**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.

General Game Feedback [Merged Threads]

17778808283118

Comments

  • Amadeo01Amadeo01 Posts: 212 ★★★
    Haji_Saab said:

    Pro player quality of life changes that can be done right away with immediate impact.
    1. Remove all mastery change costs. Once you buy the mastery you can change it unit free moving forward.
    2. AQ 30 min timers- No brainer can be done right away
    3. Remove AQ costs period. This would be pro player and resolve all of the issues at once.
    4. More 5 star sig availability. I understand 6 star sig stones are rare but we have moved backwards in terms of 5 star sig availability.
    5. Remove 2014-2016 champions from 6 star basics. Most are garbage and you can repackage them in a deal for people who want to collect every champion.

    1, 3 and 4 are all QoL pro skill pro player suggestions. Would like to see them asap.
    Especially points 1 and 3. That should take zero effort. Heck, if they argue that removing AQ costs messes with the economy or whatever, at LEAST the mastery point thing shouldn't at all.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,337 Guardian
    Wozzy101 said:

    Why not re-release Act 1-5 as an alternate mode. Almost variant of it. Keep everything the same but with the health pools at 200% - 500% more than currently. No extra attack than is already in place. Gate the content so act 1 and 2 are only up to 2* champs.
    Act 3 up to 3* champs. Act 4 up to 4* champs and Act 5 up to 5*
    Would it take that long to literally take content already made and just up the health pools of defenders? I think this would give some fun content to play that challenging. Give a reason to break out some of those 3 and 4* champs again. And also give content that can continuously be played so we don’t have to wait months and months on end for a new Act or Variant to play. Some may hate this idea but you don’t need to play if you don’t want to and it gives a huge influx of content to play through.

    In principle, this is a variation on the theme many players have suggested in various forms, which I'm generally referring to as "challenge mode." Take existing content, add some form of additional challenge to it, and allow players to run it for ancillary rewards. However, if the devs are serious about doing something like this, I would like them to spend time thinking about it and making a mode that is challenging, rewarding to play (not necessarily raining in loot) and most importantly extensible. Absolutely nothing we do will indefinitely be fun and entertaining. The system has to be designed in such a way that small tweaks don't look like small tweaks, and can continue to challenge players into the future.

    Quick and dirty implementations are quick, but they are also dirty in the sense that they can set expectations in a particular direction and make it much more difficult to get the better version. Inertia can be the enemy of creativity. So while something like you suggest might be an interesting mode, I would prefer if it shows up within a larger system that can accommodate a wider range of challenges from the beginning. Even if it takes longer to develop.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,123 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Wozzy101 said:

    Why not re-release Act 1-5 as an alternate mode. Almost variant of it. Keep everything the same but with the health pools at 200% - 500% more than currently. No extra attack than is already in place. Gate the content so act 1 and 2 are only up to 2* champs.
    Act 3 up to 3* champs. Act 4 up to 4* champs and Act 5 up to 5*
    Would it take that long to literally take content already made and just up the health pools of defenders? I think this would give some fun content to play that challenging. Give a reason to break out some of those 3 and 4* champs again. And also give content that can continuously be played so we don’t have to wait months and months on end for a new Act or Variant to play. Some may hate this idea but you don’t need to play if you don’t want to and it gives a huge influx of content to play through.

    In principle, this is a variation on the theme many players have suggested in various forms, which I'm generally referring to as "challenge mode." Take existing content, add some form of additional challenge to it, and allow players to run it for ancillary rewards. However, if the devs are serious about doing something like this, I would like them to spend time thinking about it and making a mode that is challenging, rewarding to play (not necessarily raining in loot) and most importantly extensible. Absolutely nothing we do will indefinitely be fun and entertaining. The system has to be designed in such a way that small tweaks don't look like small tweaks, and can continue to challenge players into the future.

    Quick and dirty implementations are quick, but they are also dirty in the sense that they can set expectations in a particular direction and make it much more difficult to get the better version. Inertia can be the enemy of creativity. So while something like you suggest might be an interesting mode, I would prefer if it shows up within a larger system that can accommodate a wider range of challenges from the beginning. Even if it takes longer to develop.
    I suppose if they were going in that direction, they might as well go the way of selecting Difficulty. (Beginner, Normal, Expert, eg.)
  • EtjamaEtjama Posts: 7,981 ★★★★★
    So I posted this on another thread and was told to put it here. Here's the thing. A lot of people keep saying that stuff in Act 6 needs nerfed like Sinister, The Champion, DarkHawk, etc. I don't think that's the cade. An alternate solution to kill 2 birds with one stone is to keep buffing old and outdated champs. When you update them, add stuff into their kit that allows them to counter the crazy fights in Act 6. This would work so well because the main problem with Act 6 is that so much of it isn't doable without the right champ. Then you're just sitting there, waiting for that champ to come along. The champs you need are so specific that it's really aggravating. We don't need simpler problems, but more solitions. By buffing the old champs to counter stuff in Act 6, you're making sure that more people have counters and it becomes about skill rather than your crystal pulls. Everyone's been accumulating these old, outdated champs for so long that counters will be more available, rather than occasionally adding counters in with new champ's kits that could take months or years to get. This even benefits the Endgamers that have finished exploring Act 6 already because these champs they've had for a long time that they really enjoy finally become usable. This fixes so many problems and I really don't understand why it's not already taking place much more readily.
  • SeraphSeraph Posts: 65
    Haji_Saab said:

