SCL10 Mission Changes

Mayo

Scl10 reduced easy nodes, not hard nodes. Devs have to address the difficulty level and make it more manageable to really promote more players at this level. As evidence shows, for more than a year the game has been geared towards cutting resources and device ways to use hp though bundles, increased release dates and lately, health pack consumption. If I stopped buying 100s at the buy club for some months without missing much this month i will stop buying vip and go from scl10 to the lowest scl possible where I will barely need to use health packs. Every day i care less for this game. Too much greed is not good for any business. 

DarthDeVo

abominatrix said:

Please tell me the point inflation for CL10 is a mistake, or will be made up when we grind.

When CL10 rolled out, the devs were clear that CL9 and CL10 would have the same points for alliance placement purposes. For the most part, with well known mistakes (which are not large enough to play around with alliance placement), they've done that, allowing people to choose 9 or 10 for the top alliances.

Unless the grind is significantly different, this is now completely broken (CL10 was 14310 for round 1 FFW, where CL9 was 12720). Essentially D3 is saying that if you're in a T25 alliance you MUST play in CL10. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (other than I would have to re-think my life choices), but yesterday's announcement said NOTHING ABOUT THIS. 

I am withholding judgement until tomorrow when it's clear what the impact is, but the results this morning were not positive.

Once again, we have a potentially positive change with bad messaging and a bad rollout, thus removing the goodwill from the potentially positive change. Good job!

Perhaps that point spread is a little excessive, but I personally think CL10 should have *some* extra points over 9. I can't count how many events I've played near perfectly in 10 and I barely qualify (or don't qualify at all) for the top KA team because all the CL9 players have 20 minute clears and 25 minute grinds to my 35 minute clears and 45-50 minute grinds. It was all down to the fact that they could get timers started sooner and let them recharge for longer for more points per node. 

Just felt like another way I was being slighted for doing 10 over 9.

bluewolf

DarthDeVo said:

abominatrix said:

Please tell me the point inflation for CL10 is a mistake, or will be made up when we grind.

When CL10 rolled out, the devs were clear that CL9 and CL10 would have the same points for alliance placement purposes. For the most part, with well known mistakes (which are not large enough to play around with alliance placement), they've done that, allowing people to choose 9 or 10 for the top alliances.

Unless the grind is significantly different, this is now completely broken (CL10 was 14310 for round 1 FFW, where CL9 was 12720). Essentially D3 is saying that if you're in a T25 alliance you MUST play in CL10. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (other than I would have to re-think my life choices), but yesterday's announcement said NOTHING ABOUT THIS. 

I am withholding judgement until tomorrow when it's clear what the impact is, but the results this morning were not positive.

Once again, we have a potentially positive change with bad messaging and a bad rollout, thus removing the goodwill from the potentially positive change. Good job!

Perhaps that point spread is a little excessive, but I personally think CL10 should have *some* extra points over 9. I can't count how many events I've played near perfectly in 10 and I barely qualify (or don't qualify at all) for the top KA team because all the CL9 players have 20 minute clears and 25 minute grinds to my 35 minute clears and 45-50 minute grinds. It was all down to the fact that they could get timers started sooner and let them recharge for longer for more points per node. 

Just felt like another way I was being slighted for doing 10 over 9.

Yes, but you got 1/2 a 5, more CP, another 1 1/4 4s and various other benefits over the guys who got an LT which 85% of the time is some 4 you don't give one whit about how many levels is on it, except for if it gives you ANOTHER LT which maybe this time is a 5 you wanted.  I never feel that bad about missing LTs myself.

That said, I agree.  Should be some more points in 10?  With shorter clear times, I'd be much more comfortable with this position over the prior time commitment and points being the same.

supergarv

What @abominatrix wrote could have been easily prevented... if the devs laid out their plans a week before, listened to feedback, and would get back to it.

This communication thing D3 has chosen by dropping community management is a setup for failure. I‘m so sad no one reads this, who should be reading it, if they cared for their current job at Demi/D3.

