**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
We have not set an end-date for the new period, but we will update this banner when we have more information.

Halls of Healing and Halls of Fortune return, with Special Guest: Goldpool!

1456810

Comments

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,628 Guardian

    Forward said:

    Chriz4061 said:

    @Kabam Miike can you confirm whether all difficulties are supposed to be 1 energy as we were told “low energy costs” yet the hardest difficulty costs 3 energy. Not low at all

    That is correct.
    What's correct? That it's supposed to be 1 energy per or 1 for the easiest, 2 for the second and 3 for the third?
    What's displayed in game is correct. I understand that it might not seem low to everybody, but it is correct.
    To be honest, I don't think it is likely to seem low to anybody. My gut instinct is to say those are just normal energy costs for any map of similar rewards. The math does say that the gold per energy point ratio is higher for the top map, so technically speaking anyone comfortable with the one energy point map should be happy with the three energy point map because they are still getting more gold for the same energy burn (it is about 4.1 times the gold for three times the energy) but these energy costs are still pretty high on an absolute basis.

    The problem isn't really the 1/2/3 energy scale, as some people are focusing on. That's entirely reasonable for the jump in rewards to be accompanied by a jump in energy costs. It is the step count that seems to me to be completely artificial: 44 total steps for full exploration seems very high to me. If every single fight on the maps had, say, a chance to drop a goldpool crystal, then I would actually prefer the longer maps and consider that reasonable incentivization for all the fights on the map. I'd actually consider the relative energy costs to be at least "reasonably low" compared to the potential rewards.
  • GamerGamer Posts: 10,116 ★★★★★
    @GroundedWisdom what we is don’t like it ther said it was low but what ther mean what low energy for esay gold ther shuld not hav said low energy for this quset when the quset is the same as the old one that is the sad part.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    My point is that people are hung up on phrasing, but the reaction doesn't really seem proportionate. They called it low. People don't think that's low. Okay. Fair enough. To them it can be considered low. Perhaps they misspoke. Does it matter? Ever since it's been announced, it's been not good enough for some. Not enough Gold. Too little, too late. Too much Energy. Now it's that they called it low. I do my best not to be judgmental and objective, but every once in a while, ya gotta say, just be happy....or not. Lol. People have been asking for Gold. Now they have access to some. Pick and choose your battles, people.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    I'm not trying to defend anything. That's not my responsibility. "The Halls of Fortune have low energy costs, while the Halls of Healing require no energy to run and will have entry limits."
    It didn't say lower than usual. It said low. It's called Advertising. "For the low, low price of.....". If you're offended by that, I don't debate how people feel. As for the issue however, it's really blown out of proportion. That's my opinion.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,628 Guardian

    This however? It's misrepresentation.

    Personally, I consider it a case where marketing speak drifted away from the obviously hyperbolic to the objectively and off-guardedly errant.

    In other words, if McDonalds says they have the best tasting burger in a commercial, I don't consider that a "lie" if it turns out that I don't think it's the best tasting burger. I wouldn't even consider that a lie if everyone I knew agreed it wasn't the best tasting burger. That's just marketing. But if they said their burger had the most ground beef of any burger and it wasn't even close, I'd consider that a less forgiveable error because that's an objective statement you don't normally cut marketing slack over.

    If marketing said the Halls of Fortune offered "very good value" for the energy, I'd cut them slack for that statement even if every single forum poster disagreed. That's a matter of opinion, and even if it wasn't it is also the kind of place you expect marketing to be a little hyperbolic, so you'd know (or should know) to take that statement with a grain of salt anyway. But I think "low energy costs" is on the other side of the line. I don't think they intended to be misleading, but marketing incorrectly left their assigned playground of hyperbole and tried to play their game on the wrong playing field.

    Either way, I don't think it is a big deal, but I do think Kabam took a tiny thing and made it a bigger thing by trying to defend it, since had they said "sorry, we shouldn't have described it that way" probably would have made the people complaining about it look unreasonably testy if they pushed it. But as often happens, the conversation is less about the thing, and more about the handling of the thing, and I think Kabam should know by now the handling of the thing is always more important than the thing.
  • Darkness275Darkness275 Posts: 816 ★★★★

    @DNA3000 well said. @Darkness275 absolutely people wouldn't be upset if they hadn't announced it as low energy. That doesn't mean people shouldn't object when the announcement is obviously wrong and instead of owning it they double down. "Might not seem low to everybody?" How about might not seem low to anybody... because it's the regular energy cost.

