Twysta wrote: Which nodes require HT?
gamar wrote: It's early in the event. Every PvE we get a bunch of people complaining in the first half that most of their top tier are newbies and concluded from this that the newbies are winning everything! but in my experience I've noticed by the last 12 hours of the event they're all gone except for maybe one or two guys riding a buffed hero on the (lower-scaled) essential nodes
gobstopper wrote: gamar wrote: It's early in the event. Every PvE we get a bunch of people complaining in the first half that most of their top tier are newbies and concluded from this that the newbies are winning everything! but in my experience I've noticed by the last 12 hours of the event they're all gone except for maybe one or two guys riding a buffed hero on the (lower-scaled) essential nodes Perhaps the reason the newbies don't finish as well as they start is because they don't understand how rubberbanding and point resets work yet so they aren't able to game the system.
Cryptobrancus wrote: gobstopper wrote: gamar wrote: It's early in the event. Every PvE we get a bunch of people complaining in the first half that most of their top tier are newbies and concluded from this that the newbies are winning everything! but in my experience I've noticed by the last 12 hours of the event they're all gone except for maybe one or two guys riding a buffed hero on the (lower-scaled) essential nodes Perhaps the reason the newbies don't finish as well as they start is because they don't understand how rubberbanding and point resets work yet so they aren't able to game the system. Or they are able to go nuts at the beginning with the buffed hero, but then scaling gets a hold of them and they hit a wall
IceIX wrote: We're trying out a change to help out scaling overall starting in Heroic Chapter 3, to go Live very soon. - Smoothed scaling over all brackets of PVE rating so that players will see a more gradual bump on enemies - Keep in mind that some pins will still be harder than others, this just makes the huge instant bumps less prevalent, although if you join on second one then come in 20 hours later, you should expect to see a change due to Community Scaling. - Smoothed the route back down in PVE rating if you're losing in missions so that enemies will get easier quicker. We've put in brakes however so that you can't just retreat your way to easy-dom. - Increased the maximum level of enemies from 230 to 400. >230 enemies are intended to only regularly be seen by those players that are already beating up on 230s. Increasing the maximum enemy level allows us to provide more challenges for the players that are higher in overall roster level and not create a roadblock where those players that are beating down 230s with ease are making scaling work harder for all the other players who aren't there yet. Here's what happens right now with 230s in-game: Player 1 can fight 230s but will come out of it pretty damaged. They're the intended audience for "230s = HARD". They've hit the point where their Deadly/Impossible pins are at that level. Great, fine for just those pins. Player 2 can fight 230s and win fairly easily. They may be healing in battle, they may be stunlocking, they may be that good. They're still beating the 230 encounters without issue. Player 3 can't fight 230s but they can win against 180s decently well. The game sees that the Deadly pin for Player 1 is being beaten regularly by players that are capable of taking down 230s (Player 2). They're both at the high end of PVE rating, so there's no real difference in difficulty as far as the system can see. The game *does* know that users are still defeating those pins pretty easily though, so it raises the floor to try and help difficulty go up for everyone on nodes that were apparently too easy. Player 1 sees that a couple of his Hard pins went to Deadly 200s from 180 as a result of being near the top of scaling while his bretheren is knocking down 230s like nothing. Player 1's game just got harder even though it shouldn't have, but the system has little way of knowing that without adding in much more complexity to the scaling system. Player 3 sees their nodes go from 180 to 185 since their rating isn't as high, so they're affected fairly little but still hit. A theoretical player 4 fighting 90s may be fighting 91s, so no big deal there. By raising the bar to 400, we've left room for Player 2 to grow while essentially pushing Player 1 into the same position Player 3 now enjoys. It's also the reason you see newbies hanging out in the points ranking for so long. They get hit by scaling less because the people that are pushing the community scaling up aren't hitting them as hard (as they shouldn't). They still hit difficult fights relatively quickly though as their individual rating climbs, so that ends up being self balancing by the end of any given PVE Event. Edit: Yes mods, there's supposed to be a Shadow Topic in General that leads to Events for this. Don't kill it.
Phaserhawk wrote: kevind722 wrote: Does this sound like communism to anyone else? Those who have more must work harder so that those that have less can reap the same benefits. No, it's a way to fix an underlying issue. Players are abusing characters, ie. Magneto and Spidey in the PvE enviornment. But....in PvP they are not that big of an issue and most high level players dont use them in some cases because they are slow. It's much easier to adjust one enviorment than redesign a character, because players don't spend time or money in an enviornment, but they do on their characters and considering the heat they feel when characters are messed with, I see why they are trying this first.
kevind722 wrote: Does this sound like communism to anyone else? Those who have more must work harder so that those that have less can reap the same benefits.