    Pro player quality of life changes that can be done right away with immediate impact.
    1. Remove all mastery change costs. Once you buy the mastery you can change it unit free moving forward.
    2. AQ 30 min timers- No brainer can be done right away
    3. Remove AQ costs period. This would be pro player and resolve all of the issues at once.
    4. More 5 star sig availability. I understand 6 star sig stones are rare but we have moved backwards in terms of 5 star sig availability.
    5. Remove 2014-2016 champions from 6 star basics. Most are garbage and you can repackage them in a deal for people who want to collect every champion.

    1, 3 and 4 are all QoL pro skill pro player suggestions. Would like to see them asap.
    All great ideas!!
  • LunaeLunae Posts: 371 ★★★
    Possible idea for war?

    Two different types that alliances can choose between.

    1. As it is just scaled back slightly, but with buffed rewards that make doing them worth it and that appeals to end gamers looking for a challenge and also for those looking for rewards that progress their accounts.
    2. Retro wars that have simple nodes, similar to the wars of the past before they got too complex, but the trade off is that the ais are incredibly jacked stat wise for that element of difficulty with rewards scaled back, basically war for those that just want a simple fun war and aren’t necessary looking to progress their accounts from it.

    To really grow and be at the top, alliances should run hardest war with rewards that reflect difficuity, others just looking for fun run retro war.
  • ESFESF Posts: 1,934 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    ESF said:

    Seriously, though. Honest question: Why does it cost us anything to switch Masteries?

    I mean, I guess Kabam could say "why should it be free" and that is an answer, but we already know they can turn the respec costs off whenever they want and that players have to pay to unlock them with units they either grinded for or purchased in the first place.

    At some point, maybe it would be OK to admit that cow has been milked dry and unlock respec costs permanently for those who have done what it takes to get them

    This is just my opinion, based on my experience with other games. Most games go through an evolution on this. To start, the idea is that masteries, or other build-like structures in the game, are something that players should think about as they unlock and enable. There must be some opportunity cost associated with picking this mastery over that mastery. If you take this one, you can't take that one. Because if you can have everything, then the choices are meaningless. So the choices are irreversible.

    As the game matures, you enter a period where a sizeable percentage of your more veteran players have already done everything they can do with these builds, and are stuck with them forever. The irreversibility start looking less like a way to make the choices interesting and more like a shackle where players cannot explore other possibilities anymore. So the game starts to allow for respecification - you can change your build, but it costs something. This way you can't just turn on whatever you want whenever you want in an unlimited fashion, because again, that would make choices meaningless. You're almost in the situation where you have everything on all the time, just situationally. But you can now explore what the game looks like with a different build.

    At some point, the meta gaming situation often changes again, to where the idea of build switching becomes less the exception and more the norm in dealing with content. As content continues to get more complex, the developers of the content increasingly leverage differences in builds to offer increasingly high advantages and disadvantages to certain build options. And with that comes the belief that players should have the ability to change builds to counter content challenges. And that's usually when build-switching starts to become the norm, and most of the friction associated with it goes away, at least to a point. This is where you get switchable setups, and this is often where you get low or zero cost switching.

    So my answer to the question of why mastery switches have costs is I believe the Kabam developers currently see masteries as something players should be allowed to explore, but not allowed to leverage situationally. You're supposed to be able to see what it is like to play for a week or a month with one set up, and then another week or month with another set up, so the costs need to be high enough to make it difficult to switch constantly, but low enough to be reasonable if done infrequently. Costs will disappear when the devs decide that masteries are supposed to be a tool players can use per map, or even per fight if they want to, and they no longer care about the opportunity costs of having different masteries as much.
    Thanks for taking the time to explain this -- obviously, you are honest that you don't know for sure, but it helps someone like me who really has never seen it this restrictive before.

    My memory gets foggy as I get older and I honestly never really embraced online games before...Avengers Alliance, maybe? So it could easily be a common thing and I just had never run across it before.

    I am simply not familiar with a lot of how this game operates, the reasons why, so it's helpful to get some insight and I do appreciate the time
  • ShadowstrikeShadowstrike Posts: 3,061 ★★★★★
    slacker said:

    Talk about today offer (5k unit,seriously ?), I wish kabam could bring back $1 crystal but 5* this time that community vote for which champ each class to add into that crystal, that way everyone could get their god-tier champ , everyone happy

    There will still be complaints.
    There will always be complaints.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,337 Guardian

    DNA3000 said:

    ESF said:

    Seriously, though. Honest question: Why does it cost us anything to switch Masteries?

