entrailbucket said: Competitive MPQ causes burnout. Why wouldn't it? It's baked into the design. If you're competing, you're competing with other players. To win, you have to beat them.When tapping was a thing, you couldn't win a PvE unless you were willing to spend several hours grinding a node for one point. Plenty of players were willing to do that to win. If you weren't willing to do that, you'd lose. The bottom line is that if other players are willing to play this game like a work schedule and you aren't, you will lose to them. That might be right or wrong, but it undeniably *is*, as long as the game remains a competition.If PvE becomes noncompetitive, progression-only, rewards will be reduced compared to what the top placement players get now. Would you be ok with that? If it stays a competition, then how should they decide who wins?
entrailbucket said: The bottom line is that if other players are willing to play this game like a work schedule and you aren't, you will lose to them. That might be right or wrong, but it undeniably *is*, as long as the game remains a competition.If it stays a competition, then how should they decide who wins?
Qazzy said: entrailbucket said: The bottom line is that if other players are willing to play this game like a work schedule and you aren't, you will lose to them. That might be right or wrong, but it undeniably *is*, as long as the game remains a competition.If it stays a competition, then how should they decide who wins? The problem may be that "playing games should be a more flexible thing, rather than requiring scheduling like work"And for the alternative way to stays a competition, I had posted on suggestions board, this may be a big work for devs, but it can surely be more flexible to players.https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/85785/new-pve-ranking-method-suggestion
entrailbucket said: Qazzy said: entrailbucket said: The bottom line is that if other players are willing to play this game like a work schedule and you aren't, you will lose to them. That might be right or wrong, but it undeniably *is*, as long as the game remains a competition.If it stays a competition, then how should they decide who wins? The problem may be that "playing games should be a more flexible thing, rather than requiring scheduling like work"And for the alternative way to stays a competition, I had posted on suggestions board, this may be a big work for devs, but it can surely be more flexible to players.https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/85785/new-pve-ranking-method-suggestion It's a good idea, but what you're describing is a completely different game. They're 8 years in, why would they throw away half the game and rebuild it from scratch now? Because the current format causes a few players among the top 0.001% to burn out and quit? That's been happening since day 1.I would add -- for most of the players on this board, and the overwhelming majority of players in the game, PvE does not *require* scheduling like work. I play PvE whenever I want. You only have to play on a schedule if you want to be competitive. You're asking them to overhaul the entire system for the benefit of a few hundred players, at most.
TheEyeDoctorsWife said: entrailbucket said: Qazzy said: entrailbucket said: The bottom line is that if other players are willing to play this game like a work schedule and you aren't, you will lose to them. That might be right or wrong, but it undeniably *is*, as long as the game remains a competition.If it stays a competition, then how should they decide who wins? The problem may be that "playing games should be a more flexible thing, rather than requiring scheduling like work"And for the alternative way to stays a competition, I had posted on suggestions board, this may be a big work for devs, but it can surely be more flexible to players.https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/85785/new-pve-ranking-method-suggestion It's a good idea, but what you're describing is a completely different game. They're 8 years in, why would they throw away half the game and rebuild it from scratch now? Because the current format causes a few players among the top 0.001% to burn out and quit? That's been happening since day 1.I would add -- for most of the players on this board, and the overwhelming majority of players in the game, PvE does not *require* scheduling like work. I play PvE whenever I want. You only have to play on a schedule if you want to be competitive. You're asking them to overhaul the entire system for the benefit of a few hundred players, at most. I love the game because I don’t play against others . However from how I see my placement drop faster than a superhero landing in the last hour the enormous majority play optimally. If you’re ignoring the game 22 hours a day , turning off animations , or following an exact order of node attacks without deviation every PvE you’re playing optimally and not for enjoyment. I prefer enjoyment to speed , there is no middle ground . ( I know someone will post “You can play for both “, so I’m laughing 😂 hysterically in advance now )
entrailbucket said: It's a good idea, but what you're describing is a completely different game. They're 8 years in, why would they throw away half the game and rebuild it from scratch now? Because the current format causes a few players among the top 0.001% to burn out and quit? That's been happening since day 1.I would add -- for most of the players on this board, and the overwhelming majority of players in the game, PvE does not *require* scheduling like work. I play PvE whenever I want. You only have to play on a schedule if you want to be competitive. You're asking them to overhaul the entire system for the benefit of a few hundred players, at most.
HoundofShadow said: If you are taking 30 to 50 minutes for each clear and grind, chances are you getting T50, or at best T20 with some luck in SCL 10 pves. The differences between T20 and T50 placement rewards aren't a lot:10 hp, 500iso-8, 25 5* shards, 1 4* cover, 25 4* shards. The differences between T50 and T100 placement rewards are:10 hp, 500 iso-8, 25 4* shardsIf you really want to focus on getting T10, you need to cut down your clear and grind to 25 minutes each. Don't bother playing competitively if you can't hit this timing because the difference in placement rewards aren't worth your waking up at 4.30am.
Sekilicious said: HoundofShadow said: If you are taking 30 to 50 minutes for each clear and grind, chances are you getting T50, or at best T20 with some luck in SCL 10 pves. The differences between T20 and T50 placement rewards aren't a lot:10 hp, 500iso-8, 25 5* shards, 1 4* cover, 25 4* shards. The differences between T50 and T100 placement rewards are:10 hp, 500 iso-8, 25 4* shardsIf you really want to focus on getting T10, you need to cut down your clear and grind to 25 minutes each. Don't bother playing competitively if you can't hit this timing because the difference in placement rewards aren't worth your waking up at 4.30am. You can pretty easily make top 20 in most flips simply by playing within an hour or two of the slice deadline. Top-10 is harder without sniping as most enter as soon as the flip occurs and still can manage the 25-30 minute clears. Or at least when I look at their roster they all have giant Okoye/iHulk or Apocalypse/Thor. With sniping you are limited to which slice you play (probably only slice 5 at SCL10, Slices 2 to 4 only flip once and the second flip on Slice 1 is still pretty competitive) and risk not making progression. The SCLs lower than 10 are no where near as busy. Many do not flip at all.