Discussion: Increase Mission Completion Rewards Significantly

[Troo]

Question / Discussion: How much of an increase would it take to entice players to do more regular content?

 

Task Forces and Trials have various incentives.

 

I get leveling up as fast as possible. I have no problem with that and actually think once at 50, powerset respecs should be a thing. (you made to 50 with a Elec/Dark and wanna switch one powerset to something else for a cost of say a super respec, 10 levels, and... but I digress)

 

It would appear, and I am not judging, that many players level up asap and then it's some combination of Incarnates, weeklies or popular Task Forces.

 

DFB is probably done X times more than Shining Stars or Snake Uprising. And many of those who DFB are not likely then doing Story Arcs.

 

What would it take to have Story Arcs equal level progression and rewards available through other means?

We'd definitely be out leveling contacts and might need a more streamlined path through contacts.

(It would be cool to have a best of content path)

 

Goal of asking this question is simply introducing more content to players without having to create it as well as rewarding solo or casual play.

Couldn't data mining be done to determine the least run content and figure out a way to point players to it and reward them for doing it?

 

Thoughts?

 

 

And also once players hit 50.

 

Edited September 23 by Troo

[Apogee]

It would be nice to see merit rewards on blue and red sides be increased to be more along the lines of gold side rewards.  I would also love to see a continuation of Skulls storyline from Kings Row.

[cranebump]

I approve of these messages.

[Ukase]

I can't say. I'm one of those that does "normal content".  The only TFs I do are generally in pursuit of an accolade or because it's the weekly. 
 

DFB doesn't pay reward merits, so I only rarely do those. Once SOs became available at a vendor for level 2 characters, I no longer feel a reason to run it. 

People that do TFs tend to get less merits than people that don't - because often, a GM will give an alert, and if you're on a tf, it's a bit unlikely your teammates are going to be okay with you taking time out to kill a few Kronos. 

Now, the merits for the story arcs in atlas are low; but when you do all the arcs, you get a 20 reward merit bonus. Same for the hollows, faultline, Striga, croatoa and RWZ. 
The only way to fit all the stuff organically is to avoid tfs. 

Now, running solo is generally going to take longer, but depending on build, some players will keep up with someone doing TFs. Just depends on their teams and dps. 

I certainly wouldn't mind more incentive to do general content. But I think there's incentive enough. The only reason most folks do TFs is for badges, and 7 other people that are more likely to team with them for a certain number of missions, instead of folks bailing after the first one or two. The TFs tend to keep a team going for 30 minutes to an hour. And I think that's all that most folks are after - a team.  

[Techwright]

3 hours ago, Troo said:

Question / Discussion: How much of an increase would it take to entice players to do more regular content?

 

Task Forces and Trials have various incentives.

 

I get leveling up as fast as possible. I have no problem with that and actually think once at 50, powerset respecs should be a thing. (you made to 50 with a Elec/Dark and wanna switch one powerset to something else for a cost of say a super respec, 10 levels, and... but I digress)

 

It would appear, and I am not judging, that many players level up asap and then it's some combination of Incarnates, weeklies or popular Task Forces.

 

DFB is probably done X times more than Shining Stars or Snake Uprising. And many of those who DFB are not likely then doing Story Arcs.

 

What would it take to have Story Arcs equal level progression and rewards available through other means?

We'd definitely be out leveling contacts and might need a more streamlined path through contacts.

(It would be cool to have a best of content path)

 

Goal of asking this question is simply introducing more content to players without having to create it as well as rewarding solo or casual play.

Couldn't data mining be done to determine the least run content and figure out a way to point players to it and reward them for doing it?

 

Thoughts?

 

 

I'm one of those guilty of running the DFB repeatedly.  Even if it was the same XP as contact missions it's hard to beat.  It recruits well (usually), often restocks the team quickly after a run, and it is compact.  That is, you're not running from one part of a zone map to another, or worse, to another zone.  So the efficiency of travel plays to your favor.  I get a nice set of 4 bonuses that stay with my character until level 22, and there are several trainers within the trial.  I could wish for a vendor or two, but it's still pretty sweet in it's efficiency. 

