**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options

General Game Feedback [Merged Threads]

1…8788909293…118

Comments

  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    xNig said:

    DNA3000 said:

    xNig said:

    Your LOL example is the PERFECT example.

    End game content should ALWAYS be the hardest content for the end game players. LOL was introduced before Spark, Aegon or NF. It was hard as hell when first introduced. As time goes by, rosters get better and new champs get introduced, making the content easier. That’s the whole idea.

    Act 6 is similar. It’s hard as hell for people’s rosters now. But as time passes, it’ll get easier.

    People are just complaining because they can’t do it NOW when they “think” they’re “end game” and the content was designed for them. It’s not.

    To me this is the crux of the issue with Act 6. When you judge it as end game content, the question is simply one of how challenging it should be relative to the hardest content in the game. It could be harder, it could be easier, but as long as it is theoretically doable it is only a question of how hard you want it to be. Even I judged it that way when it first came out, because of course its end game content because only end game players were in a position to even attempt it when it first came out.

    But Act 6 is also permanent story arc content, and the story arc content is also intended to be the core progressional content. Its supposed to be a moderate challenge for the vast majority of players, not just end game content for the highest skill and roster players. This would be okay if it was challenging for end game players with their current end game rosters, and eventually doable by average players with what will be judged as reasonably strong rosters down the road. But unlike Realm of Legends or even Labyrinth of Legends, I don't think Act 6 can be "outleveled" by less skilled players in any reasonable amount of time because Act 6 is, relatively speaking, tuned for champion strengths we simply aren't going to ever see unless Kabam makes future champion power creep completely ridiculous.

    The highest skill players in the game can do Act 5 with 4/40s. But average players can go in there with 4/55s and even possibly some 5/65-level champs eventually, provided they can get past the Collector. That's two or three relative ranks higher. There's no equivalent for Act 6. Even the highest skill players are generally going into Act 6 with rank 4s and 5s, and 6* rank 3s aren't that much stronger. Extrapolating the numbers, if we were to hand average players full rosters of 6* rank 5s, those would be about 1.5 ranks stronger than 5/65 champs in terms of how rank ups typically increase strength. Those would be like handing average players a roster of champs slightly stronger than 5* rank 3 to explore Act 5. And that's before factoring in the especially strong fights in Act 6; this is just comparing "minions" in both Acts. To really get the equivalent of three ranks higher in Act 5 would probably require four ranks higher in Act 6, which simply doesn't exist when Kabam's diminished rank up pattern in 6* champs is half as strong: four ranks higher in terms of 5* rank differentials is eight ranks higher in 6* rank differentials above rank 2.

    Its easy to say if I can do it they should be forced to do it also, but that's ignoring the reality of the wide range of capability in the playerbase. Failure should always be an option when we're talking about content explicitly intended to test players strength: at some point players will hit a piece of content they cannot do. I never managed the Maze before it disappeared, and that's fine. But the one place that *shouldn't* happen, in my opinion, is in the story arc content. It is ironic to me that players can eventually outlevel and beat Realm of Legends, and they can eventually outlevel and beat Labyrinth of Legends, two pieces of top tier end game content when they were released. But I don't think players will ever likely outlevel Act 6 in its current form, and that's supposed to be content for (almost) everyone.

    I even wonder if it is more likely players would sooner one day outlevel and tackle the Abyss than Act 6 in its current state, and that's ridiculous.
    That’s true. From the way content was pushed out, it seems as though the intention for Kabam when releasing Abyss was for players to outlevel it first, then go back and tackle A6. I believe they mentioned it as an end of Book 1, and as a start of Book 2.

    Act 5, at that point when 5.4 was released, was catered for 5* R4s. (I distinctly remembering only being able to bring in a max rank of 5*R4s for my 5.4 legends run) In the current state, players have been out leveling it by one rank and exploring Act 5 with 5* R5s.

