The best way to make BG better is to offer better rewards for everyone.
Well, do something, right? Either give us better rewards or give us more incentives to chase the irrelevant rewards.
For example, this "Valiant" deal is basically chock full of 5 star champs. What do Valiants need with 5 star champs? Stop giving out these types of nonsensical offers or provide meaningful content where we can use these lower tier rewards.
First of all, I don't think there is anything wrong with BG currently. People who are skilled take it very seriously and it's a great format and drives a lot of competition which is essential for any game to survive.
But playing in the GC today and bullying a victory and also getting bullied into a loss made me think. While skill plays a large part, when all else is equal, person A's R6A Onslaught will just put up lower scores than person B's 7R3 sig 200 Onslaught. Or Serpent or Silk or whoever. Again, usually skill wins out (and I include deck management & matchup selection as part of skill), but when skill is close, the rank definitely gives a big edge.
So why not have a side BG format, like we have different Arenas. The current BG with its "open weight" format still remains as king, but make a side BG for like just R6s and below. It will truly shine a spotlight on pure skill. And it will also make 6s and even 5s more relevant for Valiants, who will find a reason to keep spending time and money on these stars whereas now most of Valiants only care about 7s.
Just an idea!
I don’t hate the idea, but I feel like that would more or less just completely make 7*’s that we grinded for; completely irrelevant in most ways. Not to mention, that would basically be skill based matchmaking- which is a number one killer for endgame players. Overall, not a bad idea- but would be almost impossible to implement without killing the mode entirely.
Fair point. BUT — what if you only implemented the idea for a three day shootout? I don’t think the game economy would crash or the world would crumble because someone’s seven star champ is less important in one game mode, for a limited amount of time.
Probably not. But "will not end the game" is not a reason to do something. "Will end the game" is a reason to not do something. "Won't end the game" is just saying however dumb an idea is, it isn't as dumb as possible.
So you don’t think there are any more creative ways to use the BG game mode for innovation or experimentation? After all, that is what we were talking about here until you arrived with the usual lectures about why nothing can ever be changed or even effectively critiqued because we don’t have all the wonderful information you do. What we were doing was engaging in a harmless speculative exercise about “what might be” — which I should have remembered is always pointless in the forum.
We were talking about a specific idea, which I explained why I thought would be a bad idea but was at least worth responding to. But I was specifically replying to your post asking another specific question, which was whether implementing this otherwise bad idea would be game breaking if it was only done in a limited fashion. Which as I said it wouldn't be, but that wouldn't be a good reason to implement something that is in general a bad idea.
I don't believe my usual lectures have anything to do with why nothing can ever be changed or critiqued. That's just you reacting emotionally and irrationally to one of your own posts being critiqued, which is quite a bit of irony for a Tuesday. Usually that's more of a Thursday/Friday thing.
First of all, I don't think there is anything wrong with BG currently. People who are skilled take it very seriously and it's a great format and drives a lot of competition which is essential for any game to survive.
But playing in the GC today and bullying a victory and also getting bullied into a loss made me think. While skill plays a large part, when all else is equal, person A's R6A Onslaught will just put up lower scores than person B's 7R3 sig 200 Onslaught. Or Serpent or Silk or whoever. Again, usually skill wins out (and I include deck management & matchup selection as part of skill), but when skill is close, the rank definitely gives a big edge.
So why not have a side BG format, like we have different Arenas. The current BG with its "open weight" format still remains as king, but make a side BG for like just R6s and below. It will truly shine a spotlight on pure skill. And it will also make 6s and even 5s more relevant for Valiants, who will find a reason to keep spending time and money on these stars whereas now most of Valiants only care about 7s.
Just an idea!
I don’t hate the idea, but I feel like that would more or less just completely make 7*’s that we grinded for; completely irrelevant in most ways. Not to mention, that would basically be skill based matchmaking- which is a number one killer for endgame players. Overall, not a bad idea- but would be almost impossible to implement without killing the mode entirely.
Fair point. BUT — what if you only implemented the idea for a three day shootout? I don’t think the game economy would crash or the world would crumble because someone’s seven star champ is less important in one game mode, for a limited amount of time.
Probably not. But "will not end the game" is not a reason to do something. "Will end the game" is a reason to not do something. "Won't end the game" is just saying however dumb an idea is, it isn't as dumb as possible.
So you don’t think there are any more creative ways to use the BG game mode for innovation or experimentation? After all, that is what we were talking about here until you arrived with the usual lectures about why nothing can ever be changed or even effectively critiqued because we don’t have all the wonderful information you do. What we were doing was engaging in a harmless speculative exercise about “what might be” — which I should have remembered is always pointless in the forum.
We were talking about a specific idea, which I explained why I thought would be a bad idea but was at least worth responding to. But I was specifically replying to your post asking another specific question, which was whether implementing this otherwise bad idea would be game breaking if it was only done in a limited fashion. Which as I said it wouldn't be, but that wouldn't be a good reason to implement something that is in general a bad idea.