 

In contrast, Atlas Park contact missions are mostly not efficient, and the Shining Star ones are exceptionally buggy.  I point this out because, first we have notably lower XP, then we waste time running all over the place, even having to do some missons where we assume different personas and are restricted to slower movements.  Lack of matching reward and reduced efficiency of travel will play heavily against doing the missions, at least until DFB and DIB are exhausted.

 

Do I have a plan?  I have part of a plan.  Set an automated checkbox system that will reward a substantial XP bonus only upon completion of a contact's entire arc, regardless of what position one holds on a team.  Give enough of an XP bonus to closely offset a full run through DFB.  Set termination of arc XP bonuses to level 22, the point at which the DFB temporary rewards terminate. (I think DIB's temp rewards also terminate at 22.)  That should better match DFB, and get the player to complete what they started, rather than flitting around to various things for XP.  If they do that, they'll still get the mission XP, just not the arc bonus.  This also would mean that going back at level 50 to do Atlas contact arcs would not reward the bonus XP because one has already leveled past the cut-off point.   (I'm not sure how S.T.A.R.T. XP bonuses would play into this, as I've not thought that far into this partial plan.)

 

 

 

 

[Glacier Peak]

I have been amassing Reward Merits in anticipation for the October time period for the Lord Recluse mini pet. It's 2006 Reward Merits from Luna. Over the past two months, I've played sporadically, and acquired around 1700 Reward Merits. I'll probably keep doing Weekly Strike Targets, Hamidon Raids, and Labyrinth runs. Then when the Halloween event releases, I'll gain even more Reward Merits. It's about what I expect for my time and effort. I don't need any XP or inf, so that's what I collect.

[Apogee]

2 hours ago, Techwright said:

In contrast, Atlas Park contact missions are mostly not efficient, and the Shining Star ones are exceptionally buggy.  I point this out because, first we have notably lower XP, then we waste time running all over the place, even having to do some missons where we assume different personas and are restricted to slower movements.  Lack of matching reward and reduced efficiency of travel will play heavily against doing the missions, at least until DFB and DIB are exhausted.

 

What bugs have you run into on Twinshot's story arc?  The nice thing about doing that arc is it, along with Habashy's story, nets you a nice badge and 20 merits

Edited September 24 by Apogee

[wesslen]

7 hours ago, Troo said:

And many of those who DFB are not likely then doing Story Arcs.

 

 

I don't think the assumption that "plays DFB" = "likely won't play regular missions later" is correct.

 

It certainly doesn't apply to me. I think the game is the most fun in the level 20-45 range, and it's pretty boring in the first 5-10 levels, depending on powerset. I want to get to the good part as soon as possible, and that means DFB+Positron. Once enough powers are available that the character works properly, I'm happy to play missions.

Edited September 24 by wesslen

[MoonSheep]

hmm, i’m not sure whether it‘s the lack of rewards putting people off or not knowing which mission arcs are the exciting ones - plus it’s easier to form a TF as there’s a handy list of them and you can LFG to the contact. people also roughly know how long a TF takes, and the AVs make things more exciting

 

i agree with you that people playing missions more would be great, i’d say:

 

- put a number of signature arcs on the LFG window each month with bonus merits displayed and estimated time to complete

- enhance a few bosses to become AVs in the arc 

- up the reward for kill all mission completes (otherwise people will just ghost everything)

[Troo]

17 hours ago, wesslen said:

It certainly doesn't apply to me. I think the game is the most fun in the level 20-45 range, and it's pretty boring in the first 5-10 levels, depending on powerset. I want to get to the good part as soon as possible, and that means DFB+Positron. Once enough powers are available that the character works properly, I'm happy to play missions.

 

Totally fair point.

 

 

Edited September 24 by Troo

[ZemX]

9 hours ago, Techwright said:

Set an automated checkbox system that will reward a substantial XP bonus only upon completion of a contact's entire arc, regardless of what position one holds on a team.

 

Or just give everybody on the team the story arc completion bonus XP and merits that are already given to the story arc owner upon completion of the final mission of the arc.

