PvE on a Schedule - What’s the fix?

HoundofShadow

I think what everyone can agree on is that whatever changes D3 makes to PvE, they can never satisfy every group of players. Even with the current experiment, there are still people not happy with the change. Also, there are differing opinions on this thread. As such, there is no "fix". 

I think the current model (where points goes to zero and then regenerate) is fine as it is, relatively to my experience.

What I disagree on:

I disagree with the idea of making PvE rewards 100% alliance dependent. Do remember that not every alliance  has 10 or 20 members. You are making other groups of players unhappy in order to make your group happy. We already have that model for boss events and it seems to be occurring every month.

I disagree with the idea of making PvE 100% progression based and shifting placement rewards into progression. The current model for PvE rewards are 80% progression and 20% placement. Everyone can get 100% progression rewards if they've done optimal clear.  Remember that the essentials for 3* and 4* are placement rewards for the previous PvE. What you are achieving is giving free multiple 4* covers to everyone every PvE. As for players in higher SCL, everyone would be getting free LTs every PvE. Does it make sense? Yes for players and no for D3.

The part on timing each match can be tricky because the timers will begin on D3's end. If the board is bad, players' internet is down or the signal is weak, someone called the players and interrupted their match, phone freezed up, and other scenarios, that would affect their timing. Besides, putting a stopwatch like mechanism means having to put 100% focus on every match if you want to get better placement. Any distraction will affect your match timing. Higher level players might shift down to the lower SCL after playing a few PvE if they realised that they are faring worst than the previous model.

Since one of the focus is on strength of roster, let's make every node scale to the strength of your roster, and then for the 5th to 7th clear, the level will increase and then each match will be timed.

I think the main problem is certain groups of players are not able to achieve top placement or the placement rewards they desire due to schedule conflict. I believe that they can achieve 100% progression rewards though. It's not getting the top 1 or top 5 placement rewards that irk them.  I think adding one more time slice might or might not help.

Daiches

The Viceroy Returns said:

Daiches said:

That's neither rubber banding nor roster based scaling. That was the old community scaling. Where node difficulty increased for everyone relative to the number of times all players in the game had beaten the node. Also why we had to fight level
392 capped Maggia Thugs with Stormneto.

Community Scaling sounds about right.
Regardless whatever that was, it was terrible.  Sure, that was like 2+ years ago at least, so it's hard to remember exactly what that was.  All I know is I hated it.

Don't forget 3 Star Magneto's old Blue to get through those nodes without too much trouble... 
For those weren't around, for only 5 Blue AP, you could place 2 Blue tiles anywhere, including on top of any type of special tile (including either team's Countdowns) or Team Up.
Was fun as hell to play, but all of those Match 5's one after the other were probably a bit too powerful.

Also when Charlie's Angels was a thing.  I suppose it still could be to some extent, but the game has moved on in many ways since then.
Still have my Prof X purposefully left at Level 210 just in case I ever want to reminisce...

You are misremembering what Mag2 did. His change was from placing 5 blue tiles to 3 on his purple ability.
Unless you are talking about a version before I started 1240 days ago? The first nerf Mag2 got was the move to equip only 2 AP boosts instead of 3, so that he needed an extra match 3.
As for Winfinite, I remember fighting the example I gave of 392 Maggia during the PX release event

HoundofShadow

The difference is time based result and point based result. As an example, a lag of 1 minute in game will add 60 seconds to your overall timing whereas for a node with 800 points, a minute lag results in 0.55 point loss which is neligible. Both adds up, but in a time based match, it adds up so much faster.  This will make the game even more like a grind because everyone have to choose the fastest team if they want to get better placements. 

I forgot about this: how is D3  going to calculate the timing for players without the essential 3*, 4* or 5*? Remove all essential character nodes and make it such a way that you can choose any characters to play all nodes or provide loaners for all essential character nodes? 

Regardless of whether you can play optimally or not, you still get placement rewards. As I mentioned, the placement rewards are not the one that the players desire due to those with scheduling conflict. I played not optimally in SCL 7 before and without 5* essential, 6 hours after the event starts, took 90 to 120 minutes to clear the nodes and I could still get top 50. I am satisfy with it, even though I can't get the top prize.

