Stax the Foyer wrote: Malcrof wrote: When the preview is up, we will all get to see progressions, placements, everything. All this rage, and no-one even knows what the event looks like yet. For all we know, it may end up being the best test yet. It appears either way that this is going to be a very lucrative event. Within seconds of the PvE test announcements being made, the community has been able to point out a glaring flaw in the design of these tests. In this one, it's the way the MPQ scoreboards handle ties. In the previous one, it was the ability to grind nodes for additional points. And yet, significant time is spent designing, programming, and running these test events, with flaws that should have been immediately obvious. Of course, through all the PvE tests, one constant has remained, and that's that principle that only one in every 100 players deserves to win a 4* ranking award. It's now probably easier for the average transitioning player to cover a given 5* than it is to cover a given 4*. I think a lack of faith in the design and direction of the game is pretty understandable at this point. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.
Malcrof wrote: When the preview is up, we will all get to see progressions, placements, everything. All this rage, and no-one even knows what the event looks like yet. For all we know, it may end up being the best test yet. It appears either way that this is going to be a very lucrative event.
Stax the Foyer wrote: If you have to use the phrase "the first 15 times they are beaten" at any point in the description of a game, something has gone terribly wrong.
Malcrof wrote: Please go back on topic, posts about progression only may be moved to a new thread to continue discussion.
DayvBang wrote: Is this a game mode or a behavioral experiment? I can see it now, the next test is going to designate one group of players as "inmates" and the other as "guards"...
Pongie wrote: JCTthe3rd81 wrote: I just had a thought but not sure if it would even work. So I'm asking all of those that are computer experts. Would it be possible to give all ties the same reward? This will be open to abuse. Just imagine if the whole bracket agreed to not play or simply play the starting node. Everyone would get top prize with minimal effort. I reckon it is not that hard to get 1000 players to join and do this.
JCTthe3rd81 wrote: I just had a thought but not sure if it would even work. So I'm asking all of those that are computer experts. Would it be possible to give all ties the same reward?
scottee wrote: Calm down everyone. They're only 3 more tests away from coming to the conclusion that everyone's been saying from the beginning. To get rid of placement rewards.
ThatOneGuyjp189512 wrote: "higher-level rosters were performing better than low-level rosters" OH GOD NO! we can't have this! we can't players think they're progressing against the new people! it's not like they spent a bunch of time and money to get ahead of the game and make it seem like they're progressing! /sarcasm
Man I am going to love this EotS with my OML locked away 5 of the 7 days, but with the event using the level of my OML for the difficulty of the event, specially with those extra levels of difficulty !!!
MissChinch wrote: I think the fear of a giant tie clogging up the leaderboard is grossly overstated. Clearing each node 7 times now, even in a horribly inefficient time scheme will more often than not put me in contention for top 50 in vet brackets. I dont see how adding harder scaling is going to make people want to play more. EotS is a pretty reviled event, however I think the new limited number of clears that yield points works best in an event with waves in it... Wave nodes have the possibility of being only partially completed for fractional points, so of the set of people that play every node until they're not worth any points, the ones that performed best in the wave nodes will outscore those that left points on the table. Its a very small instance where the event places skill over grinding, however I'd like to see a "mulligan" button for an extremely bad starting board, or maybe a character with a passive that they can fire once before any moves are made that generates a new starting board.
MissChinch wrote: If the concern is for bracket sniping, then just split existing brackets when ones maxed out instead of starting a fresh one, even number rankings go into their own 500/1000 bracket ready to accept new members, odds go in their own. It destroys the "bracket sniping game" but has positive impacts on everyone else playing the event, and IMO is a much more fair way of handling it.
MissChinch wrote: This will likely be unpopular, but if theyre going to keep this high number of available clears per node, then I'd like to have them count attempts, not victories... Someone clearing without a loss should definitely be raised above someone that threw multiple losses in there.
Gmax101 wrote: 1) Where is the 25cp progression set? Last test they clearly stated 3 clears gets you the reward... its useful info for planning effort
Polares wrote: ThatOneGuyjp189512 wrote: "higher-level rosters were performing better than low-level rosters" OH GOD NO! we can't have this! we can't players think they're progressing against the new people! it's not like they spent a bunch of time and money to get ahead of the game and make it seem like they're progressing! /sarcasm Man after reading this sentence I thought two things, first they don't understand how a game should work. You improve your characters and the the game gets easier? Yeah this is how all RPG-like games except this one work (even games with variable difficulty or where difficulty scales with your current level or your current point in the story of the game).
DFiPL wrote: So lemme get this straight. New players and those with weaker rosters get locked out of playing sooner because the nodes they can handle tap out on rewards and being worth points sooner than the harder ones do? Way to help them earn the resources they need to take on those harder missions.
DreadPirateW wrote: If what you're suggesting is true and that's the plan, to have only the best rosters be able to complete it all, then most players scoring placement rewards won't need the covers they get. If you need 5* characters to win 4* covers and 4* characters to score 3* covers, then forward progression is over. Hope you're wrong!
Stax the Foyer wrote: MissChinch wrote: This will likely be unpopular, but if theyre going to keep this high number of available clears per node, then I'd like to have them count attempts, not victories... Someone clearing without a loss should definitely be raised above someone that threw multiple losses in there. I understand the appeal of this approach, but I don't think there's a good way to implement it. As you mentioned, starting boards are a big deal, especially for nodes like the infamous carnage node in Venom Bomb. Penalizing people for missing a clear amplifies this issue even more, in a way that puts people in a permanent hole when it comes to placement rewards. It also makes it even more critical that every event is balanced to be fair to people across four or five roster tiers, which is almost an impossible target to hit.