I don’t know if there is any Beta program in Kabam, otherwise these kinds of unnecessary breakdown in player communication and expectation won’t happen.
According to General Feedback Threads, players want less repetitive arena, less defensive AI (hold block at corner without any move), reform the old / stale arena milestones, better chance to obtain champs I/O forcing players to grind 24/7 in 3 days, and etc. Dev Diary acknowledged and promised to bring improvements. However,
BRINGING DEATH MATCHES CONSECUTIVELY AFTER 20 STREAKS SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS IMPROVEMENT AT ALL.
So, Kabam team, please communicate for your intended change in Arena other than one-off Dev Diary please. If the so-called arena improvement promise simply means death matches and if your team still thinking “ hey guys, it’s more challenging now? Why you guys reject it!?”, then I think you will lose more players.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Thanks for your (and the dev team) attention and response.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Ok so likely a stupid question: Will we be able to use our 1/25s and 3/30s safely? Or will they cause a 4x match?
In the 4 Star Featured, you can use 2 1/25's with a 3/45, or a 2 3/30 with a 5/50 4 Star after 20 wins, by the old formula. In the 5 Star Featured/Crystal Trove, you can use a 1/25, with a 2/35, and a 3/45, or a 3/30 with a 4/40, and a 5/50. You can use double 1/25's if you're using a 4/55
After 13 wins in the 4 Star Featured, run maxed out 4 Stars, or 5 Stars above 3/45 After 13 Wins in the 5 Star Featured, run a 4/55 with 2 3/45 or 5/50, after 17 wins, 3/45 or 5/50 to 20 wins.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Rather than Fighting 2 to 3 times PI Opponents In Arena, Why not just add 4x 5x 6x Multiple Point In ARENA. Its Better Than Have To Fighting Hard Mode In The New Arena And Only Add 10% Point Than The Old Arena. Please Read This. Adding The More More Multiple Points Will Be More Easy For the Summoners Than Fighting The Deadmatch Team.
You have more accessible 5* / 6* Arena Boost via Supreme Solo Crystals now.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
I do hope this isn’t the final change made and you continue to work towards making it possible for players not to need to rank for arena to participate without specialized knowledge about building teams by scrolling. I think it’s beneficial to include as many people in the arenas as possible so I’m sad many players will lose their ability to use all their champions.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
It’s the right call here. I think there were good pieces from this, such as actually being able to use a team of all R1 5* past the 10th fight, but the negatives outweighed the positives.
Thanks for listening to the community! Eventually this will all get tuned right
I do hope this isn’t the final change made and you continue to work towards making it possible for players not to need to rank for arena to participate without specialized knowledge about building teams by scrolling. I think it’s beneficial to include as many people in the arenas as possible so I’m sad many players will lose their ability to use all their champions.
I think that's the goal. We were exploring some more options and ideas, but those would have taken more than just a day or two to implement, so in the meantime, this is the solution. I want a world where the Infinite streak is not necessary, and you don't need to know a crazy formula that is always changing in order to succeed.
I do hope this isn’t the final change made and you continue to work towards making it possible for players not to need to rank for arena to participate without specialized knowledge about building teams by scrolling. I think it’s beneficial to include as many people in the arenas as possible so I’m sad many players will lose their ability to use all their champions.
I think that's the goal. We were exploring some more options and ideas, but those would have taken more than just a day or two to implement, so in the meantime, this is the solution. I want a world where the Infinite streak is not necessary, and you don't need to know a crazy formula that is always changing in order to succeed.
Well, the biggest issues currently, are at 5/50, 3/45, and 4/45+1/25, I think these instances can be eased by going up ONE rank in these circumstances. The rest is manageable as I have a win streak over 170, with 9 million in the 4 star featured. I sandbag the 3/45 5 Stars with a 1/25, and I can use the 3/45 on the stronger opponent and the 1/25 on the other two. 95% of the complaints are coming from the 6/3 pain point because nobody will rank 3 a garbage champion like Moon Knight, Deadpool X-Force, etc.
I do hope this isn’t the final change made and you continue to work towards making it possible for players not to need to rank for arena to participate without specialized knowledge about building teams by scrolling. I think it’s beneficial to include as many people in the arenas as possible so I’m sad many players will lose their ability to use all their champions.
I think that's the goal. We were exploring some more options and ideas, but those would have taken more than just a day or two to implement, so in the meantime, this is the solution. I want a world where the Infinite streak is not necessary, and you don't need to know a crazy formula that is always changing in order to succeed.
Well, the biggest issues currently, are at 5/50, 3/45, and 4/45+1/25, I think these instances can be eased by going up ONE rank in these circumstances. The rest is manageable as I have a win streak over 170, with 9 million in the 4 star featured. I sandbag the 3/45 5 Stars with a 1/25, and I can use the 3/45 on the stronger opponent and the 1/25 on the other two. 95% of the complaints are coming from the 6/3 pain point because nobody will rank 3 a garbage champion like Moon Knight, Deadpool X-Force, etc.
