SCL10 Mission Changes

1…457910…15

Comments

  • PapaBurger
    PapaBurger Posts: 17 Just Dropped In
    The rockett said:
    Some feed back:
    Have been a SL10 player since it started.  I think I am a higher end player for pve.  Here is what my findings are 

    Sub1:
    Clear took 19 mins. (About 5 mins shorter) 
    Grind took 32 mins (same as before) 

    Sub 2:
    Clear:  21 mins (about 5 mins shorter) 


    what I can say is that this saves very little time with the rewards that were lost.  Also, now that SL10 is worth more points than 9, that means that this will put even more pressure on the top end allys and player.  You will HAVE to play in 10 or you cannot be in a T10 ally.  There is no way possible to carry lower points.  This will burn people out now.  

    So far I can fully say that this is NOT a good change. While less time on clear is fine, there is not less time in grind, the amount of pressure this will put onto the commanders that run T10 ally’s, the pressure this will put on people to move up to SL10 even if they don’t want to or cannot handle this killer C nodes will not be good for the long term of the game.  This will turn players off to moving up and not sure what we will do then.  I hope the Dev team will go back to the drawing board quickly on this (like they did with Win V1 PVP). 



    No need to go back to the drawing board; the fix is simple: Reduce the number of hits required to start timers to 2 (rather than 3) for SCL10.  Keep the point values for SCL10 50% higher as they are now. 

    Example:
    Scl9: 100 x (4 + 1 + 2/3 + 1/3) = 600
    Scl10: 150 x (2 + 1 + 2/3 + 1/3) = 600

    This would  even out the scoring between 9 and 10, and reduce time required for 10 more significantly.  (As I understand it, that was the intention of this change.) And with only 2 hits required to start a node’s timer, clears will take about half the time as before, so there won’t as much of a point penalty for playing optimally in scl10 vs. scl9 as there was before this change. 
  • MrPlow
    MrPlow Posts: 240 Tile Toppler
    edited July 2020
    I don't think the increased points will pull more 5* players out of SCL 8 & 9 into SCL 10.  Any extra points they gain from initial 3 clears they'll lose in not being able to do all 3 grinds. Not to mention the extra time and loss of placement rewards.  This will be a difficult balance for the top alliances.
  • Xair
    Xair Posts: 77 Match Maker

    I played today scl10 s1, with a roster of 5* ranging from 450 to 467.

    The first half took me 40 minutes, down from around 60 usually.

    The second half took me 70 minutes as usual.

    I still need to play around 2 hours each day in scl10.

    Playing scl9 takes me 25 minutes + 25 minutes = 50 minutes of total play time a day.

    I believe that only progression players benefit from this fix.

    Since I play for placement this fix barely changed my play time.

    If the designers wish to fix scl10 play time for placement players then they should shorten the second half as well somehow.


  • krakenoon
    krakenoon Posts: 355 Mover and Shaker
    @DAZ0273

    I still have about 15 ranks to go before I can play SCL10, so this is theoretical for me.

    As far as SCL10 PvE is concerned, the massive health pools and enemy levels leave me to think that I will at the very least need a close to max champed Grocket to even consider playing there. Most reports on the forum are people using Hulkoye and the ilk. While I may be able to get some traction on my 5* roster during Anniversary, most of my pulls as of recent have been just to roster 5s.

    So between not having any 5s that are really online, trying to stay at 4* champ levels for PvP and 4* dilution slowing my progress on meta 4s, SCL9 is really my far off target. I’m thinking maybe I would check 10 out if I had Hulkoye & 5HE, but wouldn’t have my hopes up for a good time.
  • Michael1957
    Michael1957 Posts: 630 Critical Contributor
    MrPlow said:
    I don't think the increased points will pull more 5* players out of SCL 8 & 9 into SCL 10.  Any extra points they gain from initial 3 clears they'll lose in not being able to do all 3 grinds. Not to mention the extra time and loss of placement rewards.  This will be a difficult balance for the top alliances.
    As a devil’s advocate , I’d never go back to 8-9. I didn’t find 10 too hard a challenge (my first event in 10). I know I can do the upcoming grind . It’s less battle repetitiveness and better rewards . Understandably I’m in an alliance that plays only because we love the game , so placement, time and alliance rewards are moot . 
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2020
    It seems like players playing for placements aren't pleased with the change. However, for progression only players, it could be better now since you don't need to play Challenge Nodes to get full progression. I think their strategy is to make small changes first, then observe the change for a few months, before making changes again. If they go with 3+2 immediately and then switch back to 3+3 again, then we'll know what the reactions will be again.
  • Vhailorx
    Vhailorx Posts: 6,085 Chairperson of the Boards
    The rockett said:
    HoundofShadow said:
    Thanks for the confirmation. So, it's 3+3 and players save between 5-15 mins per day, depending on their roster strengths.

    Top players can clear within ~20 mins, and those with the right 5* with level slightly higher than 450 (460-480?) can clear it in ~30 mins. Some cleared SCL 10 in 1.5 hours. It's quite a big difference.
    This issue is you are losing a pas in clears when it is easy NOT the grind which is when it is hard.   So end of day, nothing changes on grind.  You still have to hit that 650 C node 3 time on grind just like you did before. This is why, along with forcing people higher for their ally rewards, is NOT a good change.   

    So this point doesn’t get lost, Losing a pass on clears is almost nothing to a lot of people cause you still have to deal with the 3 clears on grind. 