Moon Roach

For 6 months of the year, I can't be properly competitive in PVE because of the slice times.  1st April, when our clocks go back, I'll be able to choose between:

11 pm

4 am

9 am

3 pm

6 pm

Not one of those lets me dedicate the time necessary for initial and final clears.  Right now, I'm okay with 7 pm.  For 4.5 months or so, it's almost ideal with 8 pm, and I've hit top 10 every event this year, except when I didn't have the 5*.  6 pm, no chance.

So, from a purely selfish perspective, I'd quite like a change.  Whether it's making 6 slices 4 hours apart, or some other magic, anything that removes the necessity for spending 45 minutes each side of an impossible time in order to be competitive is A Good Thing.

I had considered just moving from PVE to PVP, which was my main focus last year, but having championed a few 5*, Gambit not one of them, PVP is now [enter PVP rant #3].

Then again, there's nothing that says I have to play MPQ if it's not fun.

Nick441234

ZeroKarma said:

Nick441234 said:

Got to be honest, I would prefer a progression type system. Say, an event starts at 12pm, and from then on you have access to every node for the event for the full 3,4 or 7 day event running. You could have them in tabs across the top of the screen and you can tab between each sub and clear the battles when you see fit over the duration of the event. Personally, I would love this. 

See you can do that now and play suboptimally to get all the progression goodies. They could tack on some more at the end or in between reward tiers much like they should with PvP between 900 amd 1200

Well no, you cant. You are tied to doing all the nodes in one sub in a 24 hour period. Having the freedom to do them all whenever you want over 4 days creates a lot more freedom. 

Under my way of thinking, I could spend day 1 doing all the easy nodes of each sub, I could spend day 2 doing the 3 harder nodes of each sub, then I could spend days 3 and 4 clearing the essential nodes of each sub. That creates far more freedom with my days than having to rush to ensure I get everything done on one sub in a 24 hour period.

Smart80

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

ZeroKarma

Smart80 said:

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

I’d be fine with an additional slice or two if that makes sense. Not sure about a complete shift back and forth because it would confuse the heck out of a bunch of people and you risk alienating a large base that is ok with the timing and depending on the slices, benefitting a small group of people.

Bowgentle

Smart80 said:

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

God, no.

Instead of annoying some people like it is now, you'd annoy ALL THE PEOPLE?

Not a good idea.

I need to be able to plan my PVE times, settle for ONE time.
The last thing I want is to have a varying schedule for PVE.

NeonBlue

ZeroKarma said:

1. That the introduction of too many more time slices will dilute and fracture the player base and leave dead slices with little to no participation.

Why is diluting the slices in PvE a bad thing? Doesn't that just mean better rewards for everyone?

In PvP it would be bad, because people wouldn't be able to reach progression goals. In PvE, your points come from clears, and less people means those in the slices would place higher.

I think if given a choice between better rewards or "more competition," 99% of the population would choose more stuff.

broll

Bowgentle said:

Smart80 said:

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

God, no.

Instead of annoying some people like it is now, you'd annoy ALL THE PEOPLE?

Not a good idea.

I need to be able to plan my PVE times, settle for ONE time.
The last thing I want is to have a varying schedule for PVE.

Which is worse, majorly annoying, if not completely driving away, entire subsets of people that always get tinykittied every single time or spreading that annoyance over everyone under the expectation that everyone has good times and bad times?  I would think the latter. 

It wouldn't be any different that the pervasive RNG all over the game.  Sometimes it's in your favor, sometimes it's not.  Right now time slices are never in certain peoples favor and there is no hope that will ever change.  Why should those people pay the company that doesn't care about them?  If however the timeslices rolled it could potentially drive people to sometimes pay for more covers when they are in a bad slice on a release event.  Doesn't that fit the F2P model several people keep harping on?