It's really about Total PI. Not the Rank of what you're using. I usually stay above a certain PI, and only use my lower ones with two stronger Champs. I rarely run into an issue.
It also includes Boosts, so if you're like me and have 10s and 20s expiring, throwing them on when you're pushing through with your lower Champs can help. I realize that's not the solution people are asking for, but it may help for the time being.
Arena fights are now taking way too long! Way longer than before! And the match ups are much worse too! Was the goal of these changes to make it so less people do the arenas? I know that is not the stated goal, but it sure feels like it could have been, based upon the results of the changes!
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Thank you for your patience in listening to our complaints and for your efficiency in delivering the message to the developer team. In this case arenas will actually be much better as the real pain point was the very passive a.i. in the first few fights before entering the streak. The idea of making the fights challenging by giving us all the time opponents that were way stronger than us was really bad and I also believe that whoever spends time grinding arenas doesn't want to focus on the fights as much as he does during a fight in aw!!! Or else it's just too stressful and tiresome to grind
This definitely fells worse, this is my third time hitting a so called death match. All at round 19 or 20. Seem to hit all or nothing enemies, I tried to bait this magik for about 2 minutes and she would not throw tell she hit 3.
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Thank you very much for a quick solution! Definitely Kudos to fixing it after just one round of the arenas. And the AI not being affected is awesome! AI was definitely the biggest pain, especially during the first 20 fights or so. Again, Thank you very much for handling this the right way!
Alright everybody, thanks for your patience. I come with news!
After a bunch of testing and conversations, we're going to be reverting the changes to Matchmaking. The goal is to have that ready for the next run of Red Goblin on Monday. This will not affect the changes to AI, which have been pretty popular.
There is a chance that the changes will not be ready for Monday, though those chances are slim.
Once again, thank you for your patience as we worked to address this.
Arena fights are now taking way too long! Way longer than before! And the match ups are much worse too! Was the goal of these changes to make it so less people do the arenas? I know that is not the stated goal, but it sure feels like it could have been, based upon the results of the changes!
What am I missing here? I love these fights and the new matchmaking. With the new AI these deathmatches are actually easier, because these high PI teams almost always come with suicide mastery. I got these matches now and they are easy kills most of the time. A few fights take some more work but most of them I literally just watch them kill themselves with recoil. Too bad it is reverting to the old way.
This is not "a major improvement for all players". At least not with regards to how it impacts the progression rate of some players.
The Arena has, and continues to be, content that favors specific player groups over others. These changes don't really change that, they only change which groups are favored.
Before this change, it favored players with wider rosters of Champions at medium or higher Rank, at specific Star ratings for each Arena, and who better understood the matchmaking system (and game system on many other levels). Combined with lots of time and/or use of Units and Boosts.
Now with this change, it changes at least the part of the above criteria from "wider rosters of Champions at medium or higher Rank" to "wider rosters of Champions at higher Rank". It gets rid of the practical usefulness of Champions at medium rank. It kills that "Infinite Streak" method.
I don't know if the players who "better the matchmaking system (and game system on many other levels)" will cease to be a factor in improving Arena performance. Often an awareness of stats and system configuration of a game will yield boosted results. And in a game like MCOC that has complicated number and variable interactions, coupled with limited formal disclosure or tools, it seems especially prone to "in the know" players continuing to get (stacked across different parameters) boosted results.
The recent change will hurt some players, and help other players. Just as the previous version hurt some players, and helped other players.
It is unfortunate that this change also punishes players who spent resources to create a roster for Arena's previous format ("Infinite Streak", etc.). That represents a massive investment of resources into a largely now worthless and useless roster configuration. This positions those players at a clear disadvantage for current content. It also reinforces the notion that you can't rely on game devs to keep any mode's format intact (Arena, Dungeons/Incursions, etc.). This "rely on" issue "complicates" longterm planning for roster development, and brand identity and brand image.
It's a game designer conundrum in how to handle older, "bad" content, that materially affects (or would materially affect if changed) players. If designers leave it in the game as is, it remains bad content. But if designers change it, then they are creating instability in their game in something players have long relied on as a standard. Usually, the longer the content has been left unchanged, and the more that content has (or would have if changed) an impact on players, it's better to just leave the content alone and not change it. Better to leave in old bad content, than overhaul it and then get a new game that plays so different that either (1) players get "screwed" by not being configured for the new game, or (2) the new game doesn't feel like the game players know and they no longer desire to play it at the same level.