    Extrapolating this for A6, given Abyss was released prior to the whole of A6, A6 was most likely tuned for 6*R3s and possibly 6*R4s. In addition, an added objective of “testing the players’ knowledge of the rpg elements of the game” was incorporated in the design, which required players to know what champs to use for certain encounters.

    Given that rank up resources are much rarer to bring 6*s to R3s, time is a factor that needs to be considered as well. We are jumping the gun too early to say the Act is too difficult and we’ve not given ourselves time to catch-up to the level in which the average player needs to clear the content. (I believe there are players who are not even Elders Bane trying out A6 then complaining that it’s too difficult for them).
    I think people gauging the difficulty before they are ready to do so obscures the actual problem with difficulty in this case. It is easy to dismiss complaints about difficulty in general because so often those complaints aren't justified: they are snap judgments made by people who don't have sufficient perspective on that content or the progress curve of the game.

    But I don't think that's the case for my own analysis of Act 6. I believe I'm giving Act 6 every possible benefit of the doubt. I'm factoring in *maximal* roster growth possible given what the game allows. I'm not factoring in random champion acquisition bottlenecks. I'm ignoring all of the special case fights in Act 6. I'm looking that the least objectionable case of just getting through the average path on the map, and what the relative effort is between Act 4, Act 5, and Act 6. The *actual* difficulty curve is steeper than that. But that alone says the difficulty curve races upward faster than any conceivable roster growth.

    The one thing I don't account for is the possibility of extreme power creep. In other words, champions released in 2021 and 2022 being so much more powerful than predecessors that they are totally incomparable in strength, not just stronger, but many times stronger than even champions released a year earlier. But that would create a separate, and even worse problem. Such champions would then become necessary for all future progress because future content would be balanced around them, and conversely acquiring even one of them at any rank by an early player would moot all the content in front of them instantly.

    I think it is also important to note here that if we decide to just wait and see what happens, we're not going to actually "see" whether it is too difficult or not. It is easy to datamine success objectively. It is harder, but not impossible, to datamine failure objectively. But it is very difficult to datamine progress barriers until they have such a negative effect that it is too late to do anything about them for the generation of players that run into them. Because you don't see people succeeding in the content or failing in the content. You just see a diminishing amount of people even attempting it. And you won't easily be able to prove whether the reasons behind that are objectively difficulty or some other subjective problem. But when you finally figure out definitively, you can't just tweak things quickly enough to matter either. Remember that Act 6 is not just a piece of content, it is also the foundation for the difficulty of future content. If Act 6 is too difficult, then Book 2 Act 1 will also be too difficult, and so on. By the time we know for certain that it was too difficult, we'll have a lot more inertia to correct, and a lot more damage to undo than just Act 6.

    I want to emphasize that I didn't look at Act 6 difficulty with the goal of lowering the difficulty of Act 6. Act 6 is almost besides the point for me, and I actually originally approached Act 6 from the perspective of trying to *justify* its difficulty, not prove it was wrong. What my analysis tells me is not that Act 6 is "too difficult" which is a subjective thing. It tells me that Act 6 was designed for the highest tier players in the game. And whether Act 6 is too difficult or not, that intent itself is wrong. If we erase Act 6 from our memories and ask how hard should Act 6 be if we were intending it to be played by average players with respectable rosters for players who had completed Act 5, there's no way we would come up with Act 6. Act 6 is monstrously ridiculous, if that was the target audience.

    My worry is not that Act 6 is too difficult on its own. My worry is that mindset of designing all future content as if it is end game content is ultimately counter productive to the game's future. Act 6 just happens to be the place where the numbers have the most clarity. If we want to make the future of the game for (mostly) everyone, and not just the top players in the game, then Book 2 cannot continue the trend from Book 1. But if Book 2 doesn't have the extreme difficulty of Act 6, then Act 6 will look like an aberration. If Act 6 is a prerequisite for Book 2, then it doesn't matter what Book 2 looks like because many players won't reach it, unless there's a way for players to get through Act 6 and onto Book 2. And that's the main reason why I think Act 6 needs to be reexamined.