    You're replying @ me as if we didn't just both say the same thing.
  • CRE4TORCRE4TOR Posts: 39
    This is far from low energy cost, considering Kabam still has monthly content that hasn’t been released. The highest HOH takes more than 2 full rounds of energy to complete... not a chance to complete all lvls and clear other content without spending units on energy. Seems like a bad mark for something that is “low energy”. 3 energy per advancement is not low in the contrast to the game. It’s equivalent to end game content costs.please look into this and hopefully make a correction.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,638 ★★★★★

    @DNA3000 well said. @Darkness275 absolutely people wouldn't be upset if they hadn't announced it as low energy. That doesn't mean people shouldn't object when the announcement is obviously wrong and instead of owning it they double down. "Might not seem low to everybody?" How about might not seem low to anybody... because it's the regular energy cost.

    You're replying @ me as if we didn't just both say the same thing.
    Deleted my post. I could explain what happened there but I think I'll just go with the old my bad lol
  • A_Noob_Is1A_Noob_Is1 Posts: 762 ★★
    About time. Thanks for running the event.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,628 Guardian

    @DNA3000 well said. @Darkness275 absolutely people wouldn't be upset if they hadn't announced it as low energy. That doesn't mean people shouldn't object when the announcement is obviously wrong and instead of owning it they double down. "Might not seem low to everybody?" How about might not seem low to anybody... because it's the regular energy cost.

    You're replying @ me as if we didn't just both say the same thing.
    Just for the record, while I agree with and concur with most of your post, I did try to express one point of difference. I don't think the problem is "misrepresentation" but rather with avenue. In other words, we let Kabam marketing and every other marketing exaggerate or state falsehoods all the time, and we do so because we expect them in certain places. But there are other places where most people's tolerance is much lower, and I think the problem here is not the degree of exaggeration but the thing being exaggerated.

    To put it another way, if they had said the Halls of Fortune contained "lots of gold for low energy" even though there's two separate subjective statements there, "low energy" simply feels more problematic than "lots of gold" even though neither one can be objectively proved or disproved. We know a game operator is going to exaggerate the value of in-game rewards, but we don't expect them to exaggerate the explicit costs of those rewards. And I think Kabam should know where they can get away with this kind of thing, and where they shouldn't even try. I can't fully explain objectively why, but it seems obvious to me that some things you can exaggerate, and some things you can't, and this was obviously one of those areas where you can't: I would have advised such if I was reviewing the copy.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,628 Guardian
    Drooped2 said:

    @Kabam Miike am I wrong? In what sense is the energy cost low?

    Its low because it's not high :)
    My air conditioner has a medium setting. I guess it should technically be high, low, and lower.
  • FingfangfoomfanesFingfangfoomfanes Posts: 1,102 ★★★
    We complain gold, we are given halls of fortune. We complain energy. There should be halls of lightning.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    Just buff completed out dated gold rewards from all aspects of the game, 1163 gold from duping a 5*? That was outdated before 5* were even released!
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★

    We complain gold, we are given halls of fortune. We complain energy. There should be halls of lightning.

    How about Halls of Everything. One Quest, one click, Auto Fight, win the game. Lol.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    That sounded cattier than I wanted it to. Just a joke.
  • Feeney234Feeney234 Posts: 1,150 ★★★★

    Forward said:

    Chriz4061 said:

    @Kabam Miike can you confirm whether all difficulties are supposed to be 1 energy as we were told “low energy costs” yet the hardest difficulty costs 3 energy. Not low at all