 

I don't think your checkbox system is necessary.  I get that it's an attempt to make sure everyone on the team has earned the rewards but, counterpoint: So what?  Main concern is really avoiding any exploits and in this case, I don't see any that are worth doing when one can just farm more effectively by other means.  The main limiting factor in farming that last mission is getting that last mission.  Someone still has to run through the arc.  At best you could have a group individually solo the same arc in parallel up to the last mission and then collectively do the last mission as many times as there are people on the team but again.... you could just farm.  And that exploit requires people to all be the same level and get the same arc.  It's almost a leveling compact.   Not something anyone really needs to worry about.

 

Story Arc awards are already set less than Trial and Task Forces.  The formula for merits, for example, is something like 60% the merits of a same length Task Force.  I think that could even be bumped up to 80% without really discouraging anyone from running TFs, especially the WSTs.

 

7 hours ago, wesslen said:

I don't think the assumption that "plays DFB" = "likely won't play regular missions later" is correct.

 

It's more of an observation than an assumption.  You and I might be willing to do Story Arcs but anyone watching LFG can see people do orders of magnitude more DFBs than they advertise for story arc teams.  DFB is a gateway to Posi and then you're off to the TF races.  That's for people who don't just hop on a farm or PI radio straight-away of course.   Boosting TEAM awards for Story Arcs is an obvious solution to encourage more diversity of content being run by teams.

[Luminara]

It's not the rewards or lack thereof that deter players, it's the design of the arcs.  They were designed to waste time.  Patrols exist solely as filler, as a time waster.  They never spawn an ambush.  They never spawn enemies around the call boxes.  They could literally be replaced by 5 minutes of standing next to the contact and checking prices on the market and it wouldn't change anything.  Objectives are at the end of the mission just to force the player to spend a couple of minutes to reach them.  Mission doors are randomized only to prevent players from going straight to them.  Story arcs design uses so much padding and filler, like sending you to multiple zones, scattering hostages across eight floors instead of putting them in a single room, making you click fifteen different glowies to find the "right" one, FedExes with as much purpose as patrols, hunts, defeat alls, missions so short that it took longer to reach them than to complete them, that they're three times as long as they should be and twice as long as many people consider tolerable.

 

The popular *Fs and select scanner/paper missions avoid or minimize design elements like those.  Most story arcs, like the unpopular *Fs, generally don't.

 

Some of us are okay with running story arcs, because we have time to waste, we like using travel powers and crossing zones and sometimes even loitering next a call box to watch the sun set can feel rewarding.  For a lot of players, though, being asked to spend 10 out of every 15 minutes twiddling thumbs, in a combat-oriented action MMORPG, is where they've drawn their line because the combat is what they're here for.  All the rewards in the world aren't going to drag them out of their TF > TF > TF routine.  They're doing it that way because they're getting to the action faster and more entertained than they would be if they were reading through Azuria's latest excuse for losing an artifact and asking them to deliver something to someone 3 zones away.

[Greycat]

6 minutes ago, Luminara said:

  Patrols exist solely as filler, as a time waster.  They never spawn an ambush.

 

... or they may, but nobody knows where they spawn and they take forever to saunter across the map and reach the player.

 

They may be the smartest NPCs in the game.  "You want us to ambush them? All right..." *starts walking the long way through Indy Port.* "Sorry, they weren't there when we showed up. Yeah, crazy how that keeps happening."

[tidge]

I often try to run content organically (that is, at level) but if I was committed to that and tried to recruit teammates, it is an almost certain guarantee that I'd out-level some fraction of the content I intend to run. Like others, I have disabled earning XP to get the "organic" feel, but often I'm just going through Ouroboros (or Schweinzer/Haskell) to get to specific content.

 

An improved set of rewards for going through Ouroboros, or organic play-thru, isn't something I need. Often when I am running low-level Ouroboros content I can turn up the spawn sizes to get more rewards (XP, Inf, drops) that way.

 

IIRC, there are some rewards (e.g. temp powers like Peebles' Ring?) that are better if achieved through organic play, which always struck a sour note with me.

 

I am tempted to write something like: "Learning the Lore is its own reward"... but because of choices the Live Devs made, much of the Lore is a hot mess. I do think that solo missions at-level can help players learn many things about their own powers, and how certain enemies behave (AI, special resistances, and with powers like debuffs) but I don't know that such knowledge can actually be learned, or if learned how useful it could be (see the bold reactions to FREEM! for example)

[ZemX]

51 minutes ago, Luminara said:

It's not the rewards or lack thereof that deter players, it's the design of the arcs.

