I dislike having to play at very specific times…

bbigler

I want to explore solutions to this issue in the recent survey.  I have several ideas and would like to get everyone’s feedback on them.  I trust the devs are listening.  I don’t think I need to explain why this is an issue, I think we’ve all experienced the inconvenience of needing to play the game at specific times, otherwise we lose out on rewards.  So, going from least preferred to most preferred, here are my proposed solutions: 

Idea #1) Make 10 time slices instead of 5, which requires each slice to have half the number of players (500 for PVE and 250 for PVP) and half the amount of rewards.  This doesn’t fix the problem but just makes it a little easier to deal with.  

===================================

Idea #2) For PVE, you pick any 24 / 48 hr period as you play each sub of the event.  These periods would have to be within a certain window so that the total event time is the same.  So, each sub could have different start/stop times.  This could relieve the practice of playing continuously at the end & beginning of the subs and events.  There would be no time brackets like it is now, instead each bracket of 1000 players is filled as they start playing.  The downside is that your ranking in the event is not accurate until all players in that bracket have finished their time.  The same goes for your overall ranking in the event.  For PVP, the same methodology applies except it’s just a single 48 hr period to select per event.  This solution still has the fundamental problem of needing to play at specific end times, except you can choose how to spread it out.  

===================================

Idea #3) For PVE, a timer records your battle time and upon victory you’re rewarded bonus points for each second under a threshold time for that node.  If it takes you multiple attempts for 1 victory, the total battle time is used.  All node clears would have the same base number of points and there would be no refreshing of points.  When a node is complete (green check) it can no longer be played.  The brackets would still fill up as they do now, but players can do their clears at any time within the 24 / 48 hr window (without penalty). 

For example, a node has 500 base points and a threshold time of 180 seconds.  If you win in 60 seconds, you get a total of 620 points.  If you win in 120 seconds, you get 560 points.  If you win in 180 seconds or more, you get 500 points.  Easier nodes would have a lower threshold time while harder nodes have more time.  

This would completely remove the requirement to play at specific times to maximize points. Speed still matters, but the game will wait for you and you can start/stop your clearing session at any time within the window.  This method is NA in PVP.  

===================================

Idea #4) This uses the same battle timer & bonus points as idea #3, except you don’t have 5 time slices of brackets.  Instead, brackets are simply filled up as players start the event.  In addition, players can choose to move onto the next sub of the event whenever they want within the 3-4 day window of the event.  So, players would have the freedom to either spread out their clears or do them all at once.  This is like completing a boss event early and having the rest of your weekend free.  

Bzhai

I think this emphasis on speed to get the best rewards not only for the player but for their alliance is killing the game. You´re holding people´s schedules hostage by locking them into a specific playtime and the fastest teams. Those who can´t or choose not to play optimally have their progress hindered and are singled out by their alliance. 

As a commander who is having problems recruiting new members I can tell you that this is the no. 1 problem the game has and is causing us to lose high level players. 

HoundofShadow

If you are playing in SCL 10, the difference in placement rewards are minute. The core differences between T20 and T100 placement reward are 25 5* shards and 1 4* cover. The bulk of the rewards have always been in progression rewards.

1) Doubling the number of slices will not happen because the dev wants to control the number of players getting top rewards. Remember, they shifted 18 cps from 75 wins to 50 wins and back to 75 wins when shards were introduced.

2) Nerfing the rewards is the worst decision they can make to just to satisfy a small number of playerbase who are not even whales. Whales number are small and players who want to get T1 and can't play according to time is small. So, on a scale of priority between these two groups of players, making the whales happy is more pragmatic.

3) Changing time-based to match based timing will benefit those with good R4/R5 supports. At the end of the day, placement will still be about speed, no matter how you change it.

4) Asking the dev to put T1 placement rewards will never happen, unless the game experiences major changes. Converting T10 placement rewards into progression placement rewards is equivalent to dumping poop on the whales, and top players.

If your alliances are pressuring you to get top placements, then leave and find an alliance that respect your real-life work. 

End of the day, I think it's about the mindset. Players want to get the maximum rewards because they want to progress quickly. They want to get as much rewards as 550 players but that's highly impossible. They want to speed up everything. The question is, where are you rushing to?

SourCream

I like some fries too.

In all seriousness :

1) You don't have to play at very specific time.

2) Progression is there for all to take at any given time of play.

3) Not every event need to be a hand out like Deadpool Daily.

Let's be honest, the issue is placement. 

If you want same prize for all and no time restriction, wait for the next alliance event... when player engagement is next to none.

