Time Gem Season Updates *Updated (10/19/17)

Vhailorx

Bloody Marvel said:

Put the 4* at 30 wins.
Put the 15CP at 40 wins.

Everybody happy.

Do that. No, don't argue. Don't think about it. Do that.

This would, indeed, resolve my most signifcant concerns.  But demi clearly doesn't want to make cp *that* available.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Spudgutter

wymtime said:

Spudgutter said:

Stax the Foyer said:

Spudgutter said:

My point overall isnt even the cost associated, but the fact that people are upset that they are "losing" cp, claiming it is the only resource that that they play this game for, while at the same time not going after all the cp they could get.  

This is a silly point, there are more factors at play here than raw CP earnings.  People value both CP and time. 

The marginal CP difference between PvE CLs is coupled with a significant change in time requirement.  Choosing to give up a few CP a week in exchange for hours of your time is a totally rational decision, and one that's completely consistent with complaining about possibly getting 45 fewer CP/week in PvP and having to spend more time to get the remainder of the rewards.

A few?  It's 7 across progression from a 3/4 day event, 10 if you drop down to scl7.  Throw down some extra for the extra sub rewards, if there are any. 14 to 20 per week, plus all of the extra covers and tokens, which feed the farms, which gets you more cp....

I'm not saying you cant make that rational decision, I'm just pointing out that if you say you want all the cp you can get, then make that decision, it's a little hypocritical 

It is called quality of life and can also be determined by if you have the 5* required leveled or not for PVE.  A lot of 5* players play PVP because that is what we like and we strive for the CP.  we play PVE for iso and progression CP.   CL9 has a significant jump in levels compared to CL8.  I personally strive for the cp in this game but usually go CL8 because the lower CP is worth the quality of life CL8 provides.  This new PVP system significantly impacts my quality of life as far as the game goes and how much CP I can earn.

most 5* players actually understand how beneficial this change will be for 3* and 4* players what we are asking saying is why is our quality of life being sacrificed for yours.  Why can’t there be a system that benefits all??  You can argue with people on the forum and insist upon your points or you can actually look at it from other players perspectives and the support they have given the game.  Just remember they way we are being treated now as in the future if you are around long enough it will be how d3 treads you.

Been around 1400 days, so i know how i am treated.

So, you can see how it helps newer rosters, right?  By making them progress faster, and slowing ours down, it bring us closer to equilibrium faster.  Like i said, i may not like it, but i understand it for the long term health of the game. I just wish other 5* players accepted this as well, then we wouldnt even be having this discussion. 

corytutor

Probably because putting the resources to get 5s at the very top.of rewards screws 99% of the people

corytutor

Unless youre a whale

astrp3

Daredevil217 said:

We don't know that.  

No. we don't know that - and that's my whole point. AFAIK We don't know how many players there are. We don't know the mix of veterans to newbies to whales. We don't know how long people in general play the game before quitting. We don't know why players, in general, quit. We don't know how much money each type of player spends on the game or what percentage of the game's revenue that represents. We don't know their business model. We don't know what statistics they keep or what they base their decisions on. We don't know how much players are spending on HP, ISO etc. (some of this info was posted in an article but that was very general and I don't know how long ago it was).  We don't know what all their sources of feedback are and whether or not the feedback agrees with the opinions expressed on the forums (we don't even know if opinions expressed on the forums is representative of players on the forums in general) We don't know the developer's reasons for doing things (you can't put motivations in a test tube and do an objective test to determine what they are and lord knows the devs rarely tell us their motivations). We don't have notes from their meetings. We don't have e-mails from the developers or management (i.e. things that would count as real evidence).

For some things, like how many players get to 1200, we have an idea, but the evideent nce I've seen here is largely anecdotal and was not systematically collected. Not to mention that it doesn't line up with my experience (which is not to say that the conclusions are wrong since my experience is not based on systematically collected data either).

And yet people continue to post as if they DO know most, if not all, of these things and use that "knowledge" as proof for conclusions that would be thrown out of any courtroom, debate hall, or scientific lab in the country.
 

Vhailorx

Spud,

I can definitely see how this helps new rosters progress faster.  This change will eventually democratize 4* land.  That's great!  I have been asking for that on these forums since at least june of 2015.

But why make 5* land more exclusive at the same time?  Demi often pairs a player friendly move (4* progression covers, bonus heroes, more total cp for pve progs) with player unfriendly moves (pvp cp stuck in placement, vaulting vintage 4*s, no more easy pve 10 cp prog reward and 5/6 clears for max prog). 

Sometimes i just feel that negatives are out of proportion with the positives.