    It is a good change rockett.  grinding is better with this change in place (even after accounting for the loss of iso/4* shards). that's good, all other things being equal. it's just not a sufficient change to make CL10 anything less than a slog because, as you correctly point out, the real slog is the 3x closing grind which is unchanged.
  • Michael1957
    Michael1957 Posts: 630 Critical Contributor
    Vhailorx said:
    Michael1957 said:
    MrPlow said:
    I don't think the increased points will pull more 5* players out of SCL 8 & 9 into SCL 10.  Any extra points they gain from initial 3 clears they'll lose in not being able to do all 3 grinds. Not to mention the extra time and loss of placement rewards.  This will be a difficult balance for the top alliances.
    As a devil’s advocate , I’d never go back to 8-9. I didn’t find 10 too hard a challenge (my first event in 10). I know I can do the upcoming grind . It’s less battle repetitiveness and better rewards . Understandably I’m in an alliance that plays only because we love the game , so placement, time and alliance rewards are moot . 

    note that FFW is not (through 2 subs) the most challenging cl10 event.  When simulator or cosmis chaos cycle back around, you should go in expecting a different level of difficulty.
    Oh I expect that , even in SCL 9 Simulator was a drag for me . But I can deal with going down to 9 if I have to for 1 or 2 of the 22 possible PvEs. 90% + of the time I presume 10 will be manageable 
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2020
    So, their original plan is 3+2 but due to technical difficulty, they can't implement it. In that case, players have to wait until they can figure out the solution. 
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    HoundofShadow said:
    So, their original plan is 3+2 but due to technical difficulty, they can't implement it. In that case, players have to wait until they can figure out the solution. 
    How do you know they have technical difficulties?   That has not been posted anyplace.  Please explain this.  
  • PiMacleod
    PiMacleod Posts: 1,784 Chairperson of the Boards
    so far, I'm happy with the time reduction.  I'm a progression-only player.

    Yeah, it's only an "easy" clear... but its something.

    Also, I don't count clears -- I kinda zone-out when I do my grind (mostly).  Instead, ... I LOOK FOR THE TIMER.  So, to whoever mentioned looking for the timer to appear?  Yeah, you win.  That's what I do.  Because counting them would probably eventually put me to sleep after counting clears for 10 different nodes a day.  Yuck.

    I'm just gonna keep up this timer-appear-clear thing like I used to do, and hope it takes me to full-progression like it (usually) used to do.  If it works, great... if its off by a couple points, no biggy -- I'll re-hit a node or two.  If its off BIG time, well... I'll have to reassess my strategy then (and post my disappointment here).
  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards
    I dont have okoye nor I will ever have her, so 10 minutes saved is a bit optimistical for me.
    For to be on the final rank, the final health pool I needed to clear before and now not, it took me 40 m at the very least.
     40 m less for me is well worth the resources lost.
    On the other hand, I dont think this game is ruled by competitive alliances. In fact I think they would be the opposite.

    And finally there is another perspective not commented yet: there are great and funny 5* char out there and maybe devs want to players to grind for them. 
    I have to say its a more than great goal.
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,816 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bad said:
    I dont have okoye nor I will ever have her, so 10 minutes saved is a bit optimistical for me.
    For to be on the final rank, the final health pool I needed to clear before and now not, it took me 40 m at the very least.
     40 m less for me is well worth the resources lost.
    On the other hand, I dont think this game is ruled by competitive alliances. In fact I think they would be the opposite.

    And finally there is another perspective not commented yet: there are great and funny 5* char out there and maybe devs want to players to grind for them. 
    I have to say its a more than great goal.
    I am curious how players are supposed to "grind for" 5s with any efficiency.  I assume you are referring to the Classics.  As you are probably well aware, Classics show up in PVE about once a year, or longer.  You could get about 80-100 shards, I think, for placing decently in SCL10, then 250 more in progression.  Once a year.  If you manage to get T25 in PVP you can get 80 shards for a 5, a few times a year?  So I guess you can gather a little over 1 single cover from shards in rewards per Classic per year.

    Look, 5s are definitely a lot more accessible via rewards but dilution is a major problem even now.  And they remain the ultimate carrot for players.  But you simply can't "grind" for them other than finishing some off when they are missing a cover or two, unless you are on a 13 year plan or something.

    The only way to really progress towards Classic 5s are to hoard for a store and/or target them.  Both of which to me represent significant devotion of limited resources and I wouldn't advise most players to chase random "fun" 5s this way.  But everyone has their own approach, I guess.
  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards
    I never said classics. All people know they are obsolete.
    I mean LL. Those are the ones that move the game right now,  better notice this.
    And on scl10 is posible to barely champ each new 5*, shargeting them or not.
  • bluewolf
    bluewolf Posts: 5,816 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2020
    Bad said:
    I never said classics. All people know they are obsolete.
    I mean LL. Those are the ones that move the game right now,  better notice this.
    And on scl10 is posible to barely champ each new 5*, shargeting them or not.
    That makes sense.  From people's calculations, the rewards swap (shards in, other currency out) combined with a 4/5 release schedule (which I assume will remain the norm) leaves players at the exact same place in terms of keeping up with new 5s - IF they play in 10 all the time and hence spend more time playing the game than we did when 9 was the highest SCL.  Generally you can champ the 5's as they go through, and you could before too, if you play in the highest SCL and do well all the time.

    It is possible (probable?) that shards mean that a larger number of players can actually have a champed 5 this way vs random pull results resulting in bad builds under the old system.

    So I guess we can "grind" for new 5s better than before, but it's largely a wash as far as most players' outcomes.  And you need to spend more time in the game and it feels relentless/exhausting with the release schedule now.

    I do agree that they are in general doing a better job with 5* characters over the past year or so.  I am not super impressed with all of them (Sinister and Killmonger aren't as good) but I like most of them a lot.

Categories