 

That design isn't changing.  Or it already did in newer arcs vs. older ones.   What the rewards do is pay us off for putting up with that stuff.  And it works.  People do plenty of older TFs with zone hopping and defeat alls, even when they're not the WSTs (but yeah, especially when they are).

 

My hope though is that offering team rewards for arcs is a simple enough change that even if it doesn't work tremendously well, at least didn't cost anyone a lot of effort.

 

Another thing that could be done.  Not sure if this is the case or not, but the merit reward that is offered for running a story arc as a flashback should be comparable to TFs in terms of merits/hr and XP.  Given the commitment is the same from the team, reward should be the same formula.  It might be fun to see more people running flashbacks like alternatives to TFs.  I see people do this only rarely. 

[Techwright]

20 hours ago, Apogee said:

 

What bugs have you run into on Twinshot's story arc?  The nice thing about doing that arc is it, along with Habashy's story, nets you a nice badge and 20 merits

I've not run it in a few years now, but immediately what comes to mind are the characters running to you then flittering around you like a storm of moths to a porch light.

 

12 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

Or just give everybody on the team the story arc completion bonus XP and merits that are already given to the story arc owner upon completion of the final mission of the arc.

 

I don't think your checkbox system is necessary.  I get that it's an attempt to make sure everyone on the team has earned the rewards but, counterpoint: So what?  Main concern is really avoiding any exploits and in this case, I don't see any that are worth doing when one can just farm more effectively by other means.  The main limiting factor in farming that last mission is getting that last mission.  Someone still has to run through the arc.  At best you could have a group individually solo the same arc in parallel up to the last mission and then collectively do the last mission as many times as there are people on the team but again.... you could just farm.  And that exploit requires people to all be the same level and get the same arc.  It's almost a leveling compact.   Not something anyone really needs to worry about.

 

Story Arc awards are already set less than Trial and Task Forces.  The formula for merits, for example, is something like 60% the merits of a same length Task Force.  I think that could even be bumped up to 80% without really discouraging anyone from running TFs, especially the WSTs.

 

 

It's more of an observation than an assumption.  You and I might be willing to do Story Arcs but anyone watching LFG can see people do orders of magnitude more DFBs than they advertise for story arc teams.  DFB is a gateway to Posi and then you're off to the TF races.  That's for people who don't just hop on a farm or PI radio straight-away of course.   Boosting TEAM awards for Story Arcs is an obvious solution to encourage more diversity of content being run by teams.

Your first sentence has merit. 

 

I'm not sure I explained the concept very well, judging by your response.  I'm not talking about farming any last missions.  When I mentioned a hypothetical checkbox system, I was referring to it being applied to every character.  If character A is running the arc, and character B joins on the second mission and stays to the end, then B gets credit for each mission run, but doesn't get the suggested arc reward because B missed the first mission.  However, if B ran the first mission at another time, be it solo or with another team, then all the boxes are checked and character B gets the arc rewards.  For that character, they'd actually drop once all the boxes are checked, so they may receive their reward in the middle of a second team's attempt at the arc.  As I said, it's part of a plan.  

 

 

10 hours ago, Luminara said:

It's not the rewards or lack thereof that deter players, it's the design of the arcs.  They were designed to waste time.  Patrols exist solely as filler, as a time waster.  They never spawn an ambush.  They never spawn enemies around the call boxes.  They could literally be replaced by 5 minutes of standing next to the contact and checking prices on the market and it wouldn't change anything.  Objectives are at the end of the mission just to force the player to spend a couple of minutes to reach them.  Mission doors are randomized only to prevent players from going straight to them.  Story arcs design uses so much padding and filler, like sending you to multiple zones, scattering hostages across eight floors instead of putting them in a single room, making you click fifteen different glowies to find the "right" one,

 

You do make a good point.  I'd love to see patrols with significant attacks (spawned close to the call box), hopefully randomized.  I'd like the call boxes to be randomized as well.