Ptahhotep

I would like a version of the third option. However, I would like speed bonus points to be based on the number of turns required to clear the node rather than the time in seconds. Also, additional bonus points could be awarded for things like the amount of ap on hand at the end of a battle, number of different characters used in the sub, etc.

Srheer0

Do your players want to finish top 3, top 10, top 20, top 50, or worse?

I'm getting about 6 hrs of sleep a night currently (mostly due to MPQ). Even with me going casual when pve has boring placement rewards (old 4s instead of a new release etc), the PVP grind still impacts my sleeping!

If I don't play optimally, I end up top50-200.

I think a really good QOL feature they could put in the game would be an option to reduce the time it takes for enemy tile makers to make the countdown tiles in pve. Mindless ones, symbiotes, kingpin goons. They all take too long to do animations etc. And that's with animations turned off already. 

9RMetal

Feel ya fam, for me I hate playing in the afternoon hours but have to because i'm busy, so sometimes i just forget to play my pve events and it really affects your placement.

Bad

I think the main idea is to play the node and the timer giving speed points as a bonus. I like that but not focused on just speed points: it could give "style" points based on a particular way of fighting(a character healing a partner x threshold, destroying x tiles treshold, creating x special tiles treshold, etc...) 
All that would open the game for tactical play and/or speed, also characters usually considered "trash" would have some role. If the "style points" could sum up more than speed, finally okoye could take some rest.
All that gaining blue tokens in a new mode could be superb.

Because pve experiencing a change so huge would bring unknown consequences. I don't think they will ever implement something like that.
On the other hand, a new mode implementing that system, and players experiencing it bit a bit, could have great chances to become popular on time.

LavaManLee

Not sure if this will help but what I do is:

PVE: SCL 10. Play to the green check.  Doesn't matter when I do it, but as long as I get the green check I am guaranteed progression and finish anywhere from T50-100.

PVP: Don't get stuck to one specific slice time.  I play what works for my schedule.  Try to get 1000 but am fine if I get less.

bbigler

I think we all would prefer playing a larger variety of teams instead of our fastest ones.  

I would rather play 25 mindful battles instead of 77 mindless ones.  If they changed the PVE point structure so that speed wasn’t the biggest factor, then I would enjoy PVE much much more.  

Here’s the PVE problem, you could either: 

A) Play your fastest teams & supports, use boosts, be mindless & sloppy, but ultimately get the best possible rewards for your roster strength OR

Play casually on your time table, use fun teams, try new teams, take your time and think about each move, but ultimately get poor ranking and lesser rewards.  

A super simple fix would be to move all placement rewards to progression.  Then we could take our time and actually have fun.  

If placement must stay, then reward extra points for things other than speed: 
1) Using a variety of characters 
2) Finishing with surplus AP
3) Downing everyone in 1 turn 
4) Winning with a certain level of Strikes, Attacks, Protects, CD tiles, Repeaters, Charged, Fortified or Web Tiles.  

5) Winning while characters are invisible or airborne 
6) Everyone has the same team affiliation 
7) All boys team, girls team, alien team, etc
8) Everyone looks angry
9) Everyone is wearing blue, etc

But if we must have placement and points for speed, then I vote for a battle timer.  On one hand, there are small differences in the placement rewards, but on the other hand, those rewards add up.  

HoundofShadow

When you say move placement rewards to progression, are you referring to T1, T10 or T20?

DAZ0273

There is no way they are gonna move rewards to progression. There would be enormous pushback from the big alliances - what even would be the point of Alliances if placement was made irrelevant? In fact wasn't SCL10 meant to be the answer because progression rewards there were good enough that you could forego placement and still do fine?

bbigler

HoundofShadow said:

When you say move placement rewards to progression, are you referring to T1, T10 or T20?

I was thinking they could look at the average scores for T1, T5, T10, T20, T50 and then put those rewards a little below those avg scores.  So, the progression rewards would extend out further than they do now, requiring more clears to get all the rewards.  For example, in Honor Among Thieves, SCL 9, the extended rewards could be: 

55,000 - 2,500 Red ISO
57,500 - 100 HP
60,000 - Rhino cover
65,000 - 5,000 ISO
70,000 - Rhino cover
75,000 - 400 Rhino shards
80,000 - 50 Abby shards
85,000 - Rhino cover 
87,250 - LT

shardwick

I don't see them changing it unless the base dies off and then in the last six months of the game's life they're like "Guys, we're going progression only in PVE now!!!" There have been countless threads just like this one over the years and all of the suggestions fell on deaf ears. 

Natenatenate

The current way works just fine, does nobody remembers the horror that was 8hr subs?