KGB

krakenoon said:

@HoundofShadow

I think you misunderstood. The point is there are already players who are playing below their level and if you can hit T10 consistently, that’s great for you. Maybe you have a little better roster having played longer, I don’t know. I do know that if players don’t like the change they will complain and either quit or continue playing where they usually do. I also know that as long as the progression/placement reward is for a lackluster 5 star, people will be enticed to play 9 just because.

The point is that while players should be able to play in whatever SCL they want, it’s clear that there is more incentive to punch down than play at level. If they get SCL10 right, there should be a migration effect in 9, possibly 8, but unless you are trying to maximize your CP gain, there’s no incentive to move from 7 to 8 unless you can place well enough for whatever end placement reward (if you find it desirable).

My argument is that there should be a steep cost for punching down primarily in missed rewards.

Actually moving up from 7 to 8 is one of the best things you can do as a 4* player once you have a champed meta PvE team (Juggs/Gocket/Guardian or America/Karnak/3rd). The biggest reward is the 50 shards of the 5* per event. At an average of 2 events week that's 100 shards a week or 5200 a year or roughly 10 covers worth.

If you care or have a roster capable of getting top placement the 4* placement cover comes to a T20 finish instead of a T10. I regularly got T20 in CL7 and occasionally got T10. After I moved up to CL8 I found I regularly also get a T20 placement only now I no longer need to push really hard for T10 since I'm getting a 4* placement cover.

The difference in difficulty levels between 7 and 8 is only really noticeable on the 5E node on the 5+ clear.

KGB

P.S. It seems to me this new CL10 change is meant to help players who are playing for progression only since they now need fewer clears to achieve progression and get the 5* shards. For players like myself who are trying to transition into the 5* tier this should be quite helpful.

Dogface

Yeah, the moment SCL10 went live, and SCL8 got 5* shards as a prog reward was the moment I switched from SCL7 to 8. I'm pretty sure I could have made the jump way before, but the slightly better rewards vs a longer playing time always kept me from making the step. 
I can regularly make T50 in SCL8, same as in SCL7 (which surprised me a bit), but the top spots are still reserved for people with multiple 5* champs (talking 25+). 

DarthDeVo

bluewolf said:

DarthDeVo said:

abominatrix said:

Please tell me the point inflation for CL10 is a mistake, or will be made up when we grind.

When CL10 rolled out, the devs were clear that CL9 and CL10 would have the same points for alliance placement purposes. For the most part, with well known mistakes (which are not large enough to play around with alliance placement), they've done that, allowing people to choose 9 or 10 for the top alliances.

Unless the grind is significantly different, this is now completely broken (CL10 was 14310 for round 1 FFW, where CL9 was 12720). Essentially D3 is saying that if you're in a T25 alliance you MUST play in CL10. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (other than I would have to re-think my life choices), but yesterday's announcement said NOTHING ABOUT THIS. 

I am withholding judgement until tomorrow when it's clear what the impact is, but the results this morning were not positive.

Once again, we have a potentially positive change with bad messaging and a bad rollout, thus removing the goodwill from the potentially positive change. Good job!

Perhaps that point spread is a little excessive, but I personally think CL10 should have *some* extra points over 9. I can't count how many events I've played near perfectly in 10 and I barely qualify (or don't qualify at all) for the top KA team because all the CL9 players have 20 minute clears and 25 minute grinds to my 35 minute clears and 45-50 minute grinds. It was all down to the fact that they could get timers started sooner and let them recharge for longer for more points per node. 

Just felt like another way I was being slighted for doing 10 over 9.

Yes, but you got 1/2 a 5, more CP, another 1 1/4 4s and various other benefits over the guys who got an LT which 85% of the time is some 4 you don't give one whit about how many levels is on it, except for if it gives you ANOTHER LT which maybe this time is a 5 you wanted.  I never feel that bad about missing LTs myself.

That said, I agree.  Should be some more points in 10?  With shorter clear times, I'd be much more comfortable with this position over the prior time commitment and points being the same.

What you say regarding the progression rewards is true, and I probably should have acknowledged that, because a big reason why I continue to put up with the hassle that is CL10 are the rewards. 

