Argument for removing refresh timers in PvE

Buret0 · July 2015

NecroBumped from a year ago for relevance to current test.

Edit:

Since some people are still considering this OP as the entirety of my suggestion and not reading anything further, please read this before commenting:

Goobady wrote:

808SpicyToro wrote:

Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but isn't the OP basically proposing taking that ungodly grind in the last couple hours of the sub, and spreading it out over the course of 24 hours?

It doesn't spread it out, it just makes all 24 hours equally an ungodly grind if you want to get to the top. The winner will no longer be the person who puts in 1 hour every 8, then 2 at the end (4-5ish total), but whoever puts in the most hours total every 24. Given how competitive some people are, that will probably be around 10-15 hours, more when it is a new 4 star.

Again, there are ways around this.

Under the current system (assuming you don't grind the first node 780 times for one point each time) how many clears is currently optimum? Initial + 8 hour + 16 hour + ~23 hour + ~1 hour grind? How many times do you need to play a single node in the last ~hour to make it worth a single point?

I wasn't proposing a finished product, I was proposing the basis for removing the hamster wheel requirement of optimal play.

As I stated, you could simply make the new maximum number of clears = current optimal number of clears. That way optimal play would take exactly the same number of clears, but you could do them in the first hour the event opens or the last hour the event is open. Or you could make the maximum number of clears slightly higher or lower, since you are no longer reliant on the hamster wheel timers.

Again, if you make the tie-breaker first to clear, you give the advantage to those who grind early, which isn't the intention, so you could just randomly break ties or give everyone who achieved the maximum number of clears the top prize. If 30 people all finished the (exceedingly more difficult) 110 nodes, give them all the top prize. Since I'm already recommending that progression rewards be given more priority than the placement rewards, it shouldn't be an issue. Then the next best score would be 31st, because 30 people had better scores. And if five people all got that score, they all get 31st place. It isn't that hard to make the standings show T1.....T31....37, 38, T39...

I'm not trying to make more work for people, I'm just trying to bring parity between those who have 16 hours of their day where they can't play MPQ and those who are able to schedule their lives around MPQ. The sub-event is 24 hours long, but with the timers in place, it isn't really a "24 hour window" in which you can compete, it is a series of 8 hour sub-events.

Considering most people are supposed to sleep for about eight hours and work for eight or more hours, can't MPQ forgive us for not having flexible schedules and give us just as many points for clearing 16 times in the last hour as someone who did 16 clears interspersed over the course of the day? The amount of effort wasn't any different, just the flexibility of the player.

What needs to be done is kill the refresh timers on PvE. Instead, just make each clear worth 0.65 times the last clear value.

First clear = 100% of points out of each node, seven nodes (pretend it is 20,000 points)
Second clear = 13,000 points (33,000 total)
Third clear = 8450 points (41,450 total)
Fourth clear = 5493 points (46,943 total)
Fifth clear = 3570 points (50,513 total)
Sixth clear = 2321 points (52,834 total)
Seventh clear = 1508 points (54,342 total)
Eighth clear = 980 points (55,322 total)
Ninth clear = 637 points (55,959 total)
Tenth clear = 414 points (56,373 total)

So you can see the diminishing returns for each clear, meaning that grinding a single sub over and over will yield fewer and fewer points each time, but never quite to the point of 1 point clears. For 48 hour subs, they can change the point allocation to 0.7 or 0.75 instead of 0.65 to ensure more clears to match the number of days of the sub-event.

The advantage of this system is that, if you are doing a 24 hour sub-event, you can do three clears when the event first opens and the points will never regenerate, so you would get the same score from doing one clear every eight hours as you would from doing three clears in the first hour. You'll still be coming back throughout the day to see how high other people are scoring, which means that D3 is still getting traffic to the App, as people check the leaderboard status to see how many grinds they are going to need to do to before the event closes.