Daredevil217

OJSP said:

HoundofShadow said:

The difference is time based result and point based result. As an example, a lag of 1 minute in game will add 60 seconds to your overall timing whereas for a node with 800 points, a minute lag results in 0.55 point loss which is neligible. Both adds up, but in a time based match, it adds up so much faster.  This will make the game even more like a grind because everyone have to choose the fastest team if they want to get better placements. 

But, the game is already like a grind now if we want to be competitive. With regards to the internet issues or server lags you kept mentioning, that’s not going to change in whatever competitive system we are proposing. Recording the results on the player’s devices would just open the system to abuse. A lag in 60 seconds in the current system means potentially missing the last clear of a node in the current system too. In fact, as far as I know, once we get the victory screen, the win is automatically pinged to the server and recorded. We don’t need to see the change in score in the leaderboard to get the points. That’s how people who time their grind perfectly could jump to 1st in the last second.

Currently, if I know I would be playing in an area with poor internet connection, I would add more time to my grind time and reduce my expectations for the event. The problem becomes finding that additional period of time. The alternative would be to do my grinds whenever I could. Playing competitively without a reliable internet connection is out of the question. That also includes using old and slow devices.

I forgot about this: how is D3  going to calculate the timing for players without the essential 3*, 4* or 5*? Remove all essential character nodes and make it such a way that you can choose any characters to play all nodes or provide loaners for all essential character nodes? 

Make each node’s timers separate. If the player misses a node, they are grouped with others who also miss that particular node. I doubt they would provide loaners or allow any characters to be used in essential nodes, that’s what makes them money.

I hate this idea so much. I am a perennial top 10 player in 8. I almost never am top 10 during initial clears. Usually top 20. I have all but 8 4* champed but simply can’t outclear a 5* roster based on speed alone. So how am am I constantly in the top 5/10? I play a mean game of chicken. I’m usually good at timing my grind so I finish minutes before the sub closes and that is a skill. One that allows me to punch slightly above my roster strength... just enough to get me into the bracket I want to be. You want to take that skill piece away and make it so the strongest rosters can log on whenever and always win.  Look in the non-tapping feedback thread and you’ll see people are loving the race!  I don’t like taking that away.  Better rosters should equal a chance at better rewards but it shouldn’t be a lock. The current system allows for those with the best rosters to win, but adds that human element where a smaller roster can sneak in there with better timing. 

ZeroKarma

broll said:

Bowgentle said:

Smart80 said:

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

God, no.

Instead of annoying some people like it is now, you'd annoy ALL THE PEOPLE?

Not a good idea.

I need to be able to plan my PVE times, settle for ONE time.
The last thing I want is to have a varying schedule for PVE.

Which is worse, majorly annoying, if not completely driving away, entire subsets of people that always get tinykittied every single time or spreading that annoyance over everyone under the expectation that everyone has good times and bad times?  I would think the latter. 

It wouldn't be any different that the pervasive RNG all over the game.  Sometimes it's in your favor, sometimes it's not.  Right now time slices are never in certain peoples favor and there is no hope that will ever change.  Why should those people pay the company that doesn't care about them?  If however the timeslices rolled it could potentially drive people to sometimes pay for more covers when they are in a bad slice on a release event.  Doesn't that fit the F2P model several people keep harping on?

So we need time slice RNG because some people have problems with token RNG?

The goal is to improve without alienating if possible, not make everyone as miserable as the minority.

ZeroKarma

NeonBlue said:

ZeroKarma said:

1. That the introduction of too many more time slices will dilute and fracture the player base and leave dead slices with little to no participation.

Why is diluting the slices in PvE a bad thing? Doesn't that just mean better rewards for everyone?

In PvP it would be bad, because people wouldn't be able to reach progression goals. In PvE, your points come from clears, and less people means those in the slices would place higher.

I think if given a choice between better rewards or "more competition," 99% of the population would choose more stuff.

D3 rarely does things that generate more rewards unless they’re planning a release do resources like changing token odds or adding a node in DDQ.