In finance, they call "style drift" when you change things enough that it's really a new thing. This is something the game dev industry would be wise to keep track of as a concept as well. Know if they're drifting or potentially drifting, weigh the projected costs and benefits of that. One site I referenced sated, "the strongest voice you can give your product is a well-defined and consistently communicated brand identity." I wouldn't go that far, but brand identity can have its role.
I know this is a tough issue for game devs to juggle. Especially when in a game like MCOC, the players have ASKED for "changes" to the game. And then the devs have to wrestle with what the players think they want vs. what the players will freak out at having changed... until the weather changes... and then the players (and devs) react (or think) a different way. (I've been there)
Maybe it's regarded as an improvement simply because it removes a layer of non-intuitive awareness of stats and system configuration.
That depends on which players fit into the "new to the Arena" demographic. And how these changes end up affecting players performance and participation over time. Is that just a subset of the players doing "Featured 3-Star", "Summoner Trials", and "Quickmatch"? Is it players that have only been playing the game for a certain duration of time? Or only players that have only played less than a certain number of Arena matches?
Without clarification of what defines this demographic, it just becomes a guessing game for me to figure out what it specifically references. So please excuse me if I address the wrong groups below in my guesses. I am happy to change my analysis to a more accurate demographic with further clarification.
I think the adding of a 3-Star at Tier 10 of the Milestone Rewards for the Featured 3-Star Arena "could" likely improve the game for some players. A player can grind less total points to get it, and there is no fixed limit on what % of players can achieve it. "Milestone Rewards" are not mutually exclusive and are not based on performance relative to others.
But how hard is it for a "new player" to build up points?
Any new player that didn't have the skill or roster to keep a winning streak going at 3+ will likely not see any change in their performance.
Any new player that has the skill or roster to keep a winning streak going at 3+ will likely see an increase or drop in their performance, based on their roster having more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena. So, new players with the high skill or high spend to get "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena" will increase performance. New players with the non-high skill or non-high spend to get "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena" will decrease performance (if they can no longer brute force through a handful of hard matches, to get to matches they can use weaker Champions effectively on).
In the area of "Rank Rewards", these rewards are mutually exclusive and are based on performance relative to others.
It's worth noting that longtime players will have (or can much more easily get) "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level" for the lower Star Arenas. So longtime players will be able to much more easily outscore most new players, even more than before the change. The only real limit on longtime players dominating the lower Star Arenas for "Rank Rewards", is if those players choose either to skip the content or to not pursue much higher scoring in those Arenas.
So we're looking at "Rank Rewards" likely being dominated by longtime players who don't blow off the content, and new players with stacked rosters.
I’m sorry but these recent changes are bad for the game. There is zero scenario here where these are treated as fun scenarios, and most can be deathmatches.
Why were these changes made? To annoy progressing players? To annoy veterans?
There was nothing wrong with the infinite streak in the arena.
Right, i normally dont expect much because i am free to play here, but aboit arena it feels, because i know people who invest hours and hours in arena. They have ranked up maximum champs for arena purpose. So they deserve infinity streak and some better rewards. I am playing arena since last 2 years and 90% of the time i never lose streak but in 2 days i lost streaks 4 to 5 times. May be i am noob.
Well that was quick... was able to reach streak 29 starting r1 5* and upward. Sure it was hard, but it was doable as hell because the AI throw their specials more now. Yeah lots of deathsquad, but I rather have them that way with the new arena changes if it gives a player more points to finish milestones faster then zero complaining.
Comments
According to General Feedback Threads, players want less repetitive arena, less defensive AI (hold block at corner without any move), reform the old / stale arena milestones, better chance to obtain champs I/O forcing players to grind 24/7 in 3 days, and etc. Dev Diary acknowledged and promised to bring improvements. However,
BRINGING DEATH MATCHES CONSECUTIVELY AFTER 20 STREAKS SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS IMPROVEMENT AT ALL.
So, Kabam team, please communicate for your intended change in Arena other than one-off Dev Diary please. If the so-called arena improvement promise simply means death matches and if your team still thinking “ hey guys, it’s more challenging now? Why you guys reject it!?”, then I think you will lose more players.
In the 5 Star Featured/Crystal Trove, you can use a 1/25, with a 2/35, and a 3/45, or a 3/30 with a 4/40, and a 5/50.
You can use double 1/25's if you're using a 4/55
After 13 wins in the 4 Star Featured, run maxed out 4 Stars, or 5 Stars above 3/45
After 13 Wins in the 5 Star Featured, run a 4/55 with 2 3/45 or 5/50, after 17 wins, 3/45 or 5/50 to 20 wins.
Thanks for listening to the community! Eventually this will all get tuned right
This definitely fells worse, this is my third time hitting a so called death match. All at round 19 or 20. Seem to hit all or nothing enemies, I tried to bait this magik for about 2 minutes and she would not throw tell she hit 3.
Again, Thank you very much for handling this the right way!