The real advantage of this is that it doesn't punish people for not following the strict 8 hour refresh window. People aren't trying to sneak away to the bathroom at work because their points have all refreshed. People aren't risking getting fired by doing clears at their desks. And for the devs, it gives the "I don't understand diminishing returns" crowd the opportunity to play as much as they want and use those vault

packs.

The other thing that needs to be done is not having the last sub-event's nodes be worth more than twice what the first sub event's nodes were worth. Yes, you do want people to be able to feel like they need to play the last nodes instead of just holding their leads, but making the final sub worth more points than the first two subs together is crazy. Think about how many points you got on the last sub of Enemy of the State. That sub alone (in a seven day event) was almost enough to unlock all of the progression rewards.

Anyway, this needs to be done, because rewarding people who play "optimally" is neither in the interests of the players, the game, or the publisher.

Malcrof · July 2015

With this method, and points not regenerating, you run the risk of loads of ties.

say 50 out of the 1000 (5%) people in the bracket are able to grind the nodes to nothing.. all will have the exact same points... so , who then is in 1st place, and who is in 50th?

DCUDCU · July 2015

You would have to put in scaling for each subsequent clear to be harder. Then in the end you are just helping people with the best rosters...which is already PVP. How would those looking to transition from 2* to 3* finish well in these events? They wouldn't beyond Deadpool Daily, unless you made different slices for those in transition. Or if it was for a character most have, if people didn't play.

Buret0 · July 2015

Malcrof wrote:

With this method, and points not regenerating, you run the risk of loads of ties.

say 50 out of the 1000 (5%) people in the bracket are able to grind the nodes to nothing.. all will have the exact same points... so , who then is in 1st place, and who is in 50th?

Ah, yes, I had thought of that.

I assume that some people are going to be grinding the higher value nodes harder than the lower value nodes while other people are going to grind them all evenly, which will fix some of that issue.

The tie-breaker would have to be based on first come, first served (first place). I believe that this is the current tie-breaker, as you do see a lot of ties in PvP events.

tanis3303 · July 2015

Malcrof wrote:

With this method, and points not regenerating, you run the risk of loads of ties.

say 50 out of the 1000 (5%) people in the bracket are able to grind the nodes to nothing.. all will have the exact same points... so , who then is in 1st place, and who is in 50th?

Or...OR...Use OP's system, and simply make the event NON-COMPETITIVE! Then *Gasp!* it doesn't matter!

Seriously tho, why does the ENTIRE game have to be a competition vs the entire world? I've never understood that...

Buret0 · July 2015

DCUDCU wrote:

You would have to put in scaling for each subsequent clear to be harder. Then in the end you are just helping people with the best rosters...which is already PVP. How would those looking to transition from 2* to 3* finish well in these events? They wouldn't beyond Deadpool Daily, unless you made different slices for those in transition. Or if it was for a character most have, if people didn't play.

I think personal scaling should suffice. Why would you need to make each subsequent clear harder when you already have a diminishing returns on each clear?

DCUDCU · July 2015

Buret0 wrote:

DCUDCU wrote:

You would have to put in scaling for each subsequent clear to be harder. Then in the end you are just helping people with the best rosters...which is already PVP. How would those looking to transition from 2* to 3* finish well in these events? They wouldn't beyond Deadpool Daily, unless you made different slices for those in transition. Or if it was for a character most have, if people didn't play.

I think personal scaling should suffice. Why would you need to make each subsequent clear harder when you already have a diminishing returns on each clear?

To break ties. If I knew all I had to do was beat a node 8 times in 24 hour period I could do that easily, especially if I could just replay the same exact node 8 times in a row. At least for me, I get locked in when I'm not changing opponenets and the game just comes easier for those nodes(ie, when grinding out nodes to 1 during regular PVE, ha).

DCUDCU · July 2015

I don't disagree with the intentions on making PvE less of a time suck...I just don't know the best way.

JVReal · July 2015

Buret0 wrote:

Malcrof wrote:

With this method, and points not regenerating, you run the risk of loads of ties.

say 50 out of the 1000 (5%) people in the bracket are able to grind the nodes to nothing.. all will have the exact same points... so , who then is in 1st place, and who is in 50th?

