PVE needs to move to Prog only ASAP!

2»

Comments

  • PiMacleod
    PiMacleod Posts: 1,786 Chairperson of the Boards
    Waddles_Pines said:
    Mrcl25 said:
    killahKlown said:
    If you shift it to progression only then it just becomes a chore like DDQ.   That's boring.  It's a game, games are meant to me competitive and exciting.  Not a boring slog.

    This 'nobody should get more than me' mentality is becoming concerning.
    I like the competitive aspect and agree that pve could become boring if they just keep running the same events with progression only rewards. Progression only would require new and more varied events.

    But what I really want, more than anything, is a way to get rid of time slices. Not having to play everyday at specific times. If they can find a way to keep pve competitive without time slices I would be very happy.
    I don't really have any problems with how pve is currently set up (besides time slices...now pvp is a totally different beast...), but here's a possible solution.  It would adversely affect the way I play, but I'll put it out there anyways:

    Shift to a time based system.  Each sub starts at the same time for everyone.  Just pick an arbitrary universal start time/end time.  The timer starts when you start and only runs while you're in a match.  Change the refresh time to 12 hours.  Change the max times cleared to 7 (or 6 for scl 10).  Score is the first tie breaker, then time.  You preserve progression for those that want it, and placement for those who want it.  
    I like this.  The idea that the game runs the same, but the TIMER starts when YOU start is cool.  
  • Kolence
    Kolence Posts: 969 Critical Contributor
    @Waddles_Pines
    I don't understand what is the 12 hour refresh time for?
    Time counts how fast your clears were, right? And score first counts if you were able to beat all the nodes? 

    Refresh is not really needed to differentiate player's scores when you're already timing the clears. I guess part of the excitement can be the game of chicken at the end. :) 
  • Davidk777
    Davidk777 Posts: 76 Match Maker
    Well I haven't took first place in this game since 3* patch came out. Since then I play for progression. I will only go back if they change the time slice. Maybe to max points, in a way the enemies level goes up to let's say 1000. Then I'll have time within 24hr to win as many matches as I can. But the key thing bening, on my time. The game is fun,  But I'm not dedicating my life around. Until then I'll just keep doing the same.
  • Waddles_Pines
    Waddles_Pines Posts: 1,229 Chairperson of the Boards
    Kolence said:
    @Waddles_Pines
    I don't understand what is the 12 hour refresh time for?
    Time counts how fast your clears were, right? And score first counts if you were able to beat all the nodes? 

    Refresh is not really needed to differentiate player's scores when you're already timing the clears. I guess part of the excitement can be the game of chicken at the end. :) 
    As much as we'd like to eliminate clears end clears, that's d3's MO.  So, it was more my attempt at leaving things relatively the same.  

    Plus, if it was strictly just initial clears, there'd be no way for middling rosters to ever place highly.  
  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    It seems strange to see this topic again, I remember it was a hot topic right around when I first joined the forums however many years ago that was. It is never going to happen.
  • The_Boogie
    The_Boogie Posts: 25 Just Dropped In
    Unfortunately this will never happen, for financial reasons mostly. If you have an incentive to use more health packs to finish clears faster, or grow your rosters to be more competitive (aka buy those starks!), D3 will run in the black and stay in business. Moving to progression only would cut off a significant revenue stream.
  • Ptahhotep
    Ptahhotep Posts: 428 Mover and Shaker
    Personally I would like to get rid of the time basis for scoring for placement. I would rather see a system of additional tasks like those in the Puzzle Gauntlet and quests that give additional points. If the nodes all locked on completing the relevant number of clears then it would be necessary to plan your clears carefully to complete as many of the tasks as possible and maximise your points.
  • Captain_Carlman
    Captain_Carlman Posts: 208 Tile Toppler
    Since I just don't have the time to devote to placement, I only play PvE for progression.  But even I could tell you the idea of switching PvE to straight progression only ain't it, chief.
  • BoyWonder1914
    BoyWonder1914 Posts: 884 Critical Contributor
    I've only recently started playing again so pardon my ignorance, but is the OP referring to people repeatedly grinding the same nodes to get additional points that give them an edge in placement? I remember there being a term for it and it was a big thing a while back. 
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    BoyWonder1914 said:
    I've only recently started playing again so pardon my ignorance, but is the OP referring to people repeatedly grinding the same nodes to get additional points that give them an edge in placement? I remember there being a term for it and it was a big thing a while back. 

    No that term is called “tapping” and was resolved with a math change on how resets points calculated.

    The issue I’m referring to know is the speed exploit used in pve to skew the placement results. As a result people have been losing the placement prizes to players who are “adjusting” animation /game play speed.

    I personally am in favor of placement prizes, but not when those prizes are given out on the basis of hardware platform instead of skill or roster size.

    the issue of placement or progression is sorta irrelevant.  Either system including tasks (ie puzzle based ) objectives are all equally valid methods of ranking and allocating prizes as long as the methods and objectives are fairly announced and uniformly applied to all players.

    tldr
    Do people seriously want to use time based placement results when there are demonstrated exploits?  I personally don’t and hope they move those prizes to prog or ANY other ranking system that has fair and equally accessible play. I personally don’t care how the covers are given as long as the results are uniform and fair.

