State of the Game
DanielRand
Member Posts: 485 ★★★★
First a little background. I've played since December '14 and been in an alliance since early '15 when they started. I've moved around a little bit but for the vast majority of the time I've been in 2 alliances, 1 for about 1.5 years the other for 2 different stints with a total of over 3 years. I like the people I play with and it keeps me going . As time has passed, I find more and more friends moving on for a variety of reasons, most of which are time related. And maybe they take a break and come back.
My concern is that the mid-high tier alliances are losing people in droves. If you want ultra competitive and can spend the required time and money there's a place for you. If you are starting out and growing there's a place for you. If you want to keep an alliance full with talent for running a mix of map 5 and 6 and gold tier war, good luck. For every post of a member looking for an alliance in that group, there's 20-30 alliances posting with multiples spots open.
Obviously contraction is an easy answer and maybe everyone benefits if that occurs, but it just makes me wonder and be concerned about how much longer that can be sustained. Seems like the "middle class" of MCOC is being squeezed out of the game.
My concern is that the mid-high tier alliances are losing people in droves. If you want ultra competitive and can spend the required time and money there's a place for you. If you are starting out and growing there's a place for you. If you want to keep an alliance full with talent for running a mix of map 5 and 6 and gold tier war, good luck. For every post of a member looking for an alliance in that group, there's 20-30 alliances posting with multiples spots open.
Obviously contraction is an easy answer and maybe everyone benefits if that occurs, but it just makes me wonder and be concerned about how much longer that can be sustained. Seems like the "middle class" of MCOC is being squeezed out of the game.
15
Comments
Sworn Enemy of the Hand
What they need to ensure is that the game is still welcoming when they come back from the inevitable breaks that players will take.
Cause and effect.
People dilute the alliances by making more alliances. More alliances require more people. Then the different types of players get spread thin across the alliances. Ultimately tiring out people (regardless of what level you play the game). These people feel as though they contribute too much to their alliance and seek out like minded individuals to play with. Or they quit.
This is a never ending cycle. There are always new people joining and others quitting. There is no shame in one way or another. Once people understand the cause and effect they have on alliance’s it becomes a lot easier to navigate through the other requirements leaders/officers have.
I run a fun, stable alliance that runs AW but without a requirement to boost, revive, etc. If we lose, we lose, and life goes on. In the end, w win some, we lose some, and we get decent season rewards -- but we have none of the pressure and cost. This is a game, so it should be fun first and foremost, and out ally has collected players over time who share this philosophy.
However, they are not investing in quality assurance, I've been grinding this axe for a while now but how many times do we see content that just fails on day 1 of its launch? I can unstand bugs that creep out in certain conditions and are discovered straight away but the launch day bugs/glitches/crashes are inexcusable for any game developer.
It has always been the middle tier alliances that have had the most shuffle, because they are the most evolving. Retirement alliances and casual alliances by their very nature don't have large pressures on their players and thus they are relatively stable. The top tier alliances do burn out players, but there's a line around the block waiting to join them. Middle tier alliances lose players to both ends, so they are the most difficult to hold together. But that's always been the case, and what balances that out are the constant influx of new alliances to replace them, or older alliances that move up into that tier.
If you were Netmarble, would you be "moving on" from MCOC?
Source: Netmarble financials for Q4 2020.
That 15% translates to players globally spending something on the order of $40M USD per month on average on MCOC in-app purchases. I'm pretty sure the day the Kabam developers lose interest in supporting MCOC Netmarble would fire them all and replace them with developers who would take an interest.
And AQ map 4 are little by little going to leave this game.
Basically they don't have time. And the reward system is heavily focused to benifit
High tier players.
It is what it is.
The glory is low.
To rank a champ up
Minimum rank 4 5 star
4 t2 alpha
6 t1 alpha
6 t4 basic
Not doable with 4k glory i think.
Not to mention thr t4 cc and iso doesn't fo hand in hand. Although duel class have narrowed the chance for desired pull of iso but no garantee with t4cc.
U open 10 u get not what u wanted.
Hence wrong force rank up cz the iso is expiring.
It's a vecious cycle. Lol.
So rank up process beocmes slower. People losseing interest fast.
Little by litttle lpw tier will be removed from this game.
And it's understandable.
They are making a game they ought to look for profit side for their business.