The Problem With Community Based Event Progression

[technophilly]

Who am I?

I would call myself a committed casual warframe player.  I play roughly week-in-week-out, but not day-in-day-out.  Raptr accout for time logs: http://raptr.com/technophilly/games.

 

Note: Times based on CST (GMT-6)

Note2: All spoiler tags contain relevant non-spoiler content, they were used purely for formatting.  Sorry for the wonky spoiler formatting, I wanted to fully express my thoughts and it became a wall of text, so I added spoiler tags so that my post isn't a mile long on the page (and it still ended up fairly long on the page with all of them collapsed).

 

Abstract

This post discusses the event architecture used by DE in the recent operation "The Tubemen of Regor".  I begin by explaining my personal situation and frustration.  I then talk about why I believe the event architecture was flawed.  I discuss a possible way that players who were impared by this flawed architecture could be compensated should DE agree that the event was significantly flawed.  I end with a statement offering suggestions for future events.

 

Context (this a QQish section, if you don't care the last spoiler tag contains most of my thoughts relevant to the rest of the post)

Early last week when DE announced the two events for the upcoming weekend I was excited.  The two events were the tactical alert, "Den of Kubrow," and the operation, "Tubemen of Regor."  I noted the different rewards for each event and decided that I wanted the rewards from both.  The problem arose that I was unsure if was going to be able to complete both events due to time constraints from schoolwork.  However, I decided that I would be able to complete both events, "Den of Kubrow" over the weekend (since it had an earlier deadline) and "Tubemen of Regor" during the early part of the week.

I was able to complete "Den of Kubrow" over the weekend and was able to complete my first invasion for "Tubemen of Regor" Sunday night.  Due to coursework I was only able to fit a single invasion in Monday night, and planned on completing the last two on Tuesday.  I was able to fit in completing my third invasion Tuesday during the afternoon (around 3-3:30pm) between finals and expected to be able to complete the event as I would be free late Tuesday night and Wednesday morning.

After I completed the course project (~10pm) I was excited to see what the new invasion would be only to find out the same one was still going on and was at about 30%-70%.  Defeated and figuring it would complete overnight I went to bed and woke up early to find the invasion at 20%-80% with only a few hours left.  Realizing I could no longer complete the event I was disheartened.

Since then I learned through hearsay that apparently people were intentionally running missions to hold up the invasions completing toward the end of the event.  Regardless if this is true or not my frustration came from making time for the game to participate in the event, but not being able to based on factors out of my control (community activity levels, potentially griefers, etc.).  I would not necessarily ask that players are always able to make event progress, just that a player can make progress in a manner that can be planned around.

 

Community-Based Progress

Event Accessibility During Event Time (consistent availability to make event progress during event time)

I want to begin this section by defining what I don't think is flawed.  I think that it is amazing that DE wants to involve the player base in deciding what happens in a lore event.  I believe that if the event is held correctly it is a great addition to the game.  However, I believe that it is unfair that being able to make progress in the event is not consistent and dependable.

Rewards were awarded based upon the net number of completed invasion where a player fully supported one side of the conflict during the invasion.  The net number of completed invasion is defined as: |(# of times player fully supported Nef Anyo) - (# of times player fully supported Alad V)|.  Fully supporting one side of the conflict during an invasion is defined as: |(# of times player completed the mission for Nef Anyo) - (# of times player completed the mission for Alad V).  Invasions completing was based upon the mission completion rate of the entire community while Missions completing was based upon the completion of a single player (or a small group of players). Note: the "|" character is representing absolute value.

The result of this system is that the invasions that occurred during peak user time (the beginning of the event) lasted a significantly less amount of time than the invasions that did not occur during peak player time.  This put players who did not play during peak player time at a disadvantage to those who played during peak player time.  The players who did not play at peak player time were still playing during valid event time, however, due to not playing at peak time the amount of progress they could make in a single session was reduced.  A player playing for 8 hours the first day of the event could have easily completed the event while a player playing for the last 8 hours of the event would have had no hope of completing the event, but both players played the same amount during valid event time.

 

I believe that this is inherently unfair.  A player who wants to invest time into an event should be able to do so consistently throughout the event, not just when everyone else is playing.

 

Unbounded Invasions

Another flaw with the system is that if the sides were close the system allowed for there to be less than 4 invasions to complete.  If both sides of the operation were dead even, no one would have ever won.

 

Compensation

Disclaimer

Compensation is a different argument from the one above and would only occur if DE felt both that the way the event was structured was flawed and that it was significantly flawed that they must compensate the community.

