I want to bring attention to this topic and what it means for pvp.
Overall, a weekly side event with no placement is a good supplemental event that players can experiment with and play at their own pace. Its not a viable replacement for PVP and alliance integration. Specifically, once your done with the task, you have zero incentive to keep engaging with the game. Unlike traditional pvp where the scoring, and hitting incentives are essentially endless. In practical terms it means every account does 50-60 wins and stops vs. a t5 scl player who hops or enforces would easily account for 100-150 matches. Before going down the Excel rabbit hole, I just want to emphasis that a match 3 game should have an an endless component of play.
As a supplemental and continuously running side event, I think this is great. A week to week event that has a limited roster ( it doesn't really matter if it mutants/ Class of / Secret Wars etc) is a great way for players to try out new combinations and play styles that don't impact current expectations/obligations of play.
I think the key takeway is that a limited roster pvp event is great for encouraging new play at a sustainable place.
I agree. They could easily+ keep it going after the anniversary by having a different theme each week.
Tl:Dr: everyone loves extra pvp with no incentive to shield.
@Bowgentle said: Tl:Dr: everyone loves extra pvp with no incentive to shield.
Well, we do sorta have that in shield sim, and I don't think anybody loves it. The difference with these is the limited roster part (and I'd argue the part of that that matters is locking out the overpowered guys).
@entrailbucket said: @Bowgentle said: Tl:Dr: everyone loves extra pvp with no incentive to shield. Well, we do sorta have that in shield sim, and I don't think anybody loves it. The difference with these is the limited roster part (and I'd argue the part of that that matters is locking out the overpowered guys).
@entrailbucket said:
Ssim is part of season, so scores matter in the end.
Yeah agreed. Maybe it'll make use of affiliations.
Maybe they can use this setup to test Supports in PvP to analyze rather than forcing it on us
I've been the opposite ironically. I barely do PvP and I barely do PvE. I usually stick to Alliance events and Deadpool dailies.
This is one of the first game modes in a while I have been actively doing every single day. I am even excited for the new buff list and characters each week too which is great.
Honestly I'd love to have this type of PvP be permanent. But instead of "Class of ____". It would work just like the Buff list of each PvP or PvE. But only the buffed characters would be usable. I mean I know for some veteran players who play, this has been the opportunity to play characters someone may normally not play or haven't played in a while.
So imagine there was a Weekly PvP. But it had a random pre-set list of only those characters that could be used. Could even theme it around whatever is going on during the month too.
@captainheath said: I agree. They could easily+ keep it going after the anniversary by having a different theme each week.
Instead of current PVP I agree. With it and SIM, no thanks. For me it would be a good addition to drop SIM from season scoring and have these new weekly type PVP events. SIM just left there to practice with teams for no points.
I think if you had all three, soon enough you would have people complaining about burnout because so many people seem unable to regulate which events to play and how deep into the rewards to go vs how much they hate an event.
I DO love that there are 150 5* shards at 1000 points of progression in these Class Of events; I wouldn't mind if that found its way to regular PVP moving forward.
@Tony_Foot said: @captainheath said: I agree. They could easily+ keep it going after the anniversary by having a different theme each week. Instead of current PVP I agree. With it and SIM, no thanks. For me it would be a good addition to drop SIM from season scoring and have these new weekly type PVP events. SIM just left there to practice with teams for no points. I think if you had all three, soon enough you would have people complaining about burnout because so many people seem unable to regulate which events to play and how deep into the rewards to go vs how much they hate an event.
@Tony_Foot said:
I think you'd have a small number complaining about burnout. The responses from Ice about player numbers and habits were a big surprise to me. It may seem as though for a lot of players, variety is more important than getting every reward available.