Astrp:

You are right that we don't know as much about player spending habits as demi.  But i reject the idea that we can't or shouldn't speculate about dev for various moves.  We should probably avoid saying things like: "the devs would just make more money if they did X."  but what is wrong with saying "the devs have made X change, which they presumably think will raise their revenue in Y fashion, but i wonder if they have considered Z"?

larzilla

@Brigby what happened to giving use more info and answering our questions today?  This is the biggest bomb dropped on mpq and we get nothing.  Can you please explain more?  What's the rewards structure?  Have the developers decided to lower the required wins?  Maybe convince the devs to put cp back in progression.  

astrp3

Vhailorx said:

Astrp:

You are right that we don't know as much about playet soending habits as demi.  But i reject the idea that we can't or shouldn't speculate about dev for various moves.  We should probably avoid saying things like: "the devs would just make more money if they did X."  but what is wrong with saying "the devs have made X change, which they presumably think will raise their revenue in Y fashion, but i wonder if they have considered Z"?

Speculation is fine when it's presented as such - and many people on here do just that. And criticism is fine too. In some cases, if only rarely, it even leads to changes (like with vaulting)

All to often, however (IMO), people present speculations as facts (e.g. the devs are lying and that explanation they gave is just a cover story), even to the point of implying that others are stupid for not accepting one's obvious" conclusions (even if their obvious conclusions and someone else's obvious conclusions are mutually exclusive), using those conclusions to make even more sweeping generalizations, or drawing conclusions that tiptoe on (if not cross) the border to wildly implausible conspiracy theories. 

Ah, maybe I should just stop posting. Sometimes I wonder if my complaining about  complainers is as annoying as the complainers' complaining. Maybe I start a thread called Complaints and the Complaining Complainers who Complain About Them? Nah - people would probably just complain about it.

Spudgutter

Vhailorx said:

Sometimes i just feel that negatives are out of proportion with the positives.

it feels like that is the unofficial slogan for this game

Bowgentle

As expected, we'll get more details about rewards tables about 3 hours before they'll be live In game.

Don't promise updates when none are coming.

Don't promise presence in a thread when you don't have new info.

dudethtsawesome

Vhailorx said:

Dude awesome:  true healing, oml nerf, baking "fix," and boss rush all got much more feedback (true healing was more than 100 pages) and the devs basically did nothing about any of those issues in the short term.  Don't hold your breath.

It was more sarcasm than anything. I realize they will push forward their agenda regardless. 

sinnerjfl

Your call is important to us.
We love feedback.
We are listening.

  

ZeiramMR

Vhailorx said:

Zeiram: what slice do you play?  S2 is a wasteland where 1200 is both quite hard to get and much more likely to be a top 10 score.  In s3-5 it's a fair bit easier to score well, but it's very rare to get even top 25 below 1200 unless the bracket flips inside the last 8 hours.  And really tough brackets can push 1200 scores down into the 60s or 70s.  I dont play s1 veey often, but i understabd it to be similar to s3-5.  

I almost always do the last slice (3 am/pm US/Eastern). WHEN I join will vary, usually sometime around the "1 day left" mark but it depends on my schedule/free time.

Though with the switch to Win-based progression, I'll be instead joining a slice right as it opens to get those 10-ish seed teams and reduce the total playing to about my normal amount per tournament. It worked for the tests.

astrp3

Vhailorx  said:
I dont play s1 veey often, but i understabd it to be similar to s3-5.

I usually play slice 1 in SCL 7 (except for PvPs starting on Sunday, when I play the 12 PM CT slice). And I always join as soon as the event starts, though I probably shouldn't (gotta get those seed teams).

My guess would be that you usually don't need 1200 to get top 25, but I haven't actually recorded the data. 

I do know that in the last two full seasons, I made 800 ten times and 900 ten times and never made 1000. I finished top 25 six times (with scores as low as 810) and 26-50th 12 times. 

Of course, that's SCL 7. SCL 8 could be totally different.

D4Ni13

OJSP said:

D4Ni13 said:

OJSP said:

D4Ni13 said:
I certainly don't try to defend them. 

You could've fooled me. I thought we need to stand behind the game just like we support our football team through the good and the bad?

Maybe you should. Though taking comments out of context won't do you any good. I was refearing to people that quit over OML nerf, and has nothing to do with this conversation. But hey while we're at it, how is life going for you ? Do you have a button to stop it & complain that it isn't fair from once in a while ?  

The point is everybody here got used to have everything for granted, and when demi decided that they don't want to give that much CP anymore, you feel robbed. And you think complaining about it will solve the problem ? The decision is already made. You have 2 options: either move on and find new solutions, either quit. 

But if you really wanna come here and tell me how hard it is for you to be a top player, at least have the decency to explain yourself and the situation in a civilized manner, with solutions and no whiney complains. 

All you did here is a cheap fiasco about how unfair is life at the top. It's like a rich guy complains to a poor guy how awful it is to be rich.

I can sympathize with you and also try to help you, if you use some logic & maturity in your reasons. I'm not saying that your game is easy or you aren't disadvantaged by this change, but don't treat me like you know everything there is to know just because you have a stronger roster than mine.

I played since the beginning, like most of you probably, and I took different decisions apparently.
And I'm happy with the state of my roster, progression & how I feel when playing the game, regardless of what is changing in gameplay. So that means I did take some right decisions at some point in time, and maybe I'm not completely desilusional when I make a stance here.

You may think what you want from this stance and joke about it, but like I already said today, this game is a lot better than it was 4 years ago. There were good decisions and bad decisions, but this kind of behavior of rejecting everything new is not helping anybody. On top of the fact that we don't even have the official table of rewards yet.