But it's my personal opinion that if you're making the natural progression to CL10 from CL9, you shouldn't be penalized by earning fewer points, making it harder to get a spot in a T10 team. Every LT contributes to progress one way or another, whether it's a 4* champ reward or a 5* cover/champ reward. 

I had an easier time sitting in Prime while playing CL9 rather than CL10, which is somewhat counterintuitive.

Bad

Thank you very much for the change. Usually I take 1h 45 m aprox. on do the 4 clears. Today it took me 45 m. Having yelena almost champed aid too. But the cruzial factor is that less clear for node.
When the bar points start regenerating I could manage my time along all the 24 h left for do the others clears.
But for ranking higher the hard node beating consuming time was needed, and now its a breeze.
I think its a life saver change. Really appreciate it.

krakenoon

Are those of you getting T50 in 8 able to do that w/out the 5e?

PiMacleod

I did my progression only clears earlier.  3 of each node.  

I'm holding my breath, because I'm not used to only needing 3.  I'm waiting to get to the last day, and still need to scrape points from somewhere.  

BUT... I'll stick with the plan, and see this through as is, just to have an honest run with this new 1-less-clear feature.  So far, I appreciate the time saved, as a progression-only player.

Dogface

krakenoon said:

Are those of you getting T50 in 8 able to do that w/out the 5e?

That depends on the slice you play in, and especially which flip. But fair guess, the answer is probably no, unless it's a very new 5* and there are players that don't have him/her/it.

KGB

Dogface said:

krakenoon said:

Are those of you getting T50 in 8 able to do that w/out the 5e?

That depends on the slice you play in, and especially which flip. But fair guess, the answer is probably no, unless it's a very new 5* and there are players that don't have him/her/it.

And do you mean 0 clears of the 5E (ie not rostered) or some clears?  I don't think T50 would be possible with 0 clears of the 5E unless you were bracket sniping (joining the last flip).

KGB

JiraiyaSannin

Did they take away cp or hp? 

wymtime

DarthDeVo said:

bluewolf said:

DarthDeVo said:

abominatrix said:

Please tell me the point inflation for CL10 is a mistake, or will be made up when we grind.

When CL10 rolled out, the devs were clear that CL9 and CL10 would have the same points for alliance placement purposes. For the most part, with well known mistakes (which are not large enough to play around with alliance placement), they've done that, allowing people to choose 9 or 10 for the top alliances.

Unless the grind is significantly different, this is now completely broken (CL10 was 14310 for round 1 FFW, where CL9 was 12720). Essentially D3 is saying that if you're in a T25 alliance you MUST play in CL10. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (other than I would have to re-think my life choices), but yesterday's announcement said NOTHING ABOUT THIS. 

I am withholding judgement until tomorrow when it's clear what the impact is, but the results this morning were not positive.

Once again, we have a potentially positive change with bad messaging and a bad rollout, thus removing the goodwill from the potentially positive change. Good job!

Perhaps that point spread is a little excessive, but I personally think CL10 should have *some* extra points over 9. I can't count how many events I've played near perfectly in 10 and I barely qualify (or don't qualify at all) for the top KA team because all the CL9 players have 20 minute clears and 25 minute grinds to my 35 minute clears and 45-50 minute grinds. It was all down to the fact that they could get timers started sooner and let them recharge for longer for more points per node. 

Just felt like another way I was being slighted for doing 10 over 9.

Yes, but you got 1/2 a 5, more CP, another 1 1/4 4s and various other benefits over the guys who got an LT which 85% of the time is some 4 you don't give one whit about how many levels is on it, except for if it gives you ANOTHER LT which maybe this time is a 5 you wanted.  I never feel that bad about missing LTs myself.

That said, I agree.  Should be some more points in 10?  With shorter clear times, I'd be much more comfortable with this position over the prior time commitment and points being the same.

What you say regarding the progression rewards is true, and I probably should have acknowledged that, because a big reason why I continue to put up with the hassle that is CL10 are the rewards. 

