What does it take to break Top 100 PVE

Tintaiwan

Hi,

any top 100 teams PVE out there willing to fill us in?  

My alliance is consistently around 125 -135 range.   Some want to push for top 100.  I was wondering what it takes.  Everyone in the alliance full progress in PVE?  or more ?  

if you're a top 100 alliance and have your alliance's stats on previous pve can I take a look?

thanks

TT

ZeiramMR

Might be worth updating the title (if you are still able to) to say Alliance Top 100. I came in to share my experience on the Individual level.

All I can say since I am in a casual alliance is to look at the 100th score or as close as you can get, divide by 20, and see where your alliance members compare. And obviously have 20 people all contributing.

ZeiramMR

As for individual scoring, I play in the last slice, and doing non-optimal 5 clears is enough to hit Top 100 for me.

PenniesForEveryone

Typically if everyone hits max progression the alliance will be T100, for release events you need a bit more (1.4x maybe?)

Jarvind

Having way too much spare time helps.

For real though, if everyone just hits progression that's usually sufficient for non-new-character events. Which is pretty easy since the 5* node isn't counted towards the progression total, so even if you only play it twice for the token and CP it makes a noticeable difference.

DyingLegend

I'm assuming undivided attention to MPQ

Punisher5784

Agreed with everyone above. Typically, if one of our alliance members are unable to make top progression, we'll drop them, add a Merc, then add the alliance member back after the event is over. As long as the alliance members are aware of the rules, then the system will work fine. It also helps if everyone is on Line for better communication because the In-Game chat isn't that good.

I viewed your alliance, you have a nice mixture of 3 and 4* rosters. The players just need to put the time in if they want the T100 rewards, but it can be a lot of management for you (and the other two Commanders). Feel free to message me here or on Line if you have further questions. Happy to help.

GrumpySmurf1002

If you want to keep the alliance intact, then everyone needs about 1.2x progression, 1.3-1.4 for new releases.

Otherwise, T100 alliance requires (temporarily) cutting members and constant reshuffling to make sure you get enough players in that can cover those thresholds.

It's an unnecessary bloodbath to fight over an extra 3* cover.

broll

PenniesForEveryone said:

Typically if everyone hits max progression the alliance will be T100, for release events you need a bit more (1.4x maybe?)

This actually sounds a little low.  Those numbers sound like what they were before the add of the 5* nodes.

For my alliance our requirements are lower than most T100 at just max progression.  In truth that's not  enough.  If not for the fact that most do more than that and a handful that do who do much more than that we wouldn't hit T100 regularly.  I looked at our one of our recent lowest scores in a non-release event (Strange Sights 96) and our average score for that event was 130% max progression.  The last release event (Hearts of darkness 102) we averaged 148% max progression and that was just short of T100.  So I would say you'd want to shoot for 120-140% non-release event and 135-155% for release events.

Swish

Our alliance has recently been hitting PVE hard to get Top 50/100, and I've been tracking our average scores.  You'll need about 1.2x progression for Top 100 as an alliance (for example, we set an alliance minimum at 38,400 for Deadpool pve, that's 32,000 x 1.2), and aim for 1.4-1.5x progression for new releases.

Some of it is also dependent on the particular events as well.  For example for Honor Among Thieves, we hit 1.55x on average and ended up in 51st place. For Simulator, we hit 1.25x and ended in 43rd. Clearly, people hate Simulator PVE!

SCL makes a difference because 5* essential is worth more in SCL9 than in SCL7.  Wave nodes also make a difference since they are worth more points than regular nodes.

Daiches

Swish said:

Our alliance has recently been hitting PVE hard to get Top 50/100, and I've been tracking our average scores.  You'll need about 1.2x progression for Top 100 as an alliance (for example, we set an alliance minimum at 38,400 for Deadpool pve, that's 32,000 x 1.2), and aim for 1.4-1.5x progression for new releases.

Some of it is also dependent on the particular events as well.  For example for Honor Among Thieves, we hit 1.55x on average and ended up in 51st place. For Simulator, we hit 1.25x and ended in 43rd. Clearly, people hate Simulator PVE!

SCL makes a difference because 5* essential is worth more in SCL9 than in SCL7.  Wave nodes also make a difference since they are worth more points than regular nodes.

Waves are the reason for the difference between HAT and Sim. It's also the reason why optimal for EOTS is 2x max progression.

bluewolf

GrumpySmurf1002 said:

It's an unnecessary bloodbath to fight over an extra 3* cover.

The thing you need to consider is what you would get vs what you lose.  

You might push some people harder to score more for a 3* cover, a couple Heroics, and a little more iso or HP.  And then some of those people who upped their efforts might feel like it isn't worth it, leave, etc.  So if the alliance as a whole is important and something you value more than a few extra rewards, I suggest that you try to be happy with what you are getting.

People complain a lot about the alliance rewards being pretty meager, but I think that is partly because if you had really good rewards (say, t100 got 4* covers), then the alliances would have a lot more infighting and pressure on members who would just decide to quit vs deal with people telling them to play more, rotating them out, etc.  The alliance structure mostly is to create a social group that bonds over the game and works together on goals, so making them at odds internally over effort  and rewards could hurt overall game engagement.

If it really matters to get higher placement, your best bet is to find a different alliance.  If that doesn't seem like a worthwhile tradeoff, then I would try to just be happy with the rewards you get and focus on individual efforts which pay off more anyway.

