able to play at THREE very specific times each day.

I liked that one EotS where there were no timers. It meant you had to be able to play at ONE very specific time at the end of the event. (current is ONE very specific time each day of the event). I know a lot of people hated it though.

Borstock

4 and 3 got me top 20 in SCL8 with optimal clear only once.

I dont expect to beat people who optimal clear each time and have a better roster.

Punisher5784

I find it extremely annoying when I consistently place T20 in each sub but by the end of the event I find myself finishing at 23.. it's even more frustrating that there is no specific T20 sub-event reward so I'm stuck constantly earning T50 rewards regardless what I do.. I agree, it needs to change.

beyonderbub

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

Updated the main post, since it's happened again.

yeah I ended up in the same situation - 21st place; 32 pts away from 20th place; 902 pts away from 1st. It was pretty tight. I should have use Oml / 3 strange / 3 thanos to clear all easy and goon nodes for the 4x clears.

Polares

People was playing again extremely hard for Mordo (at least in the third slice where I play). There were just 33 points between 20 and 21, just 1000 points between 1 and 20. I finished 13th 324 points away from top10, I played almost perfectly, I just start a bit too early on the final 3 clears of each sub (I always think I will need a bit more time to do the final clear than what I really need :S). You really need to play absolutely perfect to get top10.

We keep waiting for SCL9, SCL8 was a complete disappointing, and should have expanded a bit the range of two covers (to top50).

Magic

I find it annoying as well. The only way to get something is to lower the expectation (top100 for your and alliance for 2 covers) or snipe a bracket. Even sniping is not great. This event I have joined in the first 100 players and ended up giving up to settle for 29. I just couldn't keep up the grind and when you see the top 20 (not to mention top 10 where I was close to after the first day) running away it's just disheartening and leads straight to the burnout.

Unless there is change I will re-priorities and go for top100/top100 approach even if the 4* seems strong. It takes months to cover it anyway and one or two extra covers from release event are not worth the stress.

fmftint

All you NEED is 1 cover. It's fine

broll

Agreed. IMO the SCL7 rewards are fine, but SCL8 need a bump (for all but new releases especially). Right now the only time I don't to SCL8 is new releases because there's no point, it's just an added weight around your neck diminishing your chances at new covers.

SCL7 stay the same (which is)
1-2 - 4 covers
3-10 - 3 covers
11-20 - 2 covers
21-50 - 1 cover
50-100 - 1 cover

SCL8 should change to:
1-2 - 4 covers
3-10 - 3 covers
11-20 - 2 covers
21-50 - 2 covers
50 - 100 - 1 cover
100 - 200 - 1 cover

broll

TimGunn wrote:

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

For some unknown reason the devs have designed "PVE" to only truly reward those players who can assign specific blocks of time at *very* specific times. If you can't do that, you get scraps. Always.

...

Yeah, better than the old way with 8 hour timers. Had to be able to play at THREE very specific times each day.

I liked that one EotS where there were no timers. It meant you had to be able to play at ONE very specific time at the end of the event. (current is ONE very specific time each day of the event). I know a lot of people hated it though.

That's kinda subjective. Depends on if you have the 3 hours window at one of the 5 times the slices allow you to play optimally. For some it's easier to do 3 smaller, more spread out time windows. I find the new method better, but only slightly. It's impossible for me to play optimally during the work week in any of the 5 slices, so I generally have given up caring about placement in anything other than new releases. I might be able to play optimally if they offered more time slots.

Arphaxad

Not just personal placement rewards need to be reexamined. Top 100 Alliances getting the new cover is too low. With almost 18k alliances in the last event, and closer to 20k in most, the cover reward needs to be given to more alliances. The mad dash for mercs in the final hours of the event is building super alliances at the top and pushing real alliances out of the rewards.

Not to mention, giving the same color cover for alliance rewards as the lowest personal rewards is annoying.

atomzed

looking at this thread makes me glad that i never chase for top 20.

for the mordo pve, i was not able to play Sub 1 due work commitment. sub 2 and sub 3 completed all the green ticks... and by pure luck i finished 99. that met me 1 cover.

i was thinking "oh wow, people must not want mordo. just by playing 2 subs and i managed to get top 100"

but it looks like i was wrong. the competition for top 20 is cut throat.

i am just glad that i lower my expectations and just aim to get all the progression rewards.

mpqr7

My goal is to try to just barely hit top 100. And in order to do that, I "chase" top 20. I hit all green checks and then some, so it looks like I'm "top 15" at certain points during the event, then I go to bed. And then I wake up barely even top 100 by the skin of my teeth, and that's good enough. Sometimes I wake up not even top 100, and it is what it is.

I'm not going to go crazy and hit every node 7 to 8 or more times, as even that might not be enough to hit top 20, and it's not worth it to go all in and not end up hitting the goal after all that work.