Loki / Carnage / Electro = Beyond-God Tier confirmed
You guys really love dropping the ball, smh
Thanks a lot.
The Arena has, and continues to be, content that favors specific player groups over others. These changes don't really change that, they only change which groups are favored.
Before this change, it favored players with wider rosters of Champions at medium or higher Rank, at specific Star ratings for each Arena, and who better understood the matchmaking system (and game system on many other levels). Combined with lots of time and/or use of Units and Boosts.
Now with this change, it changes at least the part of the above criteria from "wider rosters of Champions at medium or higher Rank" to "wider rosters of Champions at higher Rank". It gets rid of the practical usefulness of Champions at medium rank. It kills that "Infinite Streak" method.
I don't know if the players who "better the matchmaking system (and game system on many other levels)" will cease to be a factor in improving Arena performance. Often an awareness of stats and system configuration of a game will yield boosted results. And in a game like MCOC that has complicated number and variable interactions, coupled with limited formal disclosure or tools, it seems especially prone to "in the know" players continuing to get (stacked across different parameters) boosted results.
The recent change will hurt some players, and help other players. Just as the previous version hurt some players, and helped other players.
It is unfortunate that this change also punishes players who spent resources to create a roster for Arena's previous format ("Infinite Streak", etc.). That represents a massive investment of resources into a largely now worthless and useless roster configuration. This positions those players at a clear disadvantage for current content. It also reinforces the notion that you can't rely on game devs to keep any mode's format intact (Arena, Dungeons/Incursions, etc.). This "rely on" issue "complicates" longterm planning for roster development, and brand identity and brand image.
It's a game designer conundrum in how to handle older, "bad" content, that materially affects (or would materially affect if changed) players. If designers leave it in the game as is, it remains bad content. But if designers change it, then they are creating instability in their game in something players have long relied on as a standard. Usually, the longer the content has been left unchanged, and the more that content has (or would have if changed) an impact on players, it's better to just leave the content alone and not change it. Better to leave in old bad content, than overhaul it and then get a new game that plays so different that either (1) players get "screwed" by not being configured for the new game, or (2) the new game doesn't feel like the game players know and they no longer desire to play it at the same level.
In finance, they call "style drift" when you change things enough that it's really a new thing. This is something the game dev industry would be wise to keep track of as a concept as well. Know if they're drifting or potentially drifting, weigh the projected costs and benefits of that. One site I referenced sated, "the strongest voice you can give your product is a well-defined and consistently communicated brand identity." I wouldn't go that far, but brand identity can have its role.
I know this is a tough issue for game devs to juggle. Especially when in a game like MCOC, the players have ASKED for "changes" to the game. And then the devs have to wrestle with what the players think they want vs. what the players will freak out at having changed... until the weather changes... and then the players (and devs) react (or think) a different way. (I've been there)
Maybe it's regarded as an improvement simply because it removes a layer of non-intuitive awareness of stats and system configuration. That depends on which players fit into the "new to the Arena" demographic. And how these changes end up affecting players performance and participation over time. Is that just a subset of the players doing "Featured 3-Star", "Summoner Trials", and "Quickmatch"? Is it players that have only been playing the game for a certain duration of time? Or only players that have only played less than a certain number of Arena matches?
Without clarification of what defines this demographic, it just becomes a guessing game for me to figure out what it specifically references. So please excuse me if I address the wrong groups below in my guesses. I am happy to change my analysis to a more accurate demographic with further clarification.
I think the adding of a 3-Star at Tier 10 of the Milestone Rewards for the Featured 3-Star Arena "could" likely improve the game for some players. A player can grind less total points to get it, and there is no fixed limit on what % of players can achieve it. "Milestone Rewards" are not mutually exclusive and are not based on performance relative to others.
But how hard is it for a "new player" to build up points?
Any new player that didn't have the skill or roster to keep a winning streak going at 3+ will likely not see any change in their performance.
Any new player that has the skill or roster to keep a winning streak going at 3+ will likely see an increase or drop in their performance, based on their roster having more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena. So, new players with the high skill or high spend to get "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena" will increase performance. New players with the non-high skill or non-high spend to get "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level for that Arena" will decrease performance (if they can no longer brute force through a handful of hard matches, to get to matches they can use weaker Champions effectively on).
In the area of "Rank Rewards", these rewards are mutually exclusive and are based on performance relative to others.
It's worth noting that longtime players will have (or can much more easily get) "more high Rank Champions at the maximum Star level" for the lower Star Arenas. So longtime players will be able to much more easily outscore most new players, even more than before the change. The only real limit on longtime players dominating the lower Star Arenas for "Rank Rewards", is if those players choose either to skip the content or to not pursue much higher scoring in those Arenas.
So we're looking at "Rank Rewards" likely being dominated by longtime players who don't blow off the content, and new players with stacked rosters.