Witness the Great Revival! Act 6 Chapter 1 - Coming March 13th

1535456585978

Comments

  • Tasty_Yum_YumsTasty_Yum_Yums Posts: 393 ★★★
    Voltolos said:

    HAVING TO bring in a 6* champ, means you can’t bring in a 5* in its place 🤔🤪

    But you can still use 5* champs for the rest of the team. 5* champs aren't going to be useless in Act 6.2-4
    You don’t know that....
  • VoltolosVoltolos Posts: 555 ★★

    Voltolos said:

    HAVING TO bring in a 6* champ, means you can’t bring in a 5* in its place 🤔🤪

    But you can still use 5* champs for the rest of the team. 5* champs aren't going to be useless in Act 6.2-4
    You don’t know that....
    You dont know that it doesnt work like that and I'd interpret Miike separating the whole team with just one class and teh rarity requirements means that the latter wont be for whole teams
  • @Voltolos
    I see, so you’ve played Act 6 and are confirming that I don’t need to worry. Got it.

    I can only go by what they tell me, and all they’ve told me is that x amount will be required to be brought to get past the gates. So, if they require 3 6*’s I’ll be good, if they require 4, I’m stuck. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Also, I hope my meme tier 6* doesn’t keep me from bringing in my awesome synergy I need cuz I can’t fit them on my team.

    Cool.
  • VoltolosVoltolos Posts: 555 ★★

    @Voltolos
    I see, so you’ve played Act 6 and are confirming that I don’t need to worry. Got it.

    I can only go by what they tell me, and all they’ve told me is that x amount will be required to be brought to get past the gates. So, if they require 3 6*’s I’ll be good, if they require 4, I’m stuck. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Also, I hope my meme tier 6* doesn’t keep me from bringing in my awesome synergy I need cuz I can’t fit them on my team.

    Cool.

    I usually just complain about things that I know will be a problem. Just assuming that the worst happens and getting angry about that is unhealthy
  • Wait a minute.....are they trying to affect my synergies??? Nah. Just being paranoid. Relax. Relax.
  • My health is fine. But thanks for the advice!!!
  • Tasty_Yum_YumsTasty_Yum_Yums Posts: 393 ★★★
    Voltolos said:

    Voltolos said:

    HAVING TO bring in a 6* champ, means you can’t bring in a 5* in its place 🤔🤪

    But you can still use 5* champs for the rest of the team. 5* champs aren't going to be useless in Act 6.2-4
    You don’t know that....
    You dont know that it doesnt work like that and I'd interpret Miike separating the whole team with just one class and teh rarity requirements means that the latter wont be for whole teams
    I never claimed to know it would or wouldn’t work. I claimed you don’t know how the rest of act 6 looks. Don’t change my words to fit your narrative.
  • xNigxNig Posts: 3,610 ★★★★★

    Wait a minute.....are they trying to affect my synergies??? Nah. Just being paranoid. Relax. Relax.

    Probably would be affecting your Ghost synergies. Are you saying you can’t play ghost without them?
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 8,452 Guardian
    arsjum said:

    DNA3000 said:

    arsjum said:

    DrZola said:

    This thread just needs to die Lol.🤣😂

    Agreed. It’s an extremely unpopular decision with only the barest of justifications offered thus far.
    I doubt any of that is going to change regardless of how many posts show up in this thread. And as long as players dump resources into snowball’s-chance FGMCs, there’s no incentive to change anything.