But it's my personal opinion that if you're making the natural progression to CL10 from CL9, you shouldn't be penalized by earning fewer points, making it harder to get a spot in a T10 team. Every LT contributes to progress one way or another, whether it's a 4* champ reward or a 5* cover/champ reward. 

I had an easier time sitting in Prime while playing CL9 rather than CL10, which is somewhat counterintuitive.

To take a look at CL 10 and the new points CL10 does not look to have more points.  The points are just distributed between less clears.  This means a final grind of 2 clears instead of 3 for maximum points.  

So what this means if you want max progression in CL9 you do 7 total clears in CL10 it should be 5.  This is why in CL10 the green check mark is at 4 clears.

MrPlow

Can someone comment on what was removed from the node rewards.

grunth13

wymtime said:

DarthDeVo said:

bluewolf said:

DarthDeVo said:

abominatrix said:

Please tell me the point inflation for CL10 is a mistake, or will be made up when we grind.

When CL10 rolled out, the devs were clear that CL9 and CL10 would have the same points for alliance placement purposes. For the most part, with well known mistakes (which are not large enough to play around with alliance placement), they've done that, allowing people to choose 9 or 10 for the top alliances.

Unless the grind is significantly different, this is now completely broken (CL10 was 14310 for round 1 FFW, where CL9 was 12720). Essentially D3 is saying that if you're in a T25 alliance you MUST play in CL10. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing (other than I would have to re-think my life choices), but yesterday's announcement said NOTHING ABOUT THIS. 

I am withholding judgement until tomorrow when it's clear what the impact is, but the results this morning were not positive.

Once again, we have a potentially positive change with bad messaging and a bad rollout, thus removing the goodwill from the potentially positive change. Good job!

Perhaps that point spread is a little excessive, but I personally think CL10 should have *some* extra points over 9. I can't count how many events I've played near perfectly in 10 and I barely qualify (or don't qualify at all) for the top KA team because all the CL9 players have 20 minute clears and 25 minute grinds to my 35 minute clears and 45-50 minute grinds. It was all down to the fact that they could get timers started sooner and let them recharge for longer for more points per node. 

Just felt like another way I was being slighted for doing 10 over 9.

Yes, but you got 1/2 a 5, more CP, another 1 1/4 4s and various other benefits over the guys who got an LT which 85% of the time is some 4 you don't give one whit about how many levels is on it, except for if it gives you ANOTHER LT which maybe this time is a 5 you wanted.  I never feel that bad about missing LTs myself.

That said, I agree.  Should be some more points in 10?  With shorter clear times, I'd be much more comfortable with this position over the prior time commitment and points being the same.

What you say regarding the progression rewards is true, and I probably should have acknowledged that, because a big reason why I continue to put up with the hassle that is CL10 are the rewards. 

But it's my personal opinion that if you're making the natural progression to CL10 from CL9, you shouldn't be penalized by earning fewer points, making it harder to get a spot in a T10 team. Every LT contributes to progress one way or another, whether it's a 4* champ reward or a 5* cover/champ reward. 

I had an easier time sitting in Prime while playing CL9 rather than CL10, which is somewhat counterintuitive.

To take a look at CL 10 and the new points CL10 does not look to have more points.  The points are just distributed between less clears.  This means a final grind of 2 clears instead of 3 for maximum points.  

So what this means if you want max progression in CL9 you do 7 total clears in CL10 it should be 5.  This is why in CL10 the green check mark is at 4 clears.

If this is true,  this will be a wonderful change.  2 clears instead of 3 at the end will save about 10 to 12 minutes. 

SolidusMox

The top 20 in my slice must not know to stop at 3 clears...

grunth13

SolidusMox said:

The top 20 in my slice must not know to stop at 3 clears...

Well,  considering that the only news that has been posted in game was about hp sweepstakes,  iso sale, and anti-venom, how would anyone that plays the game know about the changes? 

HoundofShadow

If they aren't on autopilot mode, they would have noticed the timer ticking down at the third clear. 

grunth13

HoundofShadow said:

If they aren't on autopilot mode, they would have noticed the timer ticking down at the third clear. 

It's not on them,  white knight.  This game has barely changed in 6 years and most of us are on auto pilot.