Basepuzzler said: I enjoy the challenge node. Making it 1 time only would be less fun. And CL10 should be more points than CL9. Changing it to 3 clears/2 for grind and having it still be worth a bit more than CL9 sounds ideal.
Bad said: In any case, scl10 is mostly for people wanting to chase 5* and 4* shards. If not interested in one or both, for saving a hoard or because the 4* is not wanted, as it was already said the amount of time and effort is not worth it unless having a really strong and speedy roster.Reduction of one clear is good, but more cps would be more enticing.And right now challenge nodes give just 1 cp.When scl10 was released I think they were giving 4 per sub.
bluewolf said: The node and event rewards did get reduced a little (basically losing some iso, riso, an Elite and 50 4* shards) but the CP is the same as before this change.You get 1 CP from the 4E, 3 from the 5E (just like in 9) and one more from the Challenge Node. So the total is actually 5 CP, one more than in SCL9.
Bad said: bluewolf said: The node and event rewards did get reduced a little (basically losing some iso, riso, an Elite and 50 4* shards) but the CP is the same as before this change.You get 1 CP from the 4E, 3 from the 5E (just like in 9) and one more from the Challenge Node. So the total is actually 5 CP, one more than in SCL9. Sorry, but not, sorry. Challenge nodes were offering 2 cps as well as 4* required and 5*.Right now they are offering 1 cp as well as the 4*. Required 5* offers 1cp and 2 cps.Challenge nodes were offering 2 times 2cps too when they were released, as I said.
OJSP said: My further feedback after the first event is done: this change is a decent start. Like many have said, the majority of time spent in CL10 is during the 3x clears (grind) at the highest difficulty. So, lessening the first clears to start the timers only help slightly for people who intend to clear everything (optimally). However, I appreciate with the increase in points, playing just for progression could be a very rewarding in terms of time spent to rewards ratio.I think if this is an attempt to reduce playing time in CL10, it’s only a partial success. The top alliance players are more impacted by the change and not necessarily in a positive way.Seeing how the top alliances score, if the points are not adjusted anymore, as obvious as it sounds, I think it’s a matter of getting as many CL10 players as they can to get better scores. There might not be enough CL10 players for some events (like this event, there are still many CL9 players filling the t10 alliances), so there will be more work for the commanders and mercs to get the players they need, with less margins for errors. It might have been the intention to push more people to play CL10, but this could backfire. Personally, I don’t think the time difference is enough to entice high placing CL8 or CL9 players, who intentionally drop down despite being eligible for CL10, to move up to CL10. Either the time required in CL10 needs to be reduced further (less clears at maximum difficulties or just the Challenge nodes), the points difference between CL9 or CL10 need to be adjusted (so there’s less pressure for people to jump up to CL10 if they want to get t10 alliance rewards), or improve the placement rewards in CL10 a bit more so players who can’t play optimally in CL10 would still get better rewards than in CL9 if they spend a similar amount of time.I think people who choose to drop down CLs do so mainly because of the shorter playing time (and for top alliance players, in addition to the potential to score higher in CL9 compared to CL10 and get t10 alliance rewards). They are willing to ignore the CL10 progression rewards because of that. Some players just happened to have enough time to play optimally for a specific amount of time and not a lot more. I’ve heard of players playing optimally in CL8 and CL9 during their lunch breaks (or whatever break time they have in their schedules). So, for these players, playing in CL10 is probably still not appealing enough.The number of slice 3.10 players for Fight for Wakanda didn’t increase significantly compared to the previous run (perhaps there were still people moving down CLs trying to win Anti-Venom covers from placement rewards?). For Strange Sights, the numbers seem to be less than usual. Perhaps players who were not used to playing CL10 were mistiming their grinds (which is now more difficult to estimate because the first 3 clears are faster) and ended up missing out of placements/getting less than they usually would in lower CLs. I can understand if these players decided that CL10 is still not appealing enough for them.
SheRa007 said: I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lol
Vhailorx said: SheRa007 said: I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lol Everyone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears.
justsing said: Vhailorx said: SheRa007 said: I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lol Everyone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears. Forcing players to go SCL10 for alliance placement without reducing grind time will only lead to more people burning out and quitting / going casual.
bowla33 said: justsing said: Vhailorx said: SheRa007 said: I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lol Everyone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears. Forcing players to go SCL10 for alliance placement without reducing grind time will only lead to more people burning out and quitting / going casual. While I agree it will cause burnout for some, it also stops alliances from forcing people to play in 9 to drive higher scores. It's a two way road.
Vhailorx said:justsing said:Vhailorx said:SheRa007 said:I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lolEveryone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears. Forcing players to go SCL10 for alliance placement without reducing grind time will only lead to more people burning out and quitting / going casual. Tthat particular argument, however, is happily mooted because demi also reduced the cl10 grind at the same time (and seemingly intends to reduce the end grind as well if we believe the discord statements). So burnout is even less of an issue.
justsing said:Vhailorx said:SheRa007 said:I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lolEveryone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears. Forcing players to go SCL10 for alliance placement without reducing grind time will only lead to more people burning out and quitting / going casual.
Vhailorx said:SheRa007 said:I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lolEveryone seems outraged by this, but if demi wants to prod more people into cl10, making cl10 worth significantly more points per time-spent is perhaps the easiest way to do so. If optimally grinding cl10 produced a significant points advantage, that would basically force 1-2k players (everyone from the top 50-top 100 alliances) to play cl10 exclusively. No doubt many of those players were already doing so, but we know plenty of advanced rosters are staying in lower cl's for faster clears.
SheRa007 said:I like that the c10 PvE clears are worth more than c9. It only makes sense that t10 PvE alliances that want the t10 alliance reward require that all of their players to do the c10 PvE. I really like this change overall as it does take less time.Now they just need to lock people into an ally for PvE & PvP events before people play like they do on boss events and things would be AWESOME!Without locking people in for events, alliances essentially mean nothing lol
IceIX said: We would like to make playing in SCL 10 attractive to more players so we are making some quality of life changes to SCL 10.