    OF course this presumes my analysis of Book 1's difficulty is credible. I can't prove that in the literal sense. I can't even say I'm 100% certain all of my conclusions are correct. I can only say the evidence is strong enough that I think it is worth taking action to avoid the problems rather than try to fix them only if and after they've done enough damage to be impossible to ignore.
    After seeing your analysis, I can't really say I disagree. I would be hard-pressed to etiher way because of what you've presented. Two things that occur to me immediately are the narrowness of the Nodes, and the speed that Act 7 was started. In terms of the Nodes, they may not be entirely insurmountable on their own. When you add the aspect of depending on the 5* and 6* pulls only, that contributes to the difficulty. Now, I must clarify that I agree with the restriction. I have and I still do. However, I think that increased trajectory comes from the difficulty of the Nodes, on top of that. In that, I feel that they have slightly overshot, but then that becomes a matter of increasing that overshoot as they go along, and you end up with the issue you've described. So I think the solution would be adjusting Nodes.
    The other aspect is how fast they're working on Act 7. Content to grow into is easier justified when there's adequate time to grow into it. When you make content that fast, you end up doing exactly what you described. Designing it for an increasingly smaller number, the top of the top, and that becomes harder and harder to grow into.
  • Options
    PulyamanPulyaman Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Akumaccb said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Akumaccb said:

    Bidzy7 said:

    xNig said:

    Gates were bad idea to test roster breadth. So Kabam went with niche champ as roster breadth check as seen in 6.3/4. With the backlash, both methods were bad ideas.

    Did you stop to think that it might not have been Kabam’s issue, but the over-entitlement of the playerbase? And Kabam being a for-profit entity, is forced to cave in to keep their revenue stream ongoing?

    Anyway, I would like to hear some constructive criticism from you on how fights can be challenging, and yet provides a roster breadth check, ie if your roster isn’t sufficiently deep enough, you won’t be able to get past the fight without spending a lot of units.

    I can say the same to you. Did you stop to think that its your issue that you have played and grinded the game so much that content doesn't challenge you because you have so many champions ?

    Trying to say the player base is self entitled also holds no merit. Just because you get a handful of people who complain. Majority of players don't even come to forums.


    Its pretty simple really don't create these fights which have extremely small counters . E.g. Acid wash Mysterio has 2 counters. KG and Man Thing and i believe Howard the Duck has the ability to apply poison and armor break with his sp2 but its purely random. How is this a good roster check design.
    - Swap out Mysterio for some other champion that can be poisoned without Armor break and you now have 12 possible counters.
    - You can also change the node to be similar to the do you bleed but poison instead along with the enhanced poison damage node.

    Not only does this force players to use a champion that can poison but also isn't overly punishing on RNG and adequately checks a players roster.

    Gimme path in 6.4 why have have the 200% power gain on this path. You want players to use regeneration champs which i believe there is around 15 of them that can constantly heal through out a fight ( Not like Voodoo). The power gain literally forces players to now use a a even smaller pool of champs. Magic ( Awakened maybe work unawakened not sure) being by far the best choice. Other champs that others have made work are Sorcerer Supreme BWCV and blade and just parry and regen. Again how is this actually a roster check when the counters are 4 champs out of 176.

    Same path whats the point in putting spectre on the VTD ? what champion heals and ignores spectre that can manage power gain ( as regen buff will also trigger prey on the weak plus 200% power gain).

    there is countless type of these fights with node combinations through out act 6 and i'm not going to list them all.