 

Proposed Compensation

If and only if the above section were agreed upon, I would recommend that all players with 3/4 completions would receive a blueprint for the Karak Wraith.

 

Why 3/4?

I would recommend that only players with 3/4 completions receive it because offering the blueprint is still offering players exclusive access into a club (owners of the Karak Wraith) that they failed to get into.  Attaining the Karak Wraith required completing 12 missions at specific times during the week. if a player completed 9 missions at specific times during the week and also wants to invest the additional time to gather the resources for it and invest the time to build it I feel that it a reasonable investment in the game to receive the reward that those who were able to complete 3 more missions receive.

 

Why a blueprint?

I would recommend a blueprint for the Karak Wraith because it adds a penalty for not having met the standard set by the event.  First a player does not get the inventory slot or the Orokin Catalyst that the player who fully completed the event did receive (I am aware that players technically did not receive an Orokin Catalyst, however, to my knowledge the event reward already has one applied to it).  Additionally, a blueprint keeps people playing Warframe.  A blueprint requires players to continue playing the game to acquire the resources to build it, which is a win for DE.

 

Future Events

In this section I would like to address three potential solutions for the problem I addressed when considering future events.  Some of them conflict or would cause adverse results if combined.  I am not advising that all of these be done, nor am I saying that all of these are perfect.  These ideas are seed ideas to get creative ideas about solving the problem going.

 

Weapon Blueprints

In the future offer the blueprint for whichever weapon wins as a discount reward for ~75% of the event points that the weapon requires for reasons that I stated in the blueprint section of Compensation.

 

Timeboxing the Invasions/Multiple Nodes

Secondly, as many players have already suggested, time box the invasions.  This means that there is a set level of accessibility toward making progress on the event throughout the entire event.  On a similar note, having more invasions occur simultaneously would also help.

 

Differentiating Player Score from Event Score

Third, differentiate between player score and event score.  Allow the players to do a certain number of missions for one side or the other to receive the rewards.  Yet, have the lore result from the event be based upon number of invasion wins for either side.  This means that players always have accessibility to make meaningful progress on the event, but the lore decision is still made by the community at large.

 

Feedback

I am more than open to discussion, however, please keep it productive.  Quoting what you are responding to always helps.  I have been posting in and reading many of these threads throughout the day and they quickly devolve into: "I didn't complete the event because X, this is BS, HALP!", "Well you suck", "But it's not my fault", "But you suck", "But..."  This post is an attempt to have a meaningful discussion on the matter.

[pooptaco]

Points well taken.  I would add a few thoughts:

 

1. Keep in mind, events (some events more than others) tend to reward players for time spent playing the game.  There's always going to be players who, fairly or unfairly, just don't have time to complete them.

 

2. That said, this event could have benefitted a lot from the typical invasion-style scaling, where if the score stagnates for too long, it starts slipping in-favor of the winning side.  That would have ensured more conflicts, more rewards, more completion, and even more competition between factions.  Everybody wins in that scenario.

 

3. Warlords and alliance leaders pretend they're influential in any/all events that require splitting the community.  I remember some of the biggest clans/alliances swearing up-and-down that they were going to single-handedly win Gradivus in favor of the Corpus.  And we all know how that turned out.  Take it with a grain of salt, and realize that ultimately all the posturing and promising will basically fade-out into white-noise over time.

 

My point 1. is my only major disagreement here.  2. would have helped, had they implimented it, and 3. is just for clarification (nothing we do can stop people from colluding, especially in an event that is at best, a vote, and at worst, could arguably require collusion.)

 

I'm very sorry you didn't get your event reward.  But it'd set a bad precident if DE started capitulating rewards in cases where things actually worked-as-intended.  Just look at the latest update notes.  Almost all the feedback there is either people patting themselves on the back for getting the wraith they wanted, or complaining/whining/arguing that, for some reason or other, they should either receive the opposite reward, or receive the proper reward because "Warframe just bugged and I didn't get it, and here's my screenshot as proof, but it doesn't contain any account-identifiable info whatsoever."

 

I like to assume good faith in things like this, but we can all agree... some, many, or most of those latter posts are not in good faith.  Probably some people didn't get the reward they should have.  And probably some people will get rewards they shouldn't have, by just aggressively insisting on forums/tickets/etc that Warframe/DE "somehow didn't log their progress."