You make a point regarding the "padding and filler", but if I were in the NPCs shoes,  separating hostages and having decoys for my McGuffin of the Day would be exactly how I'd operate. 

Edited September 25 by Techwright

[Jacke]

4 hours ago, Luminara said:

It's not the rewards or lack thereof that deter players, it's the design of the arcs.  They were designed to waste time.

 

I'd never quite thought about it that way, but that is so true.

 

I've been around I've done a lot of the traditional content.  I have a Completist Toon lingering in the L20-L24 range, so I know the content below that in detail both Blueside and Redside.  Another Goldside Completist I finished that L1 to L20 Content.  Going Blueside to Redside to Goldside you see the quality of the content evolve.

 

Also, this isn't something that's likely to change.  There's only so much Dev time to do stuff and fixing the time-wasting of the original content can't be high on their list.  There's also the thought that this is the way City was back in the day and to change it would effectively remove that content from Players.  It may be time-wasting, but it's not completely bad.

 

I think it's more likely we'll see more new Contacts and arcs added to various level ranges rather than changes to the original ones.

 

The arcs give out Reward Merits when run Flashback.  Maybe change it to give those Reward Merits when run normally.  And make sure arcs can't be out-levelled (I know that's supposed to be fixed, but I've got my doubts).

 

As to when we'll see changes, I'd say that'll happen sometime after contact Wes Schnabel is fixed (get him, do everything possible at Level 9 and then again at Level 10, because he won't talk to the Players L11 and up).
https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Wes_Schnabel

[Troo]

8 hours ago, Luminara said:

It's not the rewards or lack thereof that deter players, it's the design of the arcs.  They were designed to waste time.

 

I do not completely agree with this. I agree some.

Yes, absolutely the game used to take a lot longer but it was not designed to 'waste time'. We paid for the game upfront and there was a monthly subscription. The goal at that point I would argue was engagement.

Rather than one mission type we had a variety of them. "Missions give the game variety and depth. They offer an alternative to merely wandering the streets looking for thugs who are asking for trouble."

 

8 hours ago, Luminara said:

All the rewards in the world aren't going to drag them out of their TF > TF > TF routine.

 

Oh geez, we both know if there was a level 40-50 single regular mission that could be done solo and offered a level for completion.. it would be more popular than it is currently.

 

Edited September 25 by Troo
not advocating for one level per mission completion

[Yomo Kimyata]

On 9/23/2024 at 6:59 PM, Troo said:

Question / Discussion: How much of an increase would it take to entice players to do more regular content?

nope.  I’m not going to support any of you whiny kids who want moar.  How much of a penalty should we enact on those who don’t do what we want?  I’m hoping for 100%

[UltraAlt]

20 hours ago, Apogee said:

What bugs have you run into on Twinshot's story arc?  The nice thing about doing that arc is it, along with Habashy's story, nets you a nice badge and 20 merits

 

I hate both those arcs.

I would rather just DFB past them or follow my character's origin contact arcs.

[Troo]

1 minute ago, UltraAlt said:

 

I hate both those arcs.

I would rather just DFB past them or follow my character's origin contact arcs.

 

Shining Stars.. I'd rather stub a toe.

 

It would be nice to have one path 0-30 that sorta closely matched current progression without the training wheels.

[Luminara]

35 minutes ago, Troo said:

Yes, absolutely the game used to take a lot longer but it was not designed to 'waste time'. We paid for the game upfront and there was a monthly subscription. The goal at that point I would argue was engagement.

You're conflating immersion with engagement.  They aren't the same.  Yes, some of the design elements in story arcs and missions are immersive, but they aren't engaging.  If they were, players would be doing them.

 

Engagement isn't an office map with 17 floors and nothing, not even an NPC, on 9 of those floors.  A FedEx quest that doesn't introduce a player to a new contact or area or enemy or something isn't engagement, it's extension.  If call boxes were supposed to be engaging, they'd do something other than make players crisscross zones for several minutes.  Hunt mission after hunt mission doesn't appear to provide engagement for players, but annoyance.  Enormous outdoor maps with four glowies to find, no direction little purpose beyond keeping the player busy for a few extra minutes hasn't engaged people, it's frustrated them.  All of those doors that lead to empty 12' square rooms in tech labs and offices aren't engagement, they're a delay.