Ah, yes, I had thought of that.

I assume that some people are going to be grinding the higher value nodes harder than the lower value nodes while other people are going to grind them all evenly, which will fix some of that issue.

The tie-breaker would have to be based on first come, first served (first place). I believe that this is the current tie-breaker, as you do see a lot of ties in PvP events.

But if it's whoever clears the nodes to 0 'first'... then it isn't playing on your own timeframe... it's a race. Same problem, different skin.

Unknown · July 2015

So because doing a 1 hour clear every 8 hours is bad you want to make me clear nonstop for the entire event? When points diminish uniformly across the board it is the same as not diminishing at all. If you put a cap on the number of times you get points, then this becomes a race to hitting every node that many times. So instead of needing to play every 8 hours, you have to play at exactly the start for 3, 4, or more hours in one go. This system is way more of a timesink than the current.

TxMoose · July 2015

if people blow through the first clear easily, personal scaling usually makes clear #2 harder. if they struggle, it usually stays somewhat stagnant. that could remain in place I think. said it before, they should also just throw placements out the window and dump all of those rewards into a progression string that goes well beyond the current progression levels. play at your own pace. if you play enough - you get the reward, period. doesn't depend on who's in your bracket or missing that one refresh screws your t2 finish for the week up. some think that's a participation thing for all the rewards and if it was all given in the current progression level, yes, that is pretty easy but extend to 2-2.5x progression and that is a lot of playing that would be placing anyway, but not tied to the 8 hr refresh and leaderboard. I also like the idea of using points to purchase rewards from a storefront. you get enough pts and need the ****, get it, if not, get some extra hp or iso or a roster slot or even tokens (I guess some might still do this). options/choices is always nice.

Buret0 · July 2015

tanis3303 wrote:

Or...OR...Use OP's system, and simply make the event NON-COMPETITIVE! Then *Gasp!* it doesn't matter!

Seriously tho, why does the ENTIRE game have to be a competition vs the entire world? I've never understood that...

I'm sure that the publisher has done extensive research into the effect of using "placement" rewards and progression rewards in conjunction. There's a feeling to push yourself to do better with respect to placement, and a feeling that you can see yourself progressing in the game. With respect to progression rewards, it is the carrot to get you to do just a few more clears to get the shiny.

I don't mind having non-competitive events, but I think they need to be more like gauntlet. Or like an infinite round survival mode that refreshes every 14 or 30 days. Once you lose a character in that mode, they are unavailable in that mode until the next refresh. You continue on the round that you left off, with randomly generated opponents that get progressively harder until you are facing maxed out AI every battle. No placement reward, just ISO/Survival Vault/Hero Points awarded as progressions and the best scores will obviously still be viewable in the event. Just something fun to have in the background that anyone can play and have fun in. Vault tokens allow you to win more shiny toys. Encourages having a broad based roster to play with, since you can't repeat a character from a downed team.

Buret0 · July 2015

JVReal wrote:

But if it's whoever clears the nodes to 0 'first'... then it isn't playing on your own timeframe... it's a race. Same problem, different skin.

Tell me how to get to 0 when NextClear = 0.65PrevClear?

The points are not linear, you do not get to zero.

GrumpySmurf1002 · July 2015

Buret0 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

But if it's whoever clears the nodes to 0 'first'... then it isn't playing on your own timeframe... it's a race. Same problem, different skin.

Tell me how to get to 0 when NextClear = 0.65PrevClear?

The points are not linear, you do not get to zero.

So you created a system where 'optimal' is to play continuously for 48 hours?

Buret0 · July 2015

DCUDCU wrote:

To break ties. If I knew all I had to do was beat a node 8 times in 24 hour period I could do that easily, especially if I could just replay the same exact node 8 times in a row. At least for me, I get locked in when I'm not changing opponenets and the game just comes easier for those nodes(ie, when grinding out nodes to 1 during regular PVE, ha).

