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

Hey Hunks and Honeys!

Is your comically-large vault empty? Filigreed potion vials depleted of mysterious fluids? Uncle Thrillson has the cure: The fabled Halls of Healing and Halls of Fortune are coming back!

From May 29th until June 5th, the Halls of Fortune and Halls of Healing quests will alternate for 24 hours at a time, a veritable merry-go-round of treats!

May 29 - Halls of Fortune
May 30 - Hall of Healing
May 31 - Halls of Fortune
June 1 - Hall of Healing
June 2 - Halls of Fortune
June 3 - Halls of Healing
June 4 - Halls of Fortune

The Halls of Fortune have low energy costs, while the Halls of Healing require no energy to run and will have entry limits. Your teachers told you not to run in the halls, but I’m giving you full clearance to run around in these ones as much as your little heart desires!

But that’s not all!

The return of the Halls of Fortune is nice, but wouldn’t it be better with a certain sweet, perfect, gold-plated loudmouth?

For a limited-time you can obtain the Pool’s Gold Crystal to supply you with Gold and a very (very) rare chance to obtain a 5-Star Goldpool!

Don’t miss your opportunity to add my ostentatious son to your team, and swim in riches like a wealthy Scottish duck! It all kicks off next week on May 29th at 10am PT!

Comments

GroundedWisdom

No, they didn't insert anything to elude they were lowering it. The costs are what they are. You either want to do it, or you don't. People filled in blanks that weren't there. There's a reason it was part of the same statement. One will not have a cost, while the other will have a small Energy cost. That was the implication. Not that they lowered it. What would they get out of that? You're presuming they're trying to smooth something over when it was just an explanation of what is involved. If people cared about words as much as you say they do, they would take them at face value and not add to it. Low means low. You're free to disagree that the cost is low, but you can't make low mean lower than previously.

Germycool

Goldpool FTW

DiablosUltimate

480 units worth of energy refills for 1,3mil gold seems only barely better than just buying gold crystals

TyEdge

Kabam’s “low” is different from my low.

There’s always a new low...

It’s literally an entire day’s energy. I made a point of being near 70 when 1pm hit and just finished it all.

Mlee1829

The amount of gold is extremely low considering how much gold it cost to rank up 5s and 6s

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

TyEdge

Exactly. Try this statement on for size: "The halls of fortune will take roughly a full day's worth of energy to fully explore. That is why we are doing this in the sixth and final week of this event, and why we are doing entry limits and 0 energy for halls of healing. We understand this may not be ideal for some summoners, but the halls will provide nearly enough gold to take two 5-stars from rank 3 to rank 4."

DrBruceWayne

You guys are so out of touch it's ridiculous at this point

DNA3000

480 units worth of energy refills for 1,3mil gold seems only barely better than just buying gold crystals

Its hard to say without accurate drop odds for gold crystals, but based on the back of envelope calculations I did yesterday the gold per unit ratio for the Halls of Fortune appear to be significantly better than buying any of the gold crystals.

Which reminds me: technically speaking when gold crystals purchased with units state that they have "Gold" with 100% odds or 99.9% odds, I don't think that satisfies the spirit of Apple's loot box requirements. @Kabam Miike can we get a statement from Kabam as to why the developers believe this is satisfactory? After all, every champion crystal can claim that they drop "Champions" with 100% odds, but that would clearly be an attempt to ignore the requirement. Since the different gold packages have vastly different value and also different probability of dropping, I believe the game should list them individually.

Chris_118

To me both halls of fortune and halls of healing feel a little outdated. The rewards seem appropriate for the difficulty and cost (whether that cost is 'low'or not is another discussion) but it seems to me they are just a carbon copy of an event that has run many times and hasn't changed at all since its inception. Specifically the champions all have low pi and those involved are all old champions.

Adding a higher difficulty with appropriately scaled rewards in line with where the player base is at would solve this problem.

It seems Kabam realised they had a gap in their schedule, where no new content was due to be released, and they rehashed these to fill the space.

Adamdrt2006

They ment to say the amount of gold you will get total will be low not the energy

Dexman1349

By the games' own standards, 3 energy per tile is the typical "high' cost for quests. Act 4 (pre-nerf), Act 5, Act 6, Variant, etc. all have 3 per tile. The only quest that has more is the daily T4cc with 4 per tile.

Saying 3 is low is an outright lie.

GroundedWisdom

It's the end of the month anyway. It's not terribly taxing on Energy, most people have finished with EQ by this point.

Snizzbar

I don't know how many times it has to be said that they don't do that. No, I'm not. I just don't think it's that big of a deal, honestly. It's Halls of Fortune, and it's run before the same way. Nowhere did they say the cost was reduced. Nowhere else in the game can you get that amount of Gold for that much Energy. That's about it.

No they didn't say the cost was reduced. They said the cost was low. It is not low. They mislead us. Or lied to us. Or got it wrong. One of those three anyway.

GroundedWisdom

I've already explained the use of the word "low". If they consider it low, what difference does it make? That's the cost either way. If you're trying to say they lied to you or they don't know their own game, that's a fruitless argument. They consider it low for the payout. That's not lying. That's their perspective. Which is entirely different than the perspective of others at times, sure. My point is, this is a Witch Hunt on some wording, but it's dancing around the real issue. The insatiable expectations.

Snizzbar

My point is, this is a Witch Hunt on some wording, but it's dancing around the real issue. The insatiable expectations.