    Now tell me how these fights/paths don't serve to punish players on poor RNG to get past. Tell me how this is good content design
    This is where you’re so wrong. With suicides and willpower, as long as you’re healing any champ can do proper amounts of active damage on gimme. Have you ever heard of the Corvus cheese? He’s not an uncommon champ in the rosters of those who are attempting act 6 either.
    Really? Not an uncommon champ? I have over 100 5 star champs and all the counters mentioned here namely Nick fury, Corvus Magik are missing from my roster. I have opened more that 500 5 star crystals and I still seem to be missing these. I don't run suicides either. I am completely ftp. So, yes. Kabam should not put fights with specific counters when mostly everything in the game is rng. I have been playing for over 4 years and I only pulled thor ragnarok as a 4 star once. Testing roster size in a rng game does not make much sense.
    Au contraire, it does. We are not playing some FPS or console RPG here, you just said it, this is an RNG game, and that’s exactly how gatcha games separate players by placing barriers to entry based on the weapons or characters in your inventory.
    Then it does not matter what skill level you are in or what content you have completed. All that matters is if you have the right champs, which is exactly why most players are asking it to be toned down in terms of difficulty. Your statement completely contradicts the roster breadth nonsense we are hearing time and time again. A person could essentially pull all the highest damage dealers and utility gods in the game within their first 25 5 stars and just breeze through act 6. That is possible too.
    That's exactly what happens with Acts 1-5. Difference is, the requirements are more precise because 5 and 6*s are the requirements. Less Shards mean harder to pull. Now, I hear you that people think it's too restrictive. I still think it's worth pointing out that the process already occurs. People keep saying it as if it's something new. That's what already takes place. Difference is, you can't use anything else, whereas using other Champs is possible but harder with the previous content. Take The Collector for example. (Which was called a money grab back when it came out.) People could Unit through it until they came out with better Champs. Few were getting past it that easily. The Analyzer was a good example back then. Now there is a requirement. That's what people are arguing against. While it may be too narrow, it also isn't meant to allow everyone that tries through.
    I am assuming you are talking about 4 star restrictions in your reply. While I still think it is crazy to restrict champs that you acquired in your years of playing the game into the main game mode of the game, I would not have such a problem with it, if the fights were not were not specific champion oriented. We now see that the collector can be beaten with civil warrior and mephisto, But wait they are 6 star rank 3 champs which most people will not have access to for many years. But, he could be done with a couple of revives using many champs. Challenging the player is all good and fine, just don't punish people for having bad rng. Take an example of rifts this month. I used the path selector to get an awakening gem. Other than that, I got sig stones 8 out of 10 other times that I have tried then, the other two were 100 6 star shards and 2k 5 star shards. This type of rng in crystals makes a very bad thing when you have so many champion specific fight
  • Options
    DJMNHDJMNH Posts: 720 ★★★
    edited May 2020
    ContenderJ said:

    Hopefully you don’t get DELETED

    Brother I have been an avid gamer since I was a kid.. I finish ending games top to bottom almost with in week or two. But this game has been my one of my fav.. so I would always wish for the betterment of it..

    Even before my gigs or concert, I play this game to calm down or relax. But now it's seems to be repeatative , broken nodes in quests, broken tactics like Flow 2 in war, Opponents using similar form of champs in War defence.. it's all predictable now. And a game shouldn't be predictable to keep running in longer period with also keeping its olders members active too.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Pulyaman said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Akumaccb said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Akumaccb said:

    Bidzy7 said:

    xNig said:

    Gates were bad idea to test roster breadth. So Kabam went with niche champ as roster breadth check as seen in 6.3/4. With the backlash, both methods were bad ideas.

    Did you stop to think that it might not have been Kabam’s issue, but the over-entitlement of the playerbase? And Kabam being a for-profit entity, is forced to cave in to keep their revenue stream ongoing?

    Anyway, I would like to hear some constructive criticism from you on how fights can be challenging, and yet provides a roster breadth check, ie if your roster isn’t sufficiently deep enough, you won’t be able to get past the fight without spending a lot of units.

    I can say the same to you. Did you stop to think that its your issue that you have played and grinded the game so much that content doesn't challenge you because you have so many champions ?

    Trying to say the player base is self entitled also holds no merit. Just because you get a handful of people who complain. Majority of players don't even come to forums.