    Dr. Zola
    The only way Kabam can reconsider the decision on 4* restriction is if most people refuse to do Act 6.1 when it drops. But we know it won’t happen as the players will flock to conquering it. So, not only Kabam is going to ignore complaints here but the company is in a SAFE POSITION to do so!
    I don't think you understand the purpose of a progress gate. The purpose is to initially limit the number of players capable of crossing the gate. Most people will be incapable of doing Act 6 initially whether they want to or not, which is intentional. Boycotting content the developers are explicitly saying they are trying to limit the number of people capable of blasting through it would be entirely unproductive.
    You are right, I do not understand the inner nuances of game development. I have no experience in it. I am just a regular player. What I was trying to say above--my educated guess, no hard evidence--was based on how Kabam responded to Map 7 complaints. Map 7 gated in two major ways: the high cost of donations and increased number of linked nodes. The purpose of the gate, the argument went, was to limit the number of players doing Map 7 for the time being. Many people complained here in the forums. Kabam went ahead. You might have heard, however, that after 3 weeks of running Map 7, Kabam decided to introduce some changes, significantly reducing the number of linked nodes. Why did they do so? Out of a good heart? Did they realize all of a sudden that placing so many linked nodes was too punishing to players? Or was it because the number of players willing to put up with the stringent requirements turned out to be even lower than they expected? I do not know for sure but my gut feeling suggests the latter.
    Two things. First of all, the cost of Map 7 and the linked nodes of Map 7 both "gate" Map 7 but not in the same sense of the word. The cost of Map 7 is a resource gate: you have to gather enough resources in different areas of the game to afford to do Map 7. The presumption is that most players won't be able to sustain those costs, and thus will have to pick and choose when (if ever) to do Map 7. The linked nodes in the map are a form of difficulty gate: they place a specific challenge to overcome within the map, coordinating player activity to run the map efficiently. What we're talking about here is a progress gate: locking players out of certain content unless they have a certain kind of higher progress roster.

    When you said earlier "The only way Kabam can reconsider the decision on 4* restriction is if most people refuse to do Act 6.1 when it drops" that's almost certainly not what happened with Map 7. In fact I would argue that the reverse happened: more alliances were (and are) running Map 7 than they anticipated, and that they thought the map costs would limit. The problem became one of burnout. Players like to say that the players always know what's best for them, but that's completely false: they generally don't. The links are incredibly annoying and also place a heavy meta-gaming burden on the players - they force players to make themselves available to play the game constantly, separate from any actual gameplay requirements. That shouldn't have been a problem, because players were not expected to run Map 7 constantly. But as I argued when the map costs were first revealed, history says that's not how the top players in any game behave. They will push to unreasonable degrees to play the highest, most rewarding content, as much as possible, to their own detriment. Top players have no throttle.

    If I had to guess, I would say the links were reduced in Map 7 to prevent burnout, not to make the map more accessible. And they had to do that because for all the complaints about the costs of running Map 7, they were still set too low to be any barrier at all to top alliances just running Map 7 over and over again. Basically, and of course this is a bit of a simplification, its not that too few players were playing Map 7, too many were playing Map 7 and killing themselves doing it.
    arsjum said:

    Of course, Kabam is expecting that only a small number of players will be attempting Act 6. But they should be expecting some percentage--however small it is--of players attempting it, right?

    That's a true statement, but that's also a good refutation of your earlier statement "the only way Kabam can reconsider the decision on 4* restriction is if most people refuse to do Act 6.1 when it drops." They fully expect most people to not do it, when it initially drops. They probably expect that number to slowly rise over time as more players cross the threshold of having a strong enough roster. So deliberately not doing the content when it first drops is indistinguishable from what they expect. Even worse, it can actually make the situation look even better than it is. It would be good if some players attack the content immediately, and more do over time. That upward curve would suggest to any game developer that the gate is working correctly. But the reverse: some people do it immediately, and fewer people continue to attack it over time, might suggest a problem: the gate might be too harsh, and the only people capable of doing it are veteran players with such large rosters they are already way over the gate.

    If a player that *can* do it, decides to deliberately not to it to make some kind of statement, that would lower the number of people doing it immediately. If some percentage of those players eventually cave in and do the content, the number of people doing the content will rise over time due to those defections. That can actually make a broken curve look like a working one. Ironically, if players wanted to make a statement that would show up in datamining, all the players capable of doing Act 6 at all should immediately attempt it at launch. That would deplete the playerbase of players able to do Act 6 and sitting on the sidelines, which means the number of players that "cross the gate" and enter Act 6 would be lower than expected, which could prompt Kabam to reexamine the gate.