    I mean, I guess Kabam could say "why should it be free" and that is an answer, but we already know they can turn the respec costs off whenever they want and that players have to pay to unlock them with units they either grinded for or purchased in the first place.

    At some point, maybe it would be OK to admit that cow has been milked dry and unlock respec costs permanently for those who have done what it takes to get them

    This is just my opinion, based on my experience with other games. Most games go through an evolution on this. To start, the idea is that masteries, or other build-like structures in the game, are something that players should think about as they unlock and enable. There must be some opportunity cost associated with picking this mastery over that mastery. If you take this one, you can't take that one. Because if you can have everything, then the choices are meaningless. So the choices are irreversible.

    As the game matures, you enter a period where a sizeable percentage of your more veteran players have already done everything they can do with these builds, and are stuck with them forever. The irreversibility start looking less like a way to make the choices interesting and more like a shackle where players cannot explore other possibilities anymore. So the game starts to allow for respecification - you can change your build, but it costs something. This way you can't just turn on whatever you want whenever you want in an unlimited fashion, because again, that would make choices meaningless. You're almost in the situation where you have everything on all the time, just situationally. But you can now explore what the game looks like with a different build.

    At some point, the meta gaming situation often changes again, to where the idea of build switching becomes less the exception and more the norm in dealing with content. As content continues to get more complex, the developers of the content increasingly leverage differences in builds to offer increasingly high advantages and disadvantages to certain build options. And with that comes the belief that players should have the ability to change builds to counter content challenges. And that's usually when build-switching starts to become the norm, and most of the friction associated with it goes away, at least to a point. This is where you get switchable setups, and this is often where you get low or zero cost switching.

    So my answer to the question of why mastery switches have costs is I believe the Kabam developers currently see masteries as something players should be allowed to explore, but not allowed to leverage situationally. You're supposed to be able to see what it is like to play for a week or a month with one set up, and then another week or month with another set up, so the costs need to be high enough to make it difficult to switch constantly, but low enough to be reasonable if done infrequently. Costs will disappear when the devs decide that masteries are supposed to be a tool players can use per map, or even per fight if they want to, and they no longer care about the opportunity costs of having different masteries as much.
    All of this is generally true in other games, but by now other games would usually include a second "page" for a second set of masteries. A very simple solution to the mastery issue is after using cores, there's no cost to respec. You get a second page that costs a nominal cost to swap to, say 25 units, at level 60. At level 60, you unlock the ability to purchase additional pages on a sliding scale. Page 3 is say $5, page 4 is $10, page 5 is $15. You still keep the nominal fee for switching but the time to switch is reduced, Kabam still makes money off the pages, and players can switch up their masteries on the fly for different game modes.
    If I understand what you're saying, they way I've seen it most often is not to charge for swapping, but to charge for the additional builds. So you do XYZ to unlock build #2, but then you have to buy build #2 when it is unlocked. Once you've bought it, you can populate it with a different build and switch between B1 and B2 (which for MCOC would be a complete mastery setup). If you're concerned about over-switching, you use a cooldown. So rather than pay to switch, once you switch build you can't switch again for some period of time, a day, and hour, something.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,337 Guardian

    Oh good, they deleted the boycott post and didn’t close down the thread.

    At the risk of giving this more attention than I should, it is impossible to convince anyone you represent them. Either they believe you do based on your actions, or they don't. And if they don't, but you assert you do, that's going nowhere.

    People will climb mountains and swim oceans just to tell you that you don't represent them. I think people with current situational awareness will understand my point, regardless of what side you might be on.
  • StevieManWonderStevieManWonder Posts: 5,017 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Oh good, they deleted the boycott post and didn’t close down the thread.

    At the risk of giving this more attention than I should, it is impossible to convince anyone you represent them. Either they believe you do based on your actions, or they don't. And if they don't, but you assert you do, that's going nowhere.

    People will climb mountains and swim oceans just to tell you that you don't represent them. I think people with current situational awareness will understand my point, regardless of what side you might be on.
    I’m sorry but I have no idea what that is in reference to.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,123 ★★★★★

    DNA3000 said:

    Oh good, they deleted the boycott post and didn’t close down the thread.

    At the risk of giving this more attention than I should, it is impossible to convince anyone you represent them. Either they believe you do based on your actions, or they don't. And if they don't, but you assert you do, that's going nowhere.

    People will climb mountains and swim oceans just to tell you that you don't represent them. I think people with current situational awareness will understand my point, regardless of what side you might be on.
    I’m sorry but I have no idea what that is in reference to.
    I believe he's referring to those organizing said action, and how they don't feel represented in these discussions. It's impossible to convince them that they're being represented here. They either believe it, or they don't. Forgive me if I'm mistaken.
Sign In or Register to comment.