Lastly: that there is massive drop off in scores once you get out of the top 100 or so.  I was in a casual alliance until recently and I went hard for events (t50 plus, always).  A couple others played hard and a bunch hardly did anything or nothing.  We still were usually t500.  That means that just 3-5 high end players scored enough to be better than the majority of alliances that entered the event.  The players who try hard really are a small minority of the overall playerbase.

Phumade

It does seem like T100 Alliance cutoff has moved up over time.  Putting aside the actual progression table, the mere presence of 5e nodes means avg scores will go up.

The only real insight I can offer is that your alliance really needs to be ranked in the 50-75 range (before the last day) to have a viable shot at maintaing a T100.  As the event runs down,  alliances can and will make lineup shuffles to improve their standing.  Without commenting on the rightness or wrongness, you as the alliance commander need to be ready to react and adjust expectations/membership according.

i.e.
On the last day of a pve event.  your alliance needs to be:

between 50-75 ranked after s2.  (to be viable without mercing for scores, also assuming you have people still to play in following shards.)

After S4 closes, your alliance really needs to be sub 90 (to be viable without mercs)

In the last 3hrs, expect all the alliances between 75-100 to make big moves to stay above the cutoff line.

PenniesForEveryone

broll said:

PenniesForEveryone said:

Typically if everyone hits max progression the alliance will be T100, for release events you need a bit more (1.4x maybe?)

This actually sounds a little low.  Those numbers sound like what they were before the add of the 5* nodes.

For my alliance our requirements are lower than most T100 at just max progression.  In truth that's not  enough.  If not for the fact that most do more than that and a handful that do who do much more than that we wouldn't hit T100 regularly.  I looked at our one of our recent lowest scores in a non-release event (Strange Sights 96) and our average score for that event was 130% max progression.  The last release event (Hearts of darkness 102) we averaged 148% max progression and that was just short of T100.  So I would say you'd want to shoot for 120-140% non-release event and 135-155% for release events.

Yeah, you are right.  If all 20 guys hit max progression and then stop you'll likely fall short, but typically if EVERYONE is hitting max progression you'll have a handful that are playing optimally which is enough to boost the alliance score to T100.

Tintaiwan

Follow up Question Difference in rewards between: 
it does not seem like much...  
event rewards T100 2500 iso 50hp 3 elites 3 standard T200 2000 iso 50 hp 3 elite 1 standard

difference 500 iso and 2 standard

per daily t100 3500 iso 2 cp 1 event token  t200 3000 iso 1 event token  

difference 500 iso 2 cp 

So for this event the total difference is a 1500 iso , 2 cp and 2 standard tokens

How about other events...

Daiches

Oh, forgot to add if your alliance doesn't mostly plat scl 9, they will have less points available to get because of the 5star node being worth less or even lacking.

stewbacca

all pve events need to be set like boss fights.. once the first 20 start thats it.. mercing is a bunch of ****..  and if they cant freeze it, dont allow switching in the last 24 hours of a pve.. 

PenniesForEveryone

stewbacca said:

all pve events need to be set like boss fights.. once the first 20 start thats it.. mercing is a bunch of tinykitty..  and if they cant freeze it, dont allow switching in the last 24 hours of a pve.. 

I can appreciate this sentiment, but this would really cause a lot of burnout and inter-alliance turmoil.  These events are long, and sometimes life happens - having 19 guys suffer because 1 guy had a family emergency over a 7 day event is only going to get people to stop playing.  Better to allow that 1 guy to step out (or be kicked) and be replaced than have everyone miss out.

Also, the same alliances are used for both PvE and PvP, and it's actually really hard to find an alliance that has the same 20 guys consistently competing for T25 or better in both PvP AND PvE....most will use mercs for one or the other or even both.  Rosters, playstyles, and time commitments are very different for these two different modes and so locking people in to an alliance for one or the other would severely limit alliance options for players trying to find 20 guys with very similar playstyles.

evade420

Pretty much everyone in the alliance needs to hit full progression and maybe a few that are doing full clears

Phumade

PenniesForEveryone said:

stewbacca said:

all pve events need to be set like boss fights.. once the first 20 start thats it.. mercing is a bunch of tinykitty..  and if they cant freeze it, dont allow switching in the last 24 hours of a pve.. 

I can appreciate this sentiment, but this would really cause a lot of burnout and inter-alliance turmoil.  These events are long, and sometimes life happens - having 19 guys suffer because 1 guy had a family emergency over a 7 day event is only going to get people to stop playing.  Better to allow that 1 guy to step out (or be kicked) and be replaced than have everyone miss out.

Also, the same alliances are used for both PvE and PvP, and it's actually really hard to find an alliance that has the same 20 guys consistently competing for T25 or better in both PvP AND PvE....most will use mercs for one or the other or even both.  Rosters, playstyles, and time commitments are very different for these two different modes and so locking people in to an alliance for one or the other would severely limit alliance options for players trying to find 20 guys with very similar playstyles.

Lets not go down this road.  its an old topic well worn on both sides.  But we should at least acknowledge that its something that happens reliably and consistently in every pvp/pve event. and every commander needs to do their roster planning with those effects in mind.  

Its unfortunate that their are real people who are getting cut at the end of the line,  but its no different when I gotta go and prune dead weight TUs.  Its just another chore the comes with the role of commander.

Tintaiwan

okay- @stewbacca
can you explain tinykitty to me?