You have fewer brackets over more slices so potentially total rewards will stay the same. But you might also have dead slices that don’t fill. It’s a matter of scale. 1 or 2 slices wouldn’t change much, but the addition of one for every hour wouldn’t work well imo

Nick441234

Daredevil217 said:

Nick441234 said:

Well no, you cant. You are tied to doing all the nodes in one sub in a 24 hour period. Having the freedom to do them all whenever you want over 4 days creates a lot more freedom. 

Under my way of thinking, I could spend day 1 doing all the easy nodes of each sub, I could spend day 2 doing the 3 harder nodes of each sub, then I could spend days 3 and 4 clearing the essential nodes of each sub. That creates far more freedom with my days than having to rush to ensure I get everything done on one sub in a 24 hour period.

I hate this idea so much. I am a perennial top 10 player in 8. I almost never am top 10 during initial clears. Usually top 20. I have all but 8 4* champed but simply can’t outclear a 5* roster based on speed alone. So how am am I constantly in the top 5/10? I play a mean game of chicken. I’m usually good at timing my grind so I finish minutes before the sub closes and that is a skill. One that allows me to punch slightly above my roster strength... just enough to get me into the bracket I want to be. You want to take that skill piece away and make it so the strongest rosters can log on whenever and always win.  Look in the non-tapping feedback thread and you’ll see people are loving the race!  I don’t like taking that away.  Better rosters should equal a chance at better rewards but it shouldn’t be a lock. The current system allows for those with the best rosters to win, but adds that human element where a smaller roster can sneak in there with better timing. 

This was meant under a progression based system so placement was irrelevant. 

Nick441234

OJSP said:

Considering we have been trialling the points system a lot, I actually think there's no harm in trialling more time slices. All the arguments about whether having more time slices is good or bad for the game is all conjectures.

I think they should just pick one 3 day event, one 4 day event and one 7 day event spread in a couple of months and trial 6 slices spread 4 hours apart. Why multiple events including a 7 day event? It would give people an idea on how to plan their week ahead. If the developers think they are giving out inappropriate amount of rewards, then consider the trial a fail and scrap the idea. At least we could say that we've tried it.

However, I think we should address one issue at a time. If the issue with tapping is not resolved, then opening more slices would likely lead to more tappers spreading to different brackets. And, it's not actually a fix for playing on a schedule.

The 5pm time slice flips two times maximum in most events. That clearly shows that its largely inconvenient for most people who play this game. Simply push it back a few hours and make it more convenient for more players. No harm in a 9pm & 11pm slice. Most people would appreciate that. 

Smart80

ZeroKarma said:

Smart80 said:

ZeroKarma said:

I had a discussion with alliance mates and the general feeling is that PvE now is better than it ever has been.

- Play time has dramatically decreased
- playing in a chunk once a day on a timer compared to 3 or even 8(!) times a day on a timer
- no rubberbanding
- no roster-based death scaling
- better rewards 

That isn’t to say it couldn’t be better. But the evolution has been step-by-step and has been very positive. I am ok with continuing that trend.

Agree.

possible next step: shift slice times from event to event, like they do with mid week end pvp, compared to the other 2.

it wont be good for everyone each event, but all will get ideal times once every events. And will take some getting used to it, instead blindly picking slice, but in the end could be fair for all i think.

I’d be fine with an additional slice or two if that makes sense. Not sure about a complete shift back and forth because it would confuse the heck out of a bunch of people and you risk alienating a large base that is ok with the timing and depending on the slices, benefitting a small group of people.

Bowgentle said:

God, no.

Instead of annoying some people like it is now, you'd annoy ALL THE PEOPLE?

Not a good idea.

I need to be able to plan my PVE times, settle for ONE time.
The last thing I want is to have a varying schedule for PVE.

Just to be sure, i didnt mean varying times within an event, just from event to event. Between the time preview pops up and start of the event, you would have plenty time to pick a time. It doesnt have to be all that confusing. In pvp it isnt, is it?
Having said that, I do prefer stready planning as well.

So I’m playing little devil’s advocate, being quite content with current setup actually... mainly just spitballing an option, but first impressions arent very good.. lol

Additional slices will cause waiting longer for flips and less of them, so reward wise it wont matter much probably..