 

If you look at what the engine can and can't do, you can tell that it wasn't built for engagement.  We don't solve puzzles by moving crates around or touching colored panels.  We don't follow trails and find clues.  We aren't fiddling with valves or levers to open and close things.  We don't even have animations linked to click activities like operating a computer or searching a chest, despite those animations being in the game.  All of the engagement that Cryptic created was in combat.  They didn't build engagement into it beyond that.  We're hitting things, or we're staring at progress bars or clicking through text boxes until we can hit things.  We're traveling to the next mission to hit things.  We're slogging through the FedExes and talk-tos and empty rooms to hit things.

 

What Cryptic did was take short stories and try to turn them into novels, but instead of adding sentences and paragraphs, they added monosyllabic grunts and swaths of blank space.  Don't make an arc with 5 missions, split up some of those missions, add a talk-to, add a hunt, add a FedEx, send them to a couple of different zones, make it fifteen missions that way.  Slow the player down.  Drag it out.  Yes, that is wasting time.  And it was deliberate.  It gave them time to work and kept players subbed longer between Issues.

[lemming]

17 minutes ago, Luminara said:

A FedEx quest that doesn't introduce a player to a new contact or area or enemy or something isn't engagement, it's extension.

It's why I appreciate those spots in the new mission arcs where you can say "I'm on a team, let's just get to the point" bits.

[Owl Girl]

story arcs are fun when the writing is decent and when solo, but teams move too fast to get a chance to really appreciate things. the problem isn't that the rewards are too low on regular contacts, it's that the rewards for power leveling are just too high...

[Troo]

49 minutes ago, Luminara said:

You're conflating immersion with engagement.  They aren't the same.  Yes, some of the design elements in story arcs and missions are immersive, but they aren't engaging.  If they were, players would be doing them.

 

Engagement isn't an office map with 17 floors and nothing, not even an NPC, on 9 of those floors.  A FedEx quest that doesn't introduce a player to a new contact or area or enemy or something isn't engagement, it's extension.  If call boxes were supposed to be engaging, they'd do something other than make players crisscross zones for several minutes.  Hunt mission after hunt mission doesn't appear to provide engagement for players, but annoyance.  Enormous outdoor maps with four glowies to find, no direction little purpose beyond keeping the player busy for a few extra minutes hasn't engaged people, it's frustrated them.  All of those doors that lead to empty 12' square rooms in tech labs and offices aren't engagement, they're a delay.

 

If you look at what the engine can and can't do, you can tell that it wasn't built for engagement.  We don't solve puzzles by moving crates around or touching colored panels.  We don't follow trails and find clues.  We aren't fiddling with valves or levers to open and close things.  We don't even have animations linked to click activities like operating a computer or searching a chest, despite those animations being in the game.  All of the engagement that Cryptic created was in combat.  They didn't build engagement into it beyond that.  We're hitting things, or we're staring at progress bars or clicking through text boxes until we can hit things.  We're traveling to the next mission to hit things.  We're slogging through the FedExes and talk-tos and empty rooms to hit things.

 

What Cryptic did was take short stories and try to turn them into novels, but instead of adding sentences and paragraphs, they added monosyllabic grunts and swaths of blank space.  Don't make an arc with 5 missions, split up some of those missions, add a talk-to, add a hunt, add a FedEx, send them to a couple of different zones, make it fifteen missions that way.  Slow the player down.  Drag it out.  Yes, that is wasting time.  And it was deliberate.  It gave them time to work and kept players subbed longer between Issues.

 

You didn't think that diatribe was going to change my opinion, did you?

 

If you feel I used the wrong word, feel free to use your word. I believe I used the word I meant to, but whatev..

 

3 hours ago, Troo said:

Yes, absolutely the game used to take a lot longer but it was not designed to 'waste time'. We paid for the game upfront and there was a monthly subscription. The goal at that point I would argue was engagement immersion.

Rather than one mission type we had a variety of them. "Missions give the game variety and depth. They offer an alternative to merely wandering the streets looking for thugs who are asking for trouble."

 

And sweet baby beelzebub why does @Luminara even play if they think it's so terrible.