  • XNickRivXNickRiv Posts: 9
    $100 is ridiculous! That is 2017 prices. It’s ridiculous.
    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    Really? After you tell us they’re worthless. This is a slap in the face.

    Act 5, Variant and UC eq still exist and so do players that dont have large 5* rosters who therefore need 4* champs to farm 5* shards
  • VoltolosVoltolos Posts: 555 ★★
    XNickRiv said:

    $100 is ridiculous! That is 2017 prices. It’s ridiculous.

    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    Really? After you tell us they’re worthless. This is a slap in the face.

    Act 5, Variant and UC eq still exist and so do players that dont have large 5* rosters who therefore need 4* champs to farm 5* shards
    You're right but its still not about Act 6 so its irrelevant to this disscussion
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,059 ★★★
    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    $100 is ridiculous! That is 2017 prices. It’s ridiculous.

    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    Really? After you tell us they’re worthless. This is a slap in the face.

    Act 5, Variant and UC eq still exist and so do players that dont have large 5* rosters who therefore need 4* champs to farm 5* shards
    You're right but its still not about Act 6 so its irrelevant to this disscussion
    You could argue that it is relevant if this is how they plan to make 5* shards more available since they are included in the offer
  • VoltolosVoltolos Posts: 555 ★★
    Dshu said:

    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    $100 is ridiculous! That is 2017 prices. It’s ridiculous.

    Voltolos said:

    XNickRiv said:

    Really? After you tell us they’re worthless. This is a slap in the face.

    Act 5, Variant and UC eq still exist and so do players that dont have large 5* rosters who therefore need 4* champs to farm 5* shards
    You're right but its still not about Act 6 so its irrelevant to this disscussion
    You could argue that it is relevant if this is how they plan to make 5* shards more available since they are included in the offer
    Since events like nick furys intel stuff is how they want to make 5* shards more available this offer doesnt really matter here. Also there is already another discussion going on in another thread
  • TheVyrusTheVyrus Posts: 294 ★★
    It is almost like act 6 should be titled Rebirth. It is like you are starting over with 5 and 6 star champs only.
  • Doomsfist79Doomsfist79 Posts: 281 ★★
    LOL.. soo... I think the community needs to have a sense of humour.. I've posted my thoughts about this 4*/act6 thing.. up to today i thought it was a terrible idea etc etc..Then, today I realized what's going down.. it's actually a joke.. think about it.. skrulls have taken over kabam and are putting out false information.. it's actually pretty clever on kabams part.. although i don't know if they took into account the negative backlash they would receive..

    Why do I think this? Well... any other time we have had 50+ pages of complaints on the forums, kabam have actually done a pretty decent job of responding to the community.. this time.. they have made 2 (maybe 3) announcements which didn't make much sense and actually only made things worse.. they suggested that they were going to allow content creators early access to act 6 to show what it's really like.. they had a beta a while back.. yet no information from that was allowed to be disclosed.. none of the content creators have actually said they have been allowed early access to act 6.. and there has been no content about it released yet (with 2 days before it goes live)..

    Today they released several 4* offers.. at first I saw those and thought WTF.. then after thinking about it and coming to my realization, I had to laugh.. First, if the exclusion of 4*s were true.. then Kabam have just allowed for anyone who buys todays offers to get refunds from apple and google play.. you can't intentionally sell things that people can't use.. never mind the refunds.. they would also be opening themselves up to legal action.. also.. they would have to have a disclaimer stating that 4*s are excluded from certain content.. a lot of people who are concentrating on 4*s would be newer players who probably aren't very active on the forums.. there has been no in game announcement about the exclusion of 4*s..