I don't believe my usual lectures have anything to do with why nothing can ever be changed or critiqued. That's just you reacting emotionally and irrationally to one of your own posts being critiqued, which is quite a bit of irony for a Tuesday. Usually that's more of a Thursday/Friday thing.
Fair enough, my apologies. Why are unique, short-form BG events (another way to use the infrastructure Kabam has built) a bad idea?
First of all, I don't think there is anything wrong with BG currently. People who are skilled take it very seriously and it's a great format and drives a lot of competition which is essential for any game to survive.
But playing in the GC today and bullying a victory and also getting bullied into a loss made me think. While skill plays a large part, when all else is equal, person A's R6A Onslaught will just put up lower scores than person B's 7R3 sig 200 Onslaught. Or Serpent or Silk or whoever. Again, usually skill wins out (and I include deck management & matchup selection as part of skill), but when skill is close, the rank definitely gives a big edge.
So why not have a side BG format, like we have different Arenas. The current BG with its "open weight" format still remains as king, but make a side BG for like just R6s and below. It will truly shine a spotlight on pure skill. And it will also make 6s and even 5s more relevant for Valiants, who will find a reason to keep spending time and money on these stars whereas now most of Valiants only care about 7s.
Just an idea!
I don’t hate the idea, but I feel like that would more or less just completely make 7*’s that we grinded for; completely irrelevant in most ways. Not to mention, that would basically be skill based matchmaking- which is a number one killer for endgame players. Overall, not a bad idea- but would be almost impossible to implement without killing the mode entirely.
Fair point. BUT — what if you only implemented the idea for a three day shootout? I don’t think the game economy would crash or the world would crumble because someone’s seven star champ is less important in one game mode, for a limited amount of time.
Probably not. But "will not end the game" is not a reason to do something. "Will end the game" is a reason to not do something. "Won't end the game" is just saying however dumb an idea is, it isn't as dumb as possible.
So you don’t think there are any more creative ways to use the BG game mode for innovation or experimentation? After all, that is what we were talking about here until you arrived with the usual lectures about why nothing can ever be changed or even effectively critiqued because we don’t have all the wonderful information you do. What we were doing was engaging in a harmless speculative exercise about “what might be” — which I should have remembered is always pointless in the forum.
We were talking about a specific idea, which I explained why I thought would be a bad idea but was at least worth responding to. But I was specifically replying to your post asking another specific question, which was whether implementing this otherwise bad idea would be game breaking if it was only done in a limited fashion. Which as I said it wouldn't be, but that wouldn't be a good reason to implement something that is in general a bad idea.
I don't believe my usual lectures have anything to do with why nothing can ever be changed or critiqued. That's just you reacting emotionally and irrationally to one of your own posts being critiqued, which is quite a bit of irony for a Tuesday. Usually that's more of a Thursday/Friday thing.
Fair enough, my apologies. Why are unique, short-form BG events (another way to use the infrastructure Kabam has built) a bad idea?
I didn't say they were. All I said was, saying they are not game breaking is not a good reason to do them. There has to be a compelling reason to put the resources into making them, and then incur the cost of them either displacing normal BG seasons or overlapping and diluting them. And without hearing some specifics about how you would go about doing that, I don't see the net positives of doing that.
At the moment Battlegrounds is an exceptionally successful game mode, far exceeding even my most optimistic predictions when it was first released. There are seasons where a majority of all players who even qualify to participate actually participate on at least some level, and I'm not sure you can reliably say that about any other game mode. So anything that would dilute the participation (split the players into two different modes simultaneously) or disrupt the current scheduling of the mode is something to be absolutely certain can be justified. Players have even started to become protective of off season BG, which you would think would be a relatively nothing burger.
Bespoke events are rare in MCOC because the development time invested into them gets very little long term return. They happen, and then they are gone. All other things being equal, the devs are far more likely to invest that time into things they can use repeatedly, even if infrequently. So I would imagine any attempt to create "special events" with Battlegrounds other than the boosted reward seasons they already do would likely not be unique one-off events. If they can't figure out a way to justify doing those things on some sort of periodic basis, they probably wouldn't do it, and I probably wouldn't support burning the development time on it myself.
One idea that comes up periodically is a kind of top tier tournament, something akin to the showdown but integrated into the game. But if you're going to do something like that, there's no point in only doing it once, and then you have to figure out what everyone else will be doing while the tournament was on, and it becomes a question of slotting it into the game in a holistic fashion. I suspect that's a major stumbling block on attempting such an idea.
All interesting. Personally, BG passed the threshold from highly engaging to “becoming repetitive” about six months ago. I still enjoy it, but it feels like it’s settling into a routine that, personally, I would like to see disrupted or innovated upon.