If you're complaining about the times you "have" to play (nobody is forcing you), then you would have uninstalled this game

fight4thedream

Bad said:

I think the main idea is to play the node and the timer giving speed points as a bonus. I like that but not focused on just speed points: it could give "style" points based on a particular way of fighting(a character healing a partner x threshold, destroying x tiles treshold, creating x special tiles treshold, etc...) 
All that would open the game for tactical play and/or speed, also characters usually considered "trash" would have some role. If the "style points" could sum up more than speed, finally okoye could take some rest.
All that gaining blue tokens in a new mode could be superb.

Because pve experiencing a change so huge would bring unknown consequences. I don't think they will ever implement something like that.
On the other hand, a new mode implementing that system, and players experiencing it bit a bit, could have great chances to become popular on time.

I am in total agreement. I wrote a similar proposal a few years ago:

fight4thedream said:

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 think 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. 

Original post: https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/910611#Comment_910611

Similarly, I think it would probably end up being a new game mode rather than an immediate replacement of the current PvE system.

bbigler

I don’t think placement rewards will ever go away, so there has to be some way to rank the players in a bracket.  So, they used clearing speed as a way to differentiate. I doubt they will introduce other ways to get points in a battle, so if we’re stuck with speed being the only way, then I would like to have a battle timer instead so that I can do my clears when it’s convenient for me.  

HoundofShadow

The gameplay for Puzzle Gauntlet was refreshing and exciting in the beginning. After one entire run, it's getting a little boring or tedious, depending on the puzzle type.

Likewise, I think those suggestions for changes to pves will be refreshing and exciting in the beginning. However, it will become tedious as you are forced to use different characters, do different things every pves. Instead of speeding everything under 20-25 mins for placements, there's are potential that suh changes will increase the playtime for competitive players instead. Having to change your team lineup very frequently can be time-consuming.

I think such pve should be implemented once a month, instead of making it a daily affair. I can see players getting fatigue when Puzzle Gauntlet pops up, and multiply the fatigue if it's a bottom tier support.

TheEyeDoctorsWife

If I had this dislike the basic common sense option to me would be “ I’ll just go play one of the million other online games available “. Possibly I just think abnormal though if this sounds ridiculous , but I wouldn’t play any game that interferes with my real life. Again , it’s just my opinion and not a blanket statement. 

Bad

fight4thedream said:

I am in total agreement. I wrote a similar proposal a few years ago:

Original post: https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/910611#Comment_910611

Similarly, I think it would probably end up being a new game mode rather than an immediate replacement of the current PvE system.

In that thread it's mentioned something totally true: the game never explains how to play optimally pve, and that could drive to frustration.
If a new mode type gauntlet pve was released following some of these ideas it could be really interesting.
-Clearing 3 times the nodes (for to extending the experience and for making the final scores harder to tie)
-"style points" based on achievements on different tactics from characters and rated clearly higher than pure speed(because possibly trying to achieve these points would kill a speed game). It could be healing 20k points to a partner, destroying 50 tiles, blocking 10 tiles, creating 30 charged tiles, etc...All of these bonus points rated and explained before playing and while playing inside a [ i ] button.
- speed points adding bonus for clearing it faster than what it was scheduled
- if retiring it will count as a fail attempt. Only when clearing all the gauntlet the player will have a single attempt to try another time one node in order to best his score.
- penalization for a downed character
- 3 difficulty levels and according to MMR some of them could be blocked ( because they could be too hard or because they could be too easy). Because of that there could be just 3 brackets and rewards don't differ drastically from t20 to t50 or even t100.
- the event runs for a week and all battles unlocked after winning the previous one.
- after clearing all the nodes the player can take a peek at the rankings before trying his last attempt.

I am sure that a new mode similar to that could only be a plus to the game.

Timemachinego

I'm against changing the mode entirely so speed and style points are out for me (but could be neat in another mode),

As it stands I don't hate the current system, I can basically manage to go all out in the early week event and have to accept I won't do as well over the weekend; I imagine most of us make and accept those kinds of trade-offs. I don't know if more slices would make a difference, the general 2-hour needed window means you're probably playing before or after work (or you have REALLY loose lunches) already so I don't know how much more options would change that. If anything, I'm in favor of eliminating half the slices for PVP and widening shield windows. Something like the "choose your own 24 hour window" seems healthiest for PVE but I bet that somehow makes for even stranger meta-gymnastics than we even do today.

Had options like these been available from the start this game would have possibly attracted a wider crowd, at this point in the game's life I wonder if it may be too late to make fundamental changes (potentially alienating your present base) because it's just too damn late for a new player to feel like they can catch up adequately.