    Finally, Kabam has made a great game.. I realize they piss us off from time to time.. but overall it's a great game hence we are so passionate about it.. I can't see anyway for a company who can make such a great product to turn around and make such terrible decisions as to intentionally discourage people from playing the game..

    With all that being said.. I'll wait until act6 is live, to make a final judgement.. until then, I gotta hand it to you Kabam.. well played.. well played indeed..
  • FrankCYoungFrankCYoung Posts: 194
    I guess it is what it is...all the complaining and explanations along with the explaining in the world won’t make any difference, it’s just the way it’s going to be and we either accept it and continue on or quit and call it a day, it’s sad and frustrating to lots of fellow players of the game but at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter and I know it should in some way it should. As I found out in the years of change rather good, bad or ugly in the game once a decision is made and put fourth it pretty much set in stone and can’t be undone...a support ticket, mods, community, YouTube reviewers can’t do anything but give input on the situation and that’s about it.
  • FrankCYoungFrankCYoung Posts: 194
    I feel for all the players of the game, new or old. Companies will do what they want with there products rather it be a good or bad...some decisions make it work others put a company out of business, seems about like a employer...there not there to make friends but they want you to think that your a big part of the product but in reality your not...I played a few great mobile games in the past that I really enjoyed then one day they vanished. Sad way things that we love get abused and torn apart...wish there was someway to show we mattered in the game.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,468 ★★★★★
    DrZola said:

    After listening to Dork Lessons I agree. I understand that not all in the community want 4* banned, but the more I think about it. There are places for 4*, but as the content is added the bar will be raised. I do agree that they should have given more warning so the community had appropriate time to respond and so people could use time and resources on getting and ranking up 5* instead of investing in their four stars. Kabam can't go back in time to change things or go into the Quantum Realm, but do hope there is other good things coming that make this situation better and show they do care for the community at large. One thing I found odd is the recent offer for 4*s it doesn't make sense especially considering they just banned them from Act 6 content.

    Some suggestions I have for Kabam:

    1.) Provide a 5* Basic Arena. This would be helpful and would help people build and expand their 5* roster.
    2.) Provide more 5* shards in Heroic and above monthly quests. Not only this, but have more opportunities at 5* shards in all types of quest; monthly, unique, and story.
    3.) For players of a certain level and in Act 4 and above: provide extra 5* for the content they have completed
    4.) For players of level 40 and above provide in their daily crystal some 5* shards, say 250. Not a lot, but at least another way of obtaining them.
    5.) Reduce the cost of 5* crystals from 10K to 6K.

    These are a few of my suggestions. Kabam please read and consider. Community feel free to comment, but do so in a way that is productive and not attacking.

    Respectfully,

    BowTieJohn

    One thing I would add is the ability for players to obtain class specific 5* crystals for shards. Continual dilution of the 5* pool makes more 5* shards potentially meaningless.

    Dr. Zola
    I've brought that up before. I'd still support that. Perhaps something similar to the Dungeon Crystals, where they're still RNG-based, but at least give a chance to isolate a bit.
  • BrainimpacterBrainimpacter Posts: 577 ★★★
    edited March 11
    I demand we all get a new upgrade gem that turns a 4 star of our choosing into a 5 star :D :p ;) :D :D :D
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 4,990 ★★★★★

    I demand we all get a new upgrade gem that turns a 4 star of our choosing into a 5 star :D :p ;) :D :D :D

    5* SW at last!
  • AmonthirAmonthir Posts: 724 ★★★

    I demand we all get a new upgrade gem that turns a 4 star of our choosing into a 5 star :D :p ;) :D :D :D

    5* SW at last!
    Would be an interesting time to suddenly decide to release certain champs as 5* in special FGMC right before Act 6 opens.
  • DrZolaDrZola Posts: 2,797 ★★★★★

    DrZola said:

    After listening to Dork Lessons I agree. I understand that not all in the community want 4* banned, but the more I think about it. There are places for 4*, but as the content is added the bar will be raised. I do agree that they should have given more warning so the community had appropriate time to respond and so people could use time and resources on getting and ranking up 5* instead of investing in their four stars. Kabam can't go back in time to change things or go into the Quantum Realm, but do hope there is other good things coming that make this situation better and show they do care for the community at large. One thing I found odd is the recent offer for 4*s it doesn't make sense especially considering they just banned them from Act 6 content.