  • fight4thedream
    fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,973 Chairperson of the Boards
    Here is one idea I proposed when the issue of speed in PvE was brought up last year in the Breaking the clearing speed status quo thread:

    As the OP has pointed out, the current PvE model overvalues speed at the cost of play variety. It is because of this that a lot of characters and non-offensive abilities are undervalued by the competitive player community. It behooves the dev team to develop a PvE system (or new game mode) that values other factors besides simple node clearing speed, that values non-offensive abilities and encourages wider roster use. 

    I think one possible solution is to tie the scoring system to specific win conditions by utilizing a skill-based multiplier system. Instead of speed, I would rather a player's base score be focused on:

    Node value
    Number of turns to complete a node
    Overall percentage of team health remaining
    How many members of the team are active at the end of the battle
    Star level of characters used

    Explanation:

    Node value: Simply the amount of points a node has. Points increase based on difficulty.

    Number of turns: Multiplied with the node value. Determine the value of 1 turn node clear and then reduce its value by a certain amount with each turn taken to clear node. So for example, 1 turn clear equals 5. Reduce by  .2 for each turn taken. So a 4 turn clear would earn the player a 4.4. 

    Overall percentage of team health: Instead of health points of the entire team (which would favor large rosters with large HP characters) focus on the remaining percentage of health of team used to help keep the playing field even. 

    Number of members active at end of battle: Give 1 point for each active member

    Star level of characters used: in order to encourage the use of lower star tiers, I thin it best to give a higher multiplier to lower stars levels.  

    So 1* characters would get a 5 multiplier, 2* characters a 4 multiplier, 3* characters 3 multiplier, 4* characters 2 multiplier and 5* characters 1 multiplier. I know it seems counter intuitive but the point is to encourage risk taking and thinking of possible synergies between tiers to maximize points. 


    In addition, bonus points (something ranging from 500 to 1000 points added to base score) can be assigned for things like:

    not using boosts
    number of TUs collected at end of match
    number of strike, protect, attack tiles at end of match

    And then a special bonus multiplier can be assigned for things like:

    *using a whole team of affiliated members (X-men, Avengers, Villains)
    *specifically designated characters (think Essential nodes but without the requirement but with a high multiplier like 20) 
    * number of certain color AP at end of match
    * number of critical tiles at end of match

    With enough variables, the likelihood of there being a tie should decrease. If instituted for competitive play, I would recommend a limit of 4 tries per each node, with the event taking your highest score for each node. 

    In the event of a tie, the player who reached the score first would win. So there's a benefit to putting up your best score as early as possible. Otherwise, you will have players waiting until the last hour to see what kind of scores they have to beat to move up in rank.

    The best strategy would be to use 3 of your turns at one's leisure and save your last attempt for the final hour. 

    With that said, I would prefer such events be non-competitive as I believe PvE should be. I am aware making such an event non-competitive begs the question of how rewards would be distributed and I think there are viable solutions but I will leave that matter to the side for the time being. 

    My point is there are other ways to approach PvE that wouldn't necessarily rely on speed and encourage wider roster use. The system I have proposed is just one possible alternative. I think, ideally, a healthy mix between the current PvE format and something like I proposed would be a big plus for everyone (well as long rewards didn't take a hit like they did with the Gauntlet). But that's just my 2 cents.


    Obviously, a change like this wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea but I do think it would make PvE more interesting and provide a more level playing field.

  • Michael1957
    Michael1957 Posts: 630 Critical Contributor
    One thing I noticed in my alliance in PvE the newer members playing SCL 9 are getting better placement rewards than I am in SCL 10 as I advised them to clone my roster . Now they breeze through 9 and finish Top 20. I think more players are migrating to 10 because every time the same event rolls around I get a higher score but finish lower placement, while the 9 players get an identical score and get a higher placement. As the tier system becomes more top heavy with longer term players eventually any decent reward for placement in 10 won’t be worth doing except for the fun of battle challenge.
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    PVEs without placements will be boring. The event will be devoid of adrenaline or endorphins. It will be like DDQ. Where else can the non-top 1% of the players get this rush?
  • Jacklag
    Jacklag Posts: 316 Mover and Shaker
    While I am all in favor of a rework of the whole time slices thing (both for PvP and PvE, I don't mind that there are placement rewards in PvE. And I play SLC 10 with my baby champed 4*s and unchamped 5*s. I know I can't even hope for a top 50 placement. But I often get within top 300 and that's good enough for me right now. Last event I even finished in top 200, that was a glad surprise. 

    Though I do hope they get rid of the time slots thing. Ideally, I guess each player should get an individual timer as soon as they click on Star Event. It would possibly take somewhat longer for you to get your rewards once your event ends, as the game would need to wait for all other players in you fictitious "slice" to finish their games as well. But I think it would make half the player base happy.
  • dlegendary0ne
    dlegendary0ne Posts: 93 Match Maker
    The time slices are the reason I stopped playing competitively.  I don't like committing to play the same time every single day no matter what.  That was my biggest issue.  I'd love a system where I can play anytime during the window of the event and still be able to be competitive.  Although, my roster isn't cutting edge anymore, so I'd be at a disadvantage, at least I'd have flexibility.
  • fight4thedream
    fight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,973 Chairperson of the Boards
    **Mod note: Removed off-topic posts. Please keep this thread on topic. Thank you.

Categories