Were content creators given the same criteria on the design of their Carina's challenges?
Corkscrew
Member Posts: 541 ★★★
I'm not going to get into whether I think they are too hard for the rewards and certainly this is not a jab at the creators themselves.
I am intrigued whether they were given the same criteria for designing the challenges and if they collaborated in any way. Would be also interesting to know if other creators also designed challenges that were rejected. It's possible that we will never know as a result of confidentiality or non-disclosure unless someone wants to chime in.
I think that most of us can agree that the challenges are "tuned" differently. Granted they also seem to be based around champs close to the creators' hearts.
While in theory they can be done in any order - they're all designed to feed 6* selectors to acquire champs for the other challenges. Notably, you can get a 2* Zemo from the Avengers challenge, which implies it should be done before the Zemo challenge.
Onto the tuning...
Lagacy's feels like an entry point that assures that those chasing Deathless KG can at least get the "easy completion". It's also a highly likely zero or low investment challenge resource-wise. Given Sparky was a marquee champ of the day, many will have a highly ranked 5* and if they don't the resources aren't in competition with 6 and 7*rarities.
Both Fintech's and KarateMike's challenges feel like they would require at least some resource investment on champs that you probably haven't ranked, which means they're not "free" to just go in to test the waters. These challenges definitely feel like they require an investment in terms of roster and/or item use and designed to separate the wheat from the chaff. For at least a short period of time, it would make 7* Sparky, S99 and Masacre trophy champs to the 0.1% that can bang this out.
So, the question remains, given the different outcomes, were they actually all given the same instructions or were they given different ones to meet different objectives?
I am intrigued whether they were given the same criteria for designing the challenges and if they collaborated in any way. Would be also interesting to know if other creators also designed challenges that were rejected. It's possible that we will never know as a result of confidentiality or non-disclosure unless someone wants to chime in.
I think that most of us can agree that the challenges are "tuned" differently. Granted they also seem to be based around champs close to the creators' hearts.
While in theory they can be done in any order - they're all designed to feed 6* selectors to acquire champs for the other challenges. Notably, you can get a 2* Zemo from the Avengers challenge, which implies it should be done before the Zemo challenge.
Onto the tuning...
Lagacy's feels like an entry point that assures that those chasing Deathless KG can at least get the "easy completion". It's also a highly likely zero or low investment challenge resource-wise. Given Sparky was a marquee champ of the day, many will have a highly ranked 5* and if they don't the resources aren't in competition with 6 and 7*rarities.
Both Fintech's and KarateMike's challenges feel like they would require at least some resource investment on champs that you probably haven't ranked, which means they're not "free" to just go in to test the waters. These challenges definitely feel like they require an investment in terms of roster and/or item use and designed to separate the wheat from the chaff. For at least a short period of time, it would make 7* Sparky, S99 and Masacre trophy champs to the 0.1% that can bang this out.
So, the question remains, given the different outcomes, were they actually all given the same instructions or were they given different ones to meet different objectives?
0
Comments
Difficult but fun
ZEEEEEEEEMOOOOO
You will know pain
A few minutes later....
Fin, Mike, Lags: There you go...
Kabam: Good job Fin and Mike. You sure on that Lags?
Lags: Yeah, it's one champ and a 5* so it fits as asked.
Kabam: Uhh..Okie, approved. Thanks everyone.