NorthernPolarity wrote: morgh wrote: And bottom line is: Nothing we write here will make them change their mind - get used to high levels of enemies and people with weak rosters/new players grabbing everything... Has there been a single time that D3 changed anything based on forum feedback? ... Thought so... Give the devs more credit. Anyone remember back when the skip tax was initially planned and they scrapped it entirely and changed it to the victory bonus?
morgh wrote: And bottom line is: Nothing we write here will make them change their mind - get used to high levels of enemies and people with weak rosters/new players grabbing everything... Has there been a single time that D3 changed anything based on forum feedback? ... Thought so...
MikeHock wrote: NorthernPolarity wrote: morgh wrote: And bottom line is: Nothing we write here will make them change their mind - get used to high levels of enemies and people with weak rosters/new players grabbing everything... Has there been a single time that D3 changed anything based on forum feedback? ... Thought so... Give the devs more credit. Anyone remember back when the skip tax was initially planned and they scrapped it entirely and changed it to the victory bonus? And I still say it's rude to take our hard earned ISO away just because their MMR sucks. I hate trying to play a new PvP event and seeing 3 choices of battles against teams that are signifigantly higher than my team. I do well enough that I don't have to skip much, but I also retreat on purpose because I don't want to throw away any ISO. What about when you're in the top 10 of an event and you skip, only to be matched up against the same player? That's totally messed up and happens a lot.
NorthernPolarity wrote: MikeHock wrote: NorthernPolarity wrote: morgh wrote: And bottom line is: Nothing we write here will make them change their mind - get used to high levels of enemies and people with weak rosters/new players grabbing everything... Has there been a single time that D3 changed anything based on forum feedback? ... Thought so... Give the devs more credit. Anyone remember back when the skip tax was initially planned and they scrapped it entirely and changed it to the victory bonus? And I still say it's rude to take our hard earned ISO away just because their MMR sucks. I hate trying to play a new PvP event and seeing 3 choices of battles against teams that are signifigantly higher than my team. I do well enough that I don't have to skip much, but I also retreat on purpose because I don't want to throw away any ISO. What about when you're in the top 10 of an event and you skip, only to be matched up against the same player? That's totally messed up and happens a lot. Yeah, but the point was that they had an original implementation of the skip tax. We didn't like it and offered a suggestion to make it feel better, and they took the suggestion and they did it. Whether or not the change was good to begin with doesn't really add anything to the original discussion, and should be discussed somewhere else. That being said, I love the skip tax: I'm getting so much more iso off the victory bonus in LRs and farming at low point totals than I am losing iso for skipping people.
davecazz wrote: Here's a specific case I would like the devs to respond to. Lately, a lot of the goon nodes have attacks that can either kill the entire party, or at least insta kill the hero in the forefront. The only way to get past these nodes is to prevent them from attacking meaning if you win, you likely are not taking any damage. Now let's say we have a board that has 2 of these nodes and the other nodes are random 240 lvl tough matchups, like doom, c mags, loki. If you have a team that has the right board control to beat the snipers but cant win against the other nodes, what are you supposed to do? the natural impulse would be to grind down the sniper nodes to 1 and use those to gain progress in the event and not bother playing the other nodes because they will be too expensive to give you useful points. but since damage taken effects level scaling, you will end up doing a disservice to yourself because your levels will just keep climbing. Its been said a bunch of times but I dont want to throw my roster at really hard nodes and spend my health packs until my mmr comes down to a reasonable level. the game is supposed to be based around ingenuity and tying to use strategy, the tools at your disposal, and the board you are given in order to place well in events. Given the length of PvE and the rewards, PvP is way more lucrative. this change pushes the value proposition even more in favor of PvP. I really think we should at least get diminishing MMR for not choosing to fight certain nodes. Not choosing to fight because you know it will be close to a guaranteed loss says a lot more than having the tools to beat a high level goon fight.
davecazz wrote: The bottom line is that some of these changes that are being made have a theoretical purpose but they don't increase the fun factor of the game. Someone thinks that the game needs to present more "equal" matches to players and they are completely missing what makes the game fun. Long drawn out matches are not fun. Matches where I barely squeak past a victory but I need 3 healthpacks to recover is not fun Winning 1 out of 3 matches is not fun. Being on a roll where you feel like a hero winning 5 matches in a row is fun.
davecazz wrote: I'm not that cynical, I do believe they want to make money and by all means that's great. I want the game to make money. but I also think they are doing their best to try and make it a fun game as well. It's hard being in their position. like you said, they dont have anyone that plays at our level so they probably have no idea if we are wining about not be able to win as much as we used to vs us having a legit gripe. but I think the best way to effect change is to communicate about it. The more airtime a given issue gets. the more likely something will be dont about it. The devs read these threads. The best we can do is keep providing good arguments in a rational matter so they don't think we are just blindly asking to make things easier because we feel entitled.