Again, you only have to do it eight times if no one else does it nine times.

I suppose you could introduce a slight level multiplier for each clear. That way you aren't really making it harder for the n00bs.

If a vet's personal scaling starts a node at level 150 and it goes up by 7% for each clear (161, 172, 183, 197, 210, 225, 241, 258, etc.) it would be the same thing as having a n00b with personal scaling staring the node at 50 and then raising by 7% (54, 57, 61, 66, 70, 75, 80, 85, etc.).

I suppose that is like a double diminishing returns effect, each clear is worth fewer total points and will get harder and harder.

sc0ville · July 2015

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

Buret0 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

But if it's whoever clears the nodes to 0 'first'... then it isn't playing on your own timeframe... it's a race. Same problem, different skin.

Tell me how to get to 0 when NextClear = 0.65PrevClear?

The points are not linear, you do not get to zero.

So you created a system where 'optimal' is to play continuously for 48 hours?

Hey, with this system, maybe MPQ can get in the news when this happens:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/19/world/taiwan-gamer-death/

DCUDCU · July 2015

FWIW, I did a clear of Hulk sub 2 today in 22 minutes. So this 1 hour thing I don't know what is with that.

GurlBYE · July 2015

Nothing will fix pve grinding outside of making rewards non dependent on others placement.

Refresh, no refresh, the rewards would not be distributed differently. Instead of grinding 8 hours everyone would grind as quickly as possible because the game currently does ties based on who completed it first.

Unknown · July 2015

I suppose that is like a double diminishing returns effect, each clear is worth fewer total points and will get harder and harder.

That is a single diminishing returns effect. The points aren't worth less each time because the ranking isn't determined by points but purely by # of clears.

Buret0 · July 2015

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

Buret0 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

But if it's whoever clears the nodes to 0 'first'... then it isn't playing on your own timeframe... it's a race. Same problem, different skin.

Tell me how to get to 0 when NextClear = 0.65PrevClear?

The points are not linear, you do not get to zero.

So you created a system where 'optimal' is to play continuously for 48 hours?

Sure, but if you do add a clearing multiplier to the difficulty, each time you clear it is going to get harder for fewer and fewer points.

Plus, if you look at how the total score for the entire event increases, you'll see that you are barely moving your total score for the whole event even by the tenth grind through. If scores carry over to the next event, those last twenty clears you did for 400 points won't make much of a difference if the first clear on the next round is higher than a single clear of the first round.

And do you /really/ think that people will actually play for 24/7 to get placement in a 24 hour sub event only? Do you really think people would continue to do so?

I mean, 'optimally' the best way to currently play PvE is to hit the refreshes every eight hours and then grind to 1s. Maybe 15 to 20 people in a slice actually keep up anything close to that, and I've never seen anyone actually keep up that schedule for four days, let alone seven days.

And really, the "optimal" way to play PvE currently is to do a clear, then go back and grind the very first node to 1. Then continue to grind that single node for 1 point over and over until it is time to do another clear, then continue to grind that first node for 1 point over and over. What you are suggesting is that people would be willing to actually do this to win placement in PvE, which is clearly not happening now, so it is just irrational fear mongering to suggest that anyone would play anything like that under my suggested system.

Buret0 · July 2015

Goobady wrote:

I suppose that is like a double diminishing returns effect, each clear is worth fewer total points and will get harder and harder.

That is a single diminishing returns effect. The points aren't worth less each time because the ranking isn't determined by points but purely by # of clears.

Well, consider that:
100% clear in sub event 1 is worth 20,000
100% clear in sub event 2 is worth 22,500
100% clear in sub event 3 is worth 25,000
100% clear in sub event 4 is worth 30,000

That means that there is a lot more points available in the final round, so clears in the final round would be worth more points than clears in the earlier rounds, but because of event scaling and clear scaling, trying to make up for extra points from failing to do clears in early rounds will lead to tougher clears in the later rounds.

So that is still double diminishing returns.

Argument for removing refresh timers in PvE

Comments

Categories