 

But we see this every event.  "I didn't understand the rules."  "Network bugs kept me from participating in an entirely solo-able event, despite remaining signed-in the whole time."  "My kubrow ate my Vandal."  It's hard to know who to believe with stuff like that, and I don't envy DE the task of needing/wanting to make a good-faith effort to please the most people. :(

Edited May 20, 2015 by pooptaco

[technophilly]

Thanks for the response, I appreciate your sincerity and kindness.

 

1. Keep in mind, events (some events more than others) tend to reward players for time spent playing the game.  There's always going to be players who, fairly or unfairly, just don't have time to complete them.

...

My point 1. is my only major disagreement here.  2. would have helped, had they implimented it, and 3. is just for clarification (nothing we do can stop people from colluding, especially in an event that is at best, a vote, and at worst, could arguably require collusion.)

...

But it'd set a bad precident if DE started capitulating rewards in cases where things actually worked-as-intended. 

 

I agree. Receiving the reward due to my frustrations was really an auxiliary thing.  I was more concerned with the event structure being awkward.  I merely included my own story for credibility and transparency.

 

I like to assume good faith in things like this, but we can all agree... some, many, or most of those latter posts are not in good faith.  Probably some people didn't get the reward they should have.  And probably some people will get rewards they shouldn't have, by just aggressively insisting on forums/tickets/etc that Warframe/DE "somehow didn't log their progress."

 

But we see this every event.  "I didn't understand the rules."  "Network bugs kept me from participating in an entirely solo-able event, despite remaining signed-in the whole time."  "My kubrow ate my Vandal."  It's hard to know who to believe with stuff like that, and I don't envy DE the task of needing/wanting to make a good-faith effort to please the most 

 

Again I agree.  It is a problem every game faces.  I do sincerely hope that DE learns how to properly run an event though, because apparently their previous events haven't gone very well.

Edited May 20, 2015 by technophilly

[ArchPhaeton]

I didn't have any problems with this event mechanism. It was rather a break from some other hardcore "encore" tac alert-oriented events, like when we had to do 100 runs for either grineer or corpus back at gravidus... They gave plenty of time and the mission was rather easy, doing 1 battle a day I managed to cover it.

 

Like the previous guy said they compensate you for wasting your lifetime in the game. Definitely some of us won't be able to complete everything, it happened to me in the eyes of blight event where i missed the last tier of rewards. Sorry to hear your loss but that's just how it goes :\

[GrandClapper]

Thats mmos. Stop whining. This thread is useless. I had to stay up late one night to get this event done. Literally had just enough time to do the 4 runs because of work and family and a vacation over the weekend. I even pissed my wife off one day cuz i sat down and did the runs. Balance life and recreation. Dont whine that its not fair cuz they didnt post the event on your time schedule.

[technophilly]

I didn't have any problems with this event mechanism. It was rather a break from some other hardcore "encore" tac alert-oriented events, like when we had to do 100 runs for either grineer or corpus back at gravidus... They gave plenty of time and the mission was rather easy, doing 1 battle a day I managed to cover it.

 

I agree that the event was definitely doable and that this event was better than what I've heard of the past events.  That said just because something is better doesn't mean it can't be improved further :)

[technophilly]

Thats mmos. Stop whining. This thread is useless. I had to stay up late one night to get this event done. Literally had just enough time to do the 4 runs because of work and family and a vacation over the weekend. I even &!$$ed my wife off one day cuz i sat down and did the runs. Balance life and recreation. Dont whine that its not fair cuz they didnt post the event on your time schedule.

 

I'm sorry you perceived this as whining.  I was attempting to avoid sounding whiny.  The goal was to start a discussion about how such an event might be able to be done better, not to get flamed.  And "That's mmos," but just because this is how it has been done doesn't mean that it can't be done better.  All I asked for was this:

 

Context (this a QQish section, if you don't care the last spoiler tag contains most of my thoughts relevant to the rest of the post)

...

I would not necessarily ask that players are always able to make event progress, just that a player can make progress in a manner that can be planned around.

 

 

My main problem with the event was that I could not plan around when new invasions would be available, it was sporadic and aggravating.

[BioDefault]

Thats mmos. Stop whining. This thread is useless. I had to stay up late one night to get this event done. Literally had just enough time to do the 4 runs because of work and family and a vacation over the weekend. I even &!$$ed my wife off one day cuz i sat down and did the runs. Balance life and recreation. Dont whine that its not fair cuz they didnt post the event on your time schedule.

You're just okay with it because of the large amount of effort you put into it, and the fact you actually got it.

Stop trying to be cool in this situation, nobody cares.

People simply got screwed over because they put it off, then slapped in the face by the 40 hour conflict durations.