    That is correct.
    What's correct? That it's supposed to be 1 energy per or 1 for the easiest, 2 for the second and 3 for the third?
    What's displayed in game is correct. I understand that it might not seem low to everybody, but it is correct.
    Instead of saying "it might not seem low to everybody" when there is clearly no sense in which it is low, why not just acknowledge and apologize for the miscommunication? Or better yet, reduce the energy cost to make good on the statement. I don't really care as I wasn't planning to run the gold quest anyway, but simply saying sorry if you don't think it's low isn't the way.
    I would honestly have more respect for them if they did that.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    It wasn't miscommunication, though. People took it as some kind of indication that it was lower than usual. Misunderstanding, sure. It's what it usually is when it runs, no?
    A piece of colorful jargon is not a promise that it will be anything other than it usually is.
    Could they apologize that people misunderstood? Sure. It's not miscommunication. Which is why I spoke up in this case. People have a tendency to make their own interpretations and blame wording as if it was somehow misleading. Only it's not that deep.
    Honestly, it feels like people are looking for anything to crucify over.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    Dtl7714 said:

    My point is that people are hung up on phrasing, but the reaction doesn't really seem proportionate. They called it low. People don't think that's low. Okay. Fair enough. To them it can be considered low. Perhaps they misspoke. Does it matter? Ever since it's been announced, it's been not good enough for some. Not enough Gold. Too little, too late. Too much Energy. Now it's that they called it low. I do my best not to be judgmental and objective, but every once in a while, ya gotta say, just be happy....or not. Lol. People have been asking for Gold. Now they have access to some. Pick and choose your battles, people.

    The reaction is cumulative based off an event period that those of us who do not worship Kabam would call a disaster. This months lackluster event and rewards, along with the typical bugs, topped off with a questionable use of the Enlish language IE low energy cost, leads to a high level of frustration.

    Just because you like to be dismissive of every complaint about the game, and I do mean EVERY complaint, doesnt change the way others feel about it.
    So people are compounding every little issue and wondering why they're popping off about a word? Gotcha. Things usually make anyone touchy if you pile them up. Either way, it's Halls of Healing and Fortune, not the solution to every issue that can come up.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    MikeHock said:

    Halls of fortune in December 2018 had the same energy cost, 1/2/3

    Maybe don’t say something is going to be lower cost when it’s exactly the same as it was previously.

    "low", not "lower".
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,230 ★★★★★
    Low means low. It's softening the cost, yes, That happens in many Announcements. They don't just come on and say, "One will be free, the other will suck.". Low doesn't imply anything but that they call it low. It's not lower than usual. Low. Now, if you want to fight The Good Fight and stop companies from using jargon and putting spins on their product, I'm afraid that will extend well beyond here because that's what Business is all about. We're not OWED it. It's not a demand. It was a request, and they are running it. This is not just about the issues recently. It's an extension of the argument that it should be free. Which isn't really reasonable. It's also at the heart of this Gold "issue". It's expected for the least amount of effort. When it's given, it's not enough. When it's gotten, it's spent too fast, when it's gone it's pleaded for again. It's really a shame. I can understand the odd person not being happy, but this is setting an entire energy in the community and while they're not perfect, we also have to slow down and see how we ourselves are behaving towards their gestures. Yes, nothing is one-sided. Sorry, but someone had to say it.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,628 Guardian
    MikeHock said:

    Low implies less than the norm

    I don't think it necessarily does. If last year's Halls of Fortune had 5 steps each with 1/2/3 step cost, I would call that low. If this year's Halls of Fortune had the exact same configuration, I would still call that low, because it is low, even if it isn't lower than the established prior norm.
  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★

    It wasn't miscommunication, though. People took it as some kind of indication that it was lower than usual. Misunderstanding, sure. It's what it usually is when it runs, no?

    It’s what it usually is. Yes that’s the problem. They interjected low energy cost to make it seem like they were lowering the cost and doing the player base a favor when in fact it’s same old, same old. It’s really a lesson to stop and think about what you’re announcing. Words don’t mean anything to Kabam as indicated in the past, but other people care about words and what they mean. And they don’t even apologize for misusing that phrase which they clearly should. I’m really not mad at the announcement but I’m rather tired of Kabam using hollow phrases like amazing/astonishing calendars and low energy cost when really it’s the same old stale package.
Sign In or Register to comment.