I understand a developer’s need for efficient use of resources and the value of reuse. At the same time, I would ask where has the innovation been the past two years since BG was introduced?Clearly lots of new ideas in champ design and RPG, lots of new stuff in terms of champ acquisition and commercial features. I’d put Necro out there, at least for the first go-round in winter of 2024-25. And I still appreciate the effort that goes into to fight design for the EoP stuff. But the abundant recycling is also undeniable. EoP concept all over again (albeit with a new nightmare boss). Crucible was great but an obvious repackaging. By the time I finished the latest Carinas, I was tremendously tired of Necro. Feels like the business model is showing a little bit.
That’s what I always think about BG as a platform for innovation, experimentation, etc. It’s clearly a mode that has settled into its rhythm as you pointed out, but it also feels like the mode with the least baggage and the potential to evolve — or at least become something unexpected for short bursts of time.
First of all, I don't think there is anything wrong with BG currently. People who are skilled take it very seriously and it's a great format and drives a lot of competition which is essential for any game to survive.
But playing in the GC today and bullying a victory and also getting bullied into a loss made me think. While skill plays a large part, when all else is equal, person A's R6A Onslaught will just put up lower scores than person B's 7R3 sig 200 Onslaught. Or Serpent or Silk or whoever. Again, usually skill wins out (and I include deck management & matchup selection as part of skill), but when skill is close, the rank definitely gives a big edge.
So why not have a side BG format, like we have different Arenas. The current BG with its "open weight" format still remains as king, but make a side BG for like just R6s and below. It will truly shine a spotlight on pure skill. And it will also make 6s and even 5s more relevant for Valiants, who will find a reason to keep spending time and money on these stars whereas now most of Valiants only care about 7s.
Just an idea!
Ans is simple - it needs 2x attention & resources so it's out of budget
The best way to make BG better is to offer better rewards for everyone.
Well, do something, right? Either give us better rewards or give us more incentives to chase the irrelevant rewards.
For example, this "Valiant" deal is basically chock full of 5 star champs. What do Valiants need with 5 star champs? Stop giving out these types of nonsensical offers or provide meaningful content where we can use these lower tier rewards.
The game is built around RNG. There you have an Offer for a chance at 32 potential 7*s. Do you think they're going to remove the 5* and 6* outcomes and give everyone who buys it 32 7*s and some T7 Frags? First of all, lower Rarity Champs aren't just filler. They're a very specific design aspect. Some poeple choose to forget about everything below the highest they can muster. Some work a bit on everything. Not everyone believes it's totally and utterly useless. Moreover, those lower outcomes are what pace and balance the Reward system.
Comments
For example, this "Valiant" deal is basically chock full of 5 star champs. What do Valiants need with 5 star champs? Stop giving out these types of nonsensical offers or provide meaningful content where we can use these lower tier rewards.
I don't believe my usual lectures have anything to do with why nothing can ever be changed or critiqued. That's just you reacting emotionally and irrationally to one of your own posts being critiqued, which is quite a bit of irony for a Tuesday. Usually that's more of a Thursday/Friday thing.
Fair enough, my apologies. Why are unique, short-form BG events (another way to use the infrastructure Kabam has built) a bad idea?
At the moment Battlegrounds is an exceptionally successful game mode, far exceeding even my most optimistic predictions when it was first released. There are seasons where a majority of all players who even qualify to participate actually participate on at least some level, and I'm not sure you can reliably say that about any other game mode. So anything that would dilute the participation (split the players into two different modes simultaneously) or disrupt the current scheduling of the mode is something to be absolutely certain can be justified. Players have even started to become protective of off season BG, which you would think would be a relatively nothing burger.
Bespoke events are rare in MCOC because the development time invested into them gets very little long term return. They happen, and then they are gone. All other things being equal, the devs are far more likely to invest that time into things they can use repeatedly, even if infrequently. So I would imagine any attempt to create "special events" with Battlegrounds other than the boosted reward seasons they already do would likely not be unique one-off events. If they can't figure out a way to justify doing those things on some sort of periodic basis, they probably wouldn't do it, and I probably wouldn't support burning the development time on it myself.
One idea that comes up periodically is a kind of top tier tournament, something akin to the showdown but integrated into the game. But if you're going to do something like that, there's no point in only doing it once, and then you have to figure out what everyone else will be doing while the tournament was on, and it becomes a question of slotting it into the game in a holistic fashion. I suspect that's a major stumbling block on attempting such an idea.
I understand a developer’s need for efficient use of resources and the value of reuse. At the same time, I would ask where has the innovation been the past two years since BG was introduced?Clearly lots of new ideas in champ design and RPG, lots of new stuff in terms of champ acquisition and commercial features. I’d put Necro out there, at least for the first go-round in winter of 2024-25. And I still appreciate the effort that goes into to fight design for the EoP stuff. But the abundant recycling is also undeniable. EoP concept all over again (albeit with a new nightmare boss). Crucible was great but an obvious repackaging. By the time I finished the latest Carinas, I was tremendously tired of Necro. Feels like the business model is showing a little bit.
That’s what I always think about BG as a platform for innovation, experimentation, etc. It’s clearly a mode that has settled into its rhythm as you pointed out, but it also feels like the mode with the least baggage and the potential to evolve — or at least become something unexpected for short bursts of time.