Quebbster

Nick441234 said:

OJSP said:

Considering we have been trialling the points system a lot, I actually think there's no harm in trialling more time slices. All the arguments about whether having more time slices is good or bad for the game is all conjectures.

I think they should just pick one 3 day event, one 4 day event and one 7 day event spread in a couple of months and trial 6 slices spread 4 hours apart. Why multiple events including a 7 day event? It would give people an idea on how to plan their week ahead. If the developers think they are giving out inappropriate amount of rewards, then consider the trial a fail and scrap the idea. At least we could say that we've tried it.

However, I think we should address one issue at a time. If the issue with tapping is not resolved, then opening more slices would likely lead to more tappers spreading to different brackets. And, it's not actually a fix for playing on a schedule.

The 5pm time slice flips two times maximum in most events. That clearly shows that its largely inconvenient for most people who play this game. Simply push it back a few hours and make it more convenient for more players. No harm in a 9pm & 11pm slice. Most people would appreciate that. 

It's impossible to know which time slice you are talking about since we don't know what time slice you are in. I know the second slice ends in 5PM GMT, so it could be that one. The third slice ends at 5PM EST, so that's also a possibility. The last slice ends at 5 PM too in some islands in the Pacific ocean.

I am not saying you are wrong or anything, it's just that if you identify a single end time as problematic without giving us a bigger Picture it is hard to suggest any Changes. Any Changes will make things better for some and worse for some. Even people within the same time zone have very different availability and may prefer different slices.

Smart80

OJSP said:

Nick441234 said:

The 5pm time slice flips two times maximum in most events. That clearly shows that its largely inconvenient for most people who play this game. Simply push it back a few hours and make it more convenient for more players. No harm in a 9pm & 11pm slice. Most people would appreciate that. 

I assume you're talking about slice 2 (5pm GMT).. Actually it's a good slice to play if people live in East Asia and West part of Australia.

Doesnt s2 usually flip once or twice in prejoins?

animaniactoo

New thought: Although I suspect this might be difficult to code (but hey, I could be wrong)...

1st 4 clears operate as they do now. But change the refresh timer at the end of a person's clears from the 24 hour timer, to a timer that is 1 hour from the end of the sub.* Where I suspect this could trip up the code is each person would be refreshing at a different rate. But the advantage would be that people could do the initial clears on their own schedule, and there would still be competition to time your final clears right/be quick enough through them for max pt gain/etc.

*At 1 hour from end of sub, timer would revert to a 24 hour timer after the next clear of the node.

ZeroKarma

Quebbster said:

Nick441234 said:

OJSP said:

Considering we have been trialling the points system a lot, I actually think there's no harm in trialling more time slices. All the arguments about whether having more time slices is good or bad for the game is all conjectures.

I think they should just pick one 3 day event, one 4 day event and one 7 day event spread in a couple of months and trial 6 slices spread 4 hours apart. Why multiple events including a 7 day event? It would give people an idea on how to plan their week ahead. If the developers think they are giving out inappropriate amount of rewards, then consider the trial a fail and scrap the idea. At least we could say that we've tried it.

However, I think we should address one issue at a time. If the issue with tapping is not resolved, then opening more slices would likely lead to more tappers spreading to different brackets. And, it's not actually a fix for playing on a schedule.

The 5pm time slice flips two times maximum in most events. That clearly shows that its largely inconvenient for most people who play this game. Simply push it back a few hours and make it more convenient for more players. No harm in a 9pm & 11pm slice. Most people would appreciate that. 

It's impossible to know which time slice you are talking about since we don't know what time slice you are in. I know the second slice ends in 5PM GMT, so it could be that one. The third slice ends at 5PM EST, so that's also a possibility. The last slice ends at 5 PM too in some islands in the Pacific ocean.

I am not saying you are wrong or anything, it's just that if you identify a single end time as problematic without giving us a bigger Picture it is hard to suggest any Changes. Any Changes will make things better for some and worse for some. Even people within the same time zone have very different availability and may prefer different slices.

So....it’s 5 o’clock somewhere?