    Some suggestions I have for Kabam:

    1.) Provide a 5* Basic Arena. This would be helpful and would help people build and expand their 5* roster.
    2.) Provide more 5* shards in Heroic and above monthly quests. Not only this, but have more opportunities at 5* shards in all types of quest; monthly, unique, and story.
    3.) For players of a certain level and in Act 4 and above: provide extra 5* for the content they have completed
    4.) For players of level 40 and above provide in their daily crystal some 5* shards, say 250. Not a lot, but at least another way of obtaining them.
    5.) Reduce the cost of 5* crystals from 10K to 6K.

    These are a few of my suggestions. Kabam please read and consider. Community feel free to comment, but do so in a way that is productive and not attacking.

    Respectfully,

    BowTieJohn

    One thing I would add is the ability for players to obtain class specific 5* crystals for shards. Continual dilution of the 5* pool makes more 5* shards potentially meaningless.

    Dr. Zola
    I've brought that up before. I'd still support that. Perhaps something similar to the Dungeon Crystals, where they're still RNG-based, but at least give a chance to isolate a bit.
    Right. I mention class because of Miike’s suggestion that there may be class-specific paths or quests coming. Even if I don’t like a Beast or Storm or Iceman, at least I would know that I am getting a 5* mutant that is useable in gated content. Dungeon-type crystals with all classes may as well be full-on basics.

    Dr. Zola
  • FrankCYoungFrankCYoung Posts: 194
    I can’t believe I just wasted 15 minutes of my life on this, I mean the sun is shining, it’s nice outside, im picking my mistress up in a few to rank up my 5*...life is good when not behind a computer screen 🤤
  • Mathking13Mathking13 Posts: 708 ★★★
    So I'm sure we've all heard it by now. 4* restrictions on Act 6 are pretty annoying. Frustrating even.
    But I think that all this is is that Kabam had a legitimately good idea and just used it in the wrong way.
    If I was to change the 6.1 restrictions in any way, it would be to also allow MAXED 4* champions. This means that you can still bring 4*s into the new content, but you will have HAD to invest resources into them; you can't just pull a 4* heimdall and that's it you're set for the content. t3 and t4 class catalysts are still not too easy to get for me, and 5/50 is still a big investment. (And yes I invested 3 t4 mutant catalysts into OML. And I don't regret it.)
    Now another idea that I had is that Kabam implements ROSTER RESTRICTIONS on even being able to enter act 6 in the first place. Imagine this. You can't enter act 6 until you have [X] 5- or 6-star champions (I'd personally say something around 15 to 20). This makes it so that Kabam at least knows that you're starting to develop a 5* roster, and whether or not you can do the content isn't based upon whether the 5*s you've gotten are good or not.

    So what do you guys think? How else do you think Kabam could make restrictions on act 6 while still being fair? Do you think there are still problems with the ideas I've suggested? Let's talk!
  • ẞlооdẞlооd Posts: 1,268 ★★★
    Has backlash like this ever overturned a decision by Kabam? I'm curious how the company has handled it in the past given how they're handling it now..
  • Midknight007Midknight007 Posts: 572 ★★★
    ẞlооd said:

    Has backlash like this ever overturned a decision by Kabam? I'm curious how the company has handled it in the past given how they're handling it now..

    Not overturned completely, but we did compromise on CA and Thor, removal of some new stats like block penetration, and forced the scrapping of gear after the release of 12.0.
  • Erza_ScarletErza_Scarlet Posts: 80
    Kabam surely can't go on with this decision after all these feedbacks... I mean,,they can't be that stupid...


    Can they? 🤔
Sign In or Register to comment.