    Its pretty simple really don't create these fights which have extremely small counters . E.g. Acid wash Mysterio has 2 counters. KG and Man Thing and i believe Howard the Duck has the ability to apply poison and armor break with his sp2 but its purely random. How is this a good roster check design.
    - Swap out Mysterio for some other champion that can be poisoned without Armor break and you now have 12 possible counters.
    - You can also change the node to be similar to the do you bleed but poison instead along with the enhanced poison damage node.

    Not only does this force players to use a champion that can poison but also isn't overly punishing on RNG and adequately checks a players roster.

    Gimme path in 6.4 why have have the 200% power gain on this path. You want players to use regeneration champs which i believe there is around 15 of them that can constantly heal through out a fight ( Not like Voodoo). The power gain literally forces players to now use a a even smaller pool of champs. Magic ( Awakened maybe work unawakened not sure) being by far the best choice. Other champs that others have made work are Sorcerer Supreme BWCV and blade and just parry and regen. Again how is this actually a roster check when the counters are 4 champs out of 176.

    Same path whats the point in putting spectre on the VTD ? what champion heals and ignores spectre that can manage power gain ( as regen buff will also trigger prey on the weak plus 200% power gain).

    there is countless type of these fights with node combinations through out act 6 and i'm not going to list them all.

    Now tell me how these fights/paths don't serve to punish players on poor RNG to get past. Tell me how this is good content design
    This is where you’re so wrong. With suicides and willpower, as long as you’re healing any champ can do proper amounts of active damage on gimme. Have you ever heard of the Corvus cheese? He’s not an uncommon champ in the rosters of those who are attempting act 6 either.
    Really? Not an uncommon champ? I have over 100 5 star champs and all the counters mentioned here namely Nick fury, Corvus Magik are missing from my roster. I have opened more that 500 5 star crystals and I still seem to be missing these. I don't run suicides either. I am completely ftp. So, yes. Kabam should not put fights with specific counters when mostly everything in the game is rng. I have been playing for over 4 years and I only pulled thor ragnarok as a 4 star once. Testing roster size in a rng game does not make much sense.
    Au contraire, it does. We are not playing some FPS or console RPG here, you just said it, this is an RNG game, and that’s exactly how gatcha games separate players by placing barriers to entry based on the weapons or characters in your inventory.
    Then it does not matter what skill level you are in or what content you have completed. All that matters is if you have the right champs, which is exactly why most players are asking it to be toned down in terms of difficulty. Your statement completely contradicts the roster breadth nonsense we are hearing time and time again. A person could essentially pull all the highest damage dealers and utility gods in the game within their first 25 5 stars and just breeze through act 6. That is possible too.
    That's exactly what happens with Acts 1-5. Difference is, the requirements are more precise because 5 and 6*s are the requirements. Less Shards mean harder to pull. Now, I hear you that people think it's too restrictive. I still think it's worth pointing out that the process already occurs. People keep saying it as if it's something new. That's what already takes place. Difference is, you can't use anything else, whereas using other Champs is possible but harder with the previous content. Take The Collector for example. (Which was called a money grab back when it came out.) People could Unit through it until they came out with better Champs. Few were getting past it that easily. The Analyzer was a good example back then. Now there is a requirement. That's what people are arguing against. While it may be too narrow, it also isn't meant to allow everyone that tries through.
    I am assuming you are talking about 4 star restrictions in your reply. While I still think it is crazy to restrict champs that you acquired in your years of playing the game into the main game mode of the game, I would not have such a problem with it, if the fights were not were not specific champion oriented. We now see that the collector can be beaten with civil warrior and mephisto, But wait they are 6 star rank 3 champs which most people will not have access to for many years. But, he could be done with a couple of revives using many champs. Challenging the player is all good and fine, just don't punish people for having bad rng. Take an example of rifts this month. I used the path selector to get an awakening gem. Other than that, I got sig stones 8 out of 10 other times that I have tried then, the other two were 100 6 star shards and 2k 5 star shards. This type of rng in crystals makes a very bad thing when you have so many champion specific fight
    I acknowledged the narrowness of the Nodes in my last comment, but my point in this reply was to say that Players narrow down Champions naturally. It's not as if it's new. They categorize them into "God Tiers", and focus on select few. They instinctively look for the best and only focus on those. It's not as if people are using that large selection of Champs they're referring to in their arguments here. When something comes out, they either wait for the best options, or hammer it out using Revs, until better options are thrown around by the community. The Fights might be too narrow, but narrowing down in general is something that's taken place all along.
    As for the Gates, even if we look past the fact that it's not healthy to give access to Cavalier Rewards to Accounts that aren't developed enough, let's think about it for a second. If people were allowed to use 4*s, they would be trying to use them. Not just for the Synergies. We see how hard it is by the reactions, with 5 and 6*s. Imagine the reactions if people were using 4*s? How many Units or Revs would they have to go through? How would Act 6 have been received? It would have been much worse. There are more people that are Uncollected than just the ones who only need a Heimdall, or have a 4* Aegon. There's a whole range. As much as people think it's unfair, it's about tailoring the experience to a target demographic.
  • Options
    BodhizenBodhizen Posts: 303 ★★
    Bidzy7 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Anyone else just scrolling for Orange text at this point? Thread is just unreadable

