**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.
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
Comments
The roadmap is precisely why many struggle to give themselves reasons to continue playing. There is basically nothing in the announcement to look forward to outside of a variant in 3 months which to be honest I was surprised didn’t come out in may.
No one likes tactics but oh well I guess they are not going anywhere
New alliance donation plan has so many pitfalls that are so obvious on first read it is hard to imagine how any body in any way that this was passable.
There looks to be no vision anymore for this game for anything that resembles interesting. Nothing in the announcement gives hope that is about to change. I know it takes a long time to change the direction of the ship but this announcement is just full speed ahead with no attempt to make a meaningful change. It’s a shame, but it is what it is. I am not mad, just confused and let down
My hesitation is that at some point, when the next round of information is presented, it will feel more like this round in this way: There is no real plan, focus or consideration for SOLO players.
When this game started, there were no Alliances. It was a simpler game then, and I understand why Kabam has implemented the Alliance structures and I also understand why it is important to them.
But at the same time... I am a solo player. That is not going to change. Alliance changes, quality of life improvements, mean absolutely nothing to me.
That is NOT a criticism. That is simply being honest, truthful. I would likely not have committed the time, effort and resources I have to this game if it was shaped this way from the start. Again, just being honest.
So my honest feedback is this: No, I am not gonna "quit the game" if MCoC can't implement ANYTHING that allows Solo players an opportunity to play Incursions, for example, or if we just can't figure out a way to do consistent, open-ended content like a weekly Realm of Legends challenge mode, or Daily Boss Rushes, stuff like that. If Kabam doesn't view that kind of thing as important to the present or future, then that will be made clear.
At some point, the game is what it is. They make decisions. We have to decide how to react.
But for me, if there are no Solo modes coming or possible, no buff packages for older characters coming or possible, and/or Crystals remain the same...there just won't be much for me to look forward to for the future of the game.
We'll see. Just being honest
3 month plan is laughable
what we WANT is this
Cavalier level added to monthly event quest
Variants released every 2 to 3 months
New 6* arena its time for Arena to he revamped and an actual arena to win 6*s
6*s added to incursion crystals
6* UC added to loyalty store
6* Punisher added to New Cavalier level arena crystals
ability to sell t4cc for t5cc shards
updated Solo events
increased Inventory across the board especially more revives and potions capacity
Cavalier crystals should NoT have 3*s
All Actual crystals must be replace by Nexus.
Community welcomed this crystal as an improvement but is a rare option.
Guys, Nexus increase from a 0,6% to 1,8% the option of a champ. Almost 180 champs in the game and when you pull same **** champs during last months, you lost the interest to continue playing.
Is there any particular reason why? I completely understand if the Virus Situation made things slow down, but it still seems like quite a long development period and there has been next to no info on the project besides the fact it's the Blood and Venom Event, is it something like a Smaller Team is working on the Variants now due to the Development of Act 7 and all the Monthly Event Quests?
The Variants are arguably some of the best content you guys have ever put out, with their range of Utility and Usability spreading out to the more Unorthodox Champions but still having the option to Brute Force it with some of the more "Top Tier" Champions for those that have them and have become Skilled enough, so a lot of us are clambering for any info we can get on the next one!
I also took note of this: When you put this together with other statements about AQ, you reach the conclusion that Alliances are only for people who want to push hard as an alliance. If AQ is fundamental to alliances, and AQ is structured in a way that penalizes, or at least strongly discourages casual play, then MCOC doesn't believe in casual alliances. They are more of a marginal aberration than something the game explicitly tries to accommodate.
In most games, the primary purpose of alliance-like groups is to encourage players to engage with other players, to improve the entertainment they get from the game. And, to be honest, to reduce the chances that a player will get bored and quit. If you're playing with friends, you're more likely to stick around. If AQ is a fundamental part of the Alliance experience, shouldn't AQ be trying to diversify the opportunities for all different kinds of alliances? Heterogenous alliances that have players of different progress and skill level, for example. Alliances with people with different time availability or time zone or both. Even with small caveats, the AQ structure as a whole is explicitly targeted at homogeneous alliances with near-identical availability.
In another thread I talked about escalating difficulty in story quests. AQ has an analogous exponential increase in participation requirements. As you go up in map, you must simultaneously be able to fight harder fights, and devote more time to AQ, *and* have more absolutely consistent availability day by day, *and* have higher intra-day availability as well. If you fail any one of these requirements, if you can't keep up with the difficulty, or if you can easily do the difficulty but can't log in constantly throughout the day (and sometimes night), or if you can do all of that but you need one or two days off randomly, then you quickly hit an AQ ceiling. But requiring all of those things simultaneously basically says only a narrow subset of all players are really intended to experience Alliances as they were intended to be. And that seems weird to me.
I'll just point this one out: two solutions you gave for the "targeting champ" problem are incompatible, even if it doesn't seem so. They boil down to: significantly increase the rate at which players can get any champ they want, and change the content so that specific champs aren't necessary. You might be able to get away with a tiny bit of both, but if you actually do both aggressively you end up with a situation where the range of champs you need drops and the ability to target them rises, and then players too easily have counters for everything. This will only compel the devs to make content even harder, which then amplifies the problem of content being too "cash grabby." Or worse, make them thing about other ways to make content difficult besides requiring champion counters, like brute force numerical ways (i.e. cranking up attack).
Aggressively making the content require less specific counters works, and aggressively making champion acquisition better works, but doing both to only a tiny extent increases the odds that players don't get a visible benefit, requiring years of iteration to drift to an acceptable level of both, and doing both aggressively can create an unavoidable content backlash.
Also, even in cases where the issues are not in dispute, the priority of addressing them certainly is. And many of your bullet points would be long term projects. Deprioritizing any one of them can effectively make addressing it "over the horizon" for many players, in effect tantamount to eliminating it as an issue to be worked on. Even if we all unanimouosly agreed with the list, except for a few low hanging fruit we might get significant progress on just a couple over the next year or two. Which ones would everyone agree we should see happen in the foreseeable future?
Also, Corvus is path-specific in war, even in intermediate tiers. If you're on a path where you aren't going to get any charges, he's not always going to be the best choice. Or sometimes even a good choice. Can anyone tell me if Corvus is a good choice for a map full of Dooms? Because I don't know how to do a path with multiple Dooms without Void or CapIW, honestly.