Pve needs a revamp

SpiderKev
SpiderKev Posts: 78 Match Maker
in MPQ General Discussion
1. Reduce bracket sizes. People aren't playing the game because the brackets aren't flipping. I don't think we need to explain why that is a no brainer. Adjust the individual awards if necessary, although you've already slowed roster progress with the shard system. *shrug*

2. Lock PVE rosters in and reduce team swapping. If you are giving out Legendary Tokens for the best PVE teams, you could at least give it to the best teams and not the best swappers. 

Comments

  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,814 Chairperson of the Boards
    I agree with locking in teams like boss events.
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    The second point is interesting. What does best swappers mean? I've not heard of this term before.
  • SpiderKev
    SpiderKev Posts: 78 Match Maker
    HoundofShadow said:
    The second point is interesting. What does best swappers mean? I've not heard of this term before.
    The top PVE "teams" rotate people in and out that have high scores. They aren't an MPQ alliance but groups that exploit the system. After PVE rewards are given out they go back to their home alliance.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    In other word, mercenaries...

    So, my understanding is that let's say there are two alliances, A and B. The top player in A scored 10,000 points and some player in B scored 10010 points in the first sub. What happens is that the top player in B can jump to Alliance A to replace someone with poor scoring and "bring" his points there. This continues for every sub or until the "top alliance" gets the top prize.

    This isn't that much different from PvPs, in the sense that coordinations in Line are necessary to secure the top placement rewards. I suppose all these take place in Line as well?

    In the spirit of true competition among alliances, I think it should be locked like what's happening in boss events.


  • SpiderKev
    SpiderKev Posts: 78 Match Maker
    HoundofShadow said:


    This isn't that much different from PvPs, in the sense that coordinations in Line are necessary to secure the top placement rewards. I suppose all these take place in Line as well?




    True, the difference being: the PvP alliance reward differences between 1st and 100 is not nearly as unequal between 1st and 100 in PVE. 

    First in a PvP alliance is pretty much just an ego boost. 
  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,814 Chairperson of the Boards
    UNC_Samurai said:
    Locking in rosters is only going to screw over the 17-18 alliance regulars when something goes wrong.  
    Someone else then gets screwed over instead. But yeah progression only would be fine but that doesn’t stop it happening in pvp too. Lock it down, pick your players and run with it.
  • JHawkInc
    JHawkInc Posts: 2,605 Chairperson of the Boards
    Locking it down will never happen because it penalizes too many people for things outside of their control. Someone gets sick, or loses an internet connection, or breaks a phone, and an entire alliance loses out on rewards. It's not perfect by any means, but the system now lets those alliances drop someone who can't play for some reason and replace them. I've been doing it for years, finding temporary replacements, and letting people rejoin for the next event. Not perfect, but it works.

    The suggestion here won't actually make things better. It's not really going to change the top alliances and who gets the top rewards. it's just going to change which hoops they jump through to make it happen. The idea that the "best teams" aren't getting rewards now, but suddenly will after the suggested change, isn't really supported.
  • Rod5
    Rod5 Posts: 587 Critical Contributor
    I don’t really understand the point - all you’re rewarding is the ability of an alliance to have members who never have their score impacted by RL/whatever.

    Basically the alliance with most shut-ins. How is that fair?
  • _Vitto
    _Vitto Posts: 113 Tile Toppler
    Locking alliances/teams would only cause more disadvantages than advantages, imo. 
    It gets even trickier when PvP and PvE events overlap, because of players who are PvP/PvE-oriented.

    Since we are in mood of suggestions, I'd gladly see the addition of a 6th slice, so that the gap between slices remains 4h, and maybe lower the number of players as the OP suggested (to 500, like PvP maybe?).
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,486 Chairperson of the Boards
    SpiderKev said:
    1. Reduce bracket sizes. People aren't playing the game because the brackets aren't flipping. I don't think we need to explain why that is a no brainer. Adjust the individual awards if necessary, although you've already slowed roster progress with the shard system. *shrug*


    How about increase bracket size to infinite. People waiting for flips and getting the 'best' rewards for doing very, very little work other than watching bracket reports are not "playing the game"....they are "playing the system".

    Fix the system, get players playing.

  • Basepuzzler
    Basepuzzler Posts: 180 Tile Toppler
    SpiderKev said:
    1. Reduce bracket sizes. People aren't playing the game because the brackets aren't flipping. I don't think we need to explain why that is a no brainer. Adjust the individual awards if necessary, although you've already slowed roster progress with the shard system. *shrug*

    2. Lock PVE rosters in and reduce team swapping. If you are giving out Legendary Tokens for the best PVE teams, you could at least give it to the best teams and not the best swappers. 
    Well the cl10 pve brackets never flip...

    My only issue with the cl10 rewards is that you need to be top 50 for hp/mighty token.  Same as cl9, yet way more time.  

    Ideally each sub would just have a progression target for hp/token so it doesn’t matter what bracket I’m in as long as I play enough clears.
  • krakenoon
    krakenoon Posts: 355 Mover and Shaker
    @SnowcaTT

    My experience has been quite different. Rewards restructuring has forced me to go for every avenue of HPs available as the 5* tier begins to dilute in track with the 4* tier (still have a handful of 4*s to roster). Even hitting a flip, I may not get T10 placement, which is kind of where you want to start. Since I am locked out of SCL10 and cannot get placement in 9, I am also not able to get 5* shards. Even if I could get these shards, pretty soon those shards will not be meaningful enough to chase unless I randomly pick up more somewhere else.

    As the pond continues to shrink, a higher percentage of players will be locked in to just progression rewards which are not enough to develop a roster past the 3* tier. More slices, better time slots, and fair rewards would go a long way in keeping newer players engaged as well as stem the tide of retiring players who are just tired of spending more time to get less.
  • KGB
    KGB Posts: 3,236 Chairperson of the Boards
    krakenoon said:
    @SnowcaTT

    As the pond continues to shrink, a higher percentage of players will be locked in to just progression rewards which are not enough to develop a roster past the 3* tier.

    Hero points are definitely more scarce and ISO is slight more scarce as well. But covers are not, at least in the 4* tier in CL8. I'm getting *far* more covers now under the new system than I ever got prior to the shard system and in CL8 I'm finishing T20 about half the time (when I do I get an extra 4* cover).

    It's the 5* tier that is going to be harder to develop a roster for especially if you want a deep bench (ie covering classic 5*s that are still Meta).

    KGB

Categories