    haha , was little bored today. So guess i'm partly to blame. will be signing out now anyway and can g
    Bodhizen said:

    Okay, so let's talk about roster breadth in terms of general game feedback.

    I think it's pretty clear that the concept of gates and narrowing down viable Champions to a handful of selections are poor ways to "encourage" roster diversity, because they exclusively punish players. I like the idea of give-and-take, so I am encouraging Kabam to think about exclusively creating (at least for the foreseeable future until there's more of a balance of Node possibilities) Nodes that either exclusively reward players for using more than the narrowed selection of Champions, or for give-and-take Nodes that provide a challenge, but if you bring the right kind of Champion into the fight, you get a boost to your combat effectiveness or your defenses.

    For example, create Nodes (point-of-contact and global) that give the Defender -50% physical contact damage from all incoming attacks (including Special Attacks), and have that apply to blocked attacks as well, but then allow attackers to bypass that by making their hits that do physical contact damage count as non-contact hits if they're using attackers that have a specific Synergy active (common ones, like the Rivals Synergy, for example). Do not make it dependent upon having a Synergy that applies to the whole team active; only the Champions that are the Synergy partners.

    This encourages a broad swath of Champions to be brought to the fight, particularly older Champions who are more likely to have those broader Synergies. Champions like Red Guardian (for example) would not be great to bring to such fights because he only possesses narrow, unique Synergies. The Rivals Synergy would make ~64 Champions (from all 6 Classes) viable for those fights. I fully admit that this is an off-the-cuff, crude example, but it would work, and still give old and new players reasons to dust off unused Champions (or use the only ones that RNG has blessed them with) to combat these challenges. This is just one simple example of how Kabam can use existing structures to bring new challenges into the game that don't rely on using Quake, Ghost, Corvus, or the newest Champion of the month to get past.

    Best wishes!

    apologies in all my responding this has kinda of got lost. So feel free to continue from this discussion guys
    Thank you for trying, @Bidzy7.
  • Options
    Morpheus_123Morpheus_123 Posts: 792 ★★★
    RoOOts said:

    Morpheus_123 said:

    Can someone tell me how I stop getting email notifications for this thread?! I have un-bookmarked it, but that hasn't worked...

    Thanks

    It will stop if an admin or official answers to all the feedback here. Might take a while. 😅

    Greetings if your notificated by your mail account for this post.
    Haha, thanks.

    Other ones seem to stop the notifications once I un-bookmark them, but not this.
  • Options
    AmbjonyAmbjony Posts: 197 ★★
    They said they will Inform us about some of the issues in early June. Let’s hope by the end of the week we have some info regarding some near future changes
  • Options
    winterthurwinterthur Posts: 7,797 ★★★★★
    Went back looking for info on old threads and found this.

    How has it changed?

    https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/136578/#Comment_136578
Sign In or Register to comment.