Let me start with saying that I really like a new PvE coalition event. It looks like a lot of fun to play. I do have some concerns, some of which have been stated in the past and yet again are seen in this event. I will list them in a random order:
1) The new events are heavy on five nodes. That doesn't have to be an issue, but if each node starts with 2 or more charges, that will require a serious amount of time to be invested, which gets me to the next point...
2)... don't run these kind of time consuming events during midweek / workdays. Last week we had Return to Orazca during workdays immediatly followed by Trial of Strength on the same day. That is 6 days of back to back events you have to play when in a coalition. This week we have this new event which is scheduled to be followed by Return to Orazca again immediately on Friday, again requiring six days of commitment to this game.
3) Max charges on each node seems to be set to three, meaning if you can't play the nodes within the first 8 hours, you will start losing time. This has been mentioned again and again in the past and was actually fixed in Return to Orazca. Why start with two charges again??
4) Personally I think it's lame that only the top 10 coalitions have a shot at exclusive rewards. We have several players in our coalition that score (near) perfect games, thus investing the same amount of time as any other top 10 player. Should these rewards be based on being part of a top 10 coalition? I think not...
Another personal statement: I liked when HoD was skipped as a midweek coalition event with only the weekend event as a coalition event. Having multiple non coalition events to choose from during the midweek enables players that want to invest time in this game to have some events to play while players that don't want to invest time don't have to. This week and last week we had two coalition events (one during the midweek and one during the weekend). Both events were "big events" with a lot of nodes and a lot of charges to be cleared. The first iteration of Return to Orazca made me contemplate about quitting the game. Now, with this amount of time required to participate in a coaltion event during midweek the same thought pops up. Even having one midweek coalition event every two weeks would be an option. Yesterday felt like a relieve of not having to play.
I'm interested in your thoughts, so looking forward to the discussion.
Edit: This event starts at 9 PM my time, so I have to play the first 5 charges if I don't want to hit the max of 3 charges per node.
IM_CARLOS said: The lamest part aboit this event is that until now every node can be cleared with N3 cycling decks for perfect score. Now deckbuilding needed. Boring! Of course there are other ways, but I only rush trough max reward and this is still the fastest way.
bken1234 said: 1. I'm very happy to have new PvE -- it's my favorite aspect of this game -- and as an alliance leader, my favorite part of getting a new set (seeing everyone come together from coalitions in my alliance -- and our friends from other groups-- to create our amazing event doc [pm me for an invite to Discord if your coalition isn't helping out and you want access] -- and all the new deckbuilding --- I just love PvE).2. This event is remarkably well designed -- the decks and abilities are well thought out, they're challenging but beatable -- most of the objectives aren't terrible. I like it so far. BUT3. I've said it before and I'll say it again -- this reward structure is bad for the game. Not only the mythic card, taking away the rares, and giving PPs to the 1-2, superpacks to the 3-10 and junk to the rest. 4. I don't understand why 2/3 was changed for RtO but not this event. 5. Seriously, running PvE in the middle of the week???
Marvaddin said: Seriously: to you guys complaining about cycling related objectives... what do you suggest? Because the main problem aren't the objectives themselves, most times. Ok, if we are supposed to beat an opponent with 400+ HP in 10 turns, few options can do it better. But the point is: cycling is easy to change and can be used to achieve most goals. +/- creatures/spells/supports? Doable. Number of turns? Doable most times. Get less/more than X damage? Mostly doable. Destroy less/more than X creatures? Doable (unless the opponent is creatureless).So what? What do you suggest? Play 6 pirates vs an opponent with less than 100 HP? It's there, 1.3. How I did it? Putting Wily Goblin in my cycling deck. The problem is cycling, because it's easy to adapt to almost anything. And easy to get the workning cards, compared to other much more card expensive strategies.
bken1234 said: Marvaddin said: Seriously: to you guys complaining about cycling related objectives... what do you suggest? Because the main problem aren't the objectives themselves, most times. Ok, if we are supposed to beat an opponent with 400+ HP in 10 turns, few options can do it better. But the point is: cycling is easy to change and can be used to achieve most goals. +/- creatures/spells/supports? Doable. Number of turns? Doable most times. Get less/more than X damage? Mostly doable. Destroy less/more than X creatures? Doable (unless the opponent is creatureless).So what? What do you suggest? Play 6 pirates vs an opponent with less than 100 HP? It's there, 1.3. How I did it? Putting Wily Goblin in my cycling deck. The problem is cycling, because it's easy to adapt to almost anything. And easy to get the workning cards, compared to other much more card expensive strategies. I played 6 pirates without cycling. It was actually pretty easy -- and a lot of fun, I thought.