I believe you when you say that 5* play is messed up, but this is not the way to make a change. You need to post precise data in a good manner, without sarcasm and pointless blaiming and make a case of what is wrong and how to improve it. And believe me, if you do this I will stand behind you, just like I stand now behind the voice of reason.

Did you quote me and just go on a general rant to all 5* players or did you just attack me personally? I've been always curteous to you, ever since you started posting again in the forum when Ghost Rider came out and you suggested Black Panther as a partner. I wasn't even complaining. Check my last few posts.. where did I complain?

I was merely using your example as defending the game that you so care about, which is contradictory to what you said about you not defending the game. I understand you're excited, as can be seen by the number of new threads and posts in the last few days related to the new characters and changes in the game. Your posts have been full of praises to the developers and some are justified. But, lets just take a step back and think about what we're doing here.. we are debating about an online match-3 game and attacking each other because of differing opinions? That is the problem here.

My life is good. I have nothing to complain about. I just get on with it. Thanks.

@OJSP It wasn't an attack, more of a general opinion. But I didn't like the cheap move with the football team.

Anyway, you're right and I think this thread was not a good place to chat, because there is a lot of tension here. 

I really want to help 5* land get better, I just didn't thought this is the way to do it. Sorry if it came out as an attack to you, or anybody for that matter. The flow of conversation around here was pretty intense. My bad if I went too far.

whitecat31

I think people who are upset about this should post to the boards stuff, like, made top 10 or top 25, but didn't get full progression. Thanks Demiurge.   Because, sarcasm and humor, is a great way to deal with lemons, assuming you don't like the lemonade we are being served.

acescracked

smkspy said:

The irony is that the new scl scaling for pve players was loved by highend vet 5 rosters and a blow to 4 star and under rosters. We were told "well, it's not fair for 5 star players before, and they made it right for us despite it being an inconvenience or detriment to you guys." That system wasn't perfect and still isn't.

Now the shoe is on the other foot, the guys that complained about the complainers are now the complainers. It's not a perfect system, but as we were told, this evens out the playing field a bit. Not a perfect solution just like pve, but thems the breaks too.

You're argument is flawed.

Old pve scaling punished you for leveling and developing your roster. Would make players intentionally not level (softcap). New scaling encourages advancing a roster which allows faster clears not longer.

Old PvP rewarded you for developing your roster by making higher progression rewards more attainable. New PvP punishes you for developing your roster by making you do 40 matches for less rewards. Developed rosters could hit 900 or 1200 in half the matches. New PvP encourages you to not level your characters or you'll face 40 matches of dual champed 5*s.

So yea it flipped but badly.

whitecat31

ronin-san said:

In any case, Brigby doesn't deserve the flak he got, but they should be ashamed for throwing him out amidst the wolves like this.

I liken Brigby to the recent white house press secretaries. They will tell us OUR Viewpoints even though it is obviously not OUR viewpoints.  For example, today's announcement about progression based on win totals was cheered on by the largests MPQ crowd in history, and there was no negative feedback. Any claims that their is negative feedback is fake news (It's why we disabled the negative feedback buttons, {oops was that my outside voice?})    Basically, the game developers of MPQ have never been fully transparent and fully honest with us, and I don't exactly expect them to be, based on past performances.   They never know how to be honest and say when their changes are done, to specifically milk us for money, and I don't think they know how.  Nor do they know how to say, we are trying to get new and maintain noobie customers at the cost of the loyal veteran players.  I believe this is one of those times.

Daredevil217

Some food for thought:

I expected that this would be met with mixed reactions. After the initial tests, someone on here did a poll and there was a pretty big split amongst the player base as to whether or not the wins-based change was preferred over points-based progression.  The results:

58% YES (156 votes)
41% NO (109 votes)

Now I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say regardless of where your roster is at, if you are on these message boards posting about a match-3 game in your spare time you more than likely (though not necessarily) fall more in the “die hard” category than the “casual” category.

Though right now it could look to developers like the MPQ sky is falling, it is simply because the people unhappy with the change are of course going to be more vocal than those that are neutral or even happy about the change.

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/66512/do-you-like-the-new-pvp-system-progression-rewards-based-on-wins-instead-of-points-gained/p1

The poll shows that even amongst the more die hard players (forum goers) this change is preferred to the old system. This does not take into account the much larger, and likely more casual, player base not represented on the message boards.

The newer your roster the more this change benefits you as you can reach more rewards much faster that were previously unobtainable. I have about 58% of the 4* Champed so could get 900 pretty regularly. So for me this move is neutral in terms of rewards, a negative in terms of the amount of matches needed to max progress and a positive in terms of flexibility.  Anyone with a roster better than mine likely hates this and those below me likely love it.  I believe there are way more people that stand to benefit from this change and that will applaud it (especially off the boards) despite the vitriol on the boards currently.   Because people on the boards are so split on this I fully expect many more pages of the same arguments restated again and again. Expect a jumpstart tomorrow when we see the reward layout.