The expectations mostly come from the use of the word 'low'. If they describe something as being low, then my personal expectation is that it will, in fact, turn out to be low. And I don't need you to explain the use of low - I need someone who actually knows what they're talking about to explain it to me.

DNA3000

If they consider it low, what difference does it make?

I'll bet actual cash right now that the person who wrote that could not, at the moment they wrote it, answer the question how much energy each difficulty cost to explore.

When I say this content is easy, or that event is hard, or this champion is useful, or that reward is average, I always think carefully about whether I can justify that description. I also wonder if anyone will agree, but whether anyone else agrees doesn't directly affect my opinion. But whether I can explain my opinion does matter a great deal. I'm certainly not the typical player, but I think anyone getting paid to do it should care at least somewhat more than me which words they use to describe a product they are responsible for.

It doesn't matter how much energy the Halls of Fortune takes, really. It is not like everyone can't see what it cost once it was released. But attention to detail matters. And almost by definition, if you don't see it when it doesn't matter, you know you won't see it when it does matter. Because attention to detail is not a skill: it is a compulsion. Those who have it, can't not do it. Those who don't, need to understand why they can't pick and choose when to demonstrate it.

GroundedWisdom

If they consider it low, what difference does it make?
I'll bet actual cash right now that the person who wrote that could not, at the moment they wrote it, answer the question how much energy each difficulty cost to explore.

When I say this content is easy, or that event is hard, or this champion is useful, or that reward is average, I always think carefully about whether I can justify that description. I also wonder if anyone will agree, but whether anyone else agrees doesn't directly affect my opinion. But whether I can explain my opinion does matter a great deal. I'm certainly not the typical player, but I think anyone getting paid to do it should care at least somewhat more than me which words they use to describe a product they are responsible for.

It doesn't matter how much energy the Halls of Fortune takes, really. It is not like everyone can't see what it cost once it was released. But attention to detail matters. And almost by definition, if you don't see it when it doesn't matter, you know you won't see it when it does matter. Because attention to detail is not a skill: it is a compulsion. Those who have it, can't not do it. Those who don't, need to understand why they can't pick and choose when to demonstrate it.

Attention to detail matters, but so does paying too much attention to it.

unknown

This content has been removed.

DNA3000

If they consider it low, what difference does it make?
I'll bet actual cash right now that the person who wrote that could not, at the moment they wrote it, answer the question how much energy each difficulty cost to explore.

When I say this content is easy, or that event is hard, or this champion is useful, or that reward is average, I always think carefully about whether I can justify that description. I also wonder if anyone will agree, but whether anyone else agrees doesn't directly affect my opinion. But whether I can explain my opinion does matter a great deal. I'm certainly not the typical player, but I think anyone getting paid to do it should care at least somewhat more than me which words they use to describe a product they are responsible for.

It doesn't matter how much energy the Halls of Fortune takes, really. It is not like everyone can't see what it cost once it was released. But attention to detail matters. And almost by definition, if you don't see it when it doesn't matter, you know you won't see it when it does matter. Because attention to detail is not a skill: it is a compulsion. Those who have it, can't not do it. Those who don't, need to understand why they can't pick and choose when to demonstrate it.
Attention to detail matters, but so does paying too much attention to it.

Anyone working for me today who said this seriously, would not be working for me tomorrow.

GroundedWisdom

If they consider it low, what difference does it make?
I'll bet actual cash right now that the person who wrote that could not, at the moment they wrote it, answer the question how much energy each difficulty cost to explore.

When I say this content is easy, or that event is hard, or this champion is useful, or that reward is average, I always think carefully about whether I can justify that description. I also wonder if anyone will agree, but whether anyone else agrees doesn't directly affect my opinion. But whether I can explain my opinion does matter a great deal. I'm certainly not the typical player, but I think anyone getting paid to do it should care at least somewhat more than me which words they use to describe a product they are responsible for.

It doesn't matter how much energy the Halls of Fortune takes, really. It is not like everyone can't see what it cost once it was released. But attention to detail matters. And almost by definition, if you don't see it when it doesn't matter, you know you won't see it when it does matter. Because attention to detail is not a skill: it is a compulsion. Those who have it, can't not do it. Those who don't, need to understand why they can't pick and choose when to demonstrate it.
Attention to detail matters, but so does paying too much attention to it.
Anyone working for me today who said this seriously, would not be working for me tomorrow.

Let's examine this, shall we?
We know firsthand that these Announcements can be worded vaguely at times. Especially with Kabam Thrillson, given the colorful nature of his Posts. The statement was a general idea of what was involved. Not a precise run-down of the Energy required.
We also know that this community has a history of filling in their own interpretations and reacting when it's not congruent with what comes to pass.
We know that the Quest has run before, and we know what was required. If anything has differed from that, please let me know.
We know that the expectations surrounding not only Gold, but the game in general, have become heated because of last month's Event, and the ongoing issues.
You and I are both aware of how these Announcements go, how Marketing plays out, how things are presented in a way that is appealing.

All-in-all, we have a comment that basically means that one will cost Energy, and one won't, and a reaction that is nitpicking the use of the word low. If your Employees had to respond to the degree of scrutiny we see here, they would no doubt quit.

GroundedWisdom

Just to be clear, that was just a bit of sarcasm. I'm not taking stock of how you do business, or being that shady. Lol. Just trying to make a point. No disrespect intended.

ÐarkŠtar

I've already explained the use of the word "low". If they consider it low, what difference does it make? That's the cost either way. If you're trying to say they lied to you or they don't know their own game, that's a fruitless argument. They consider it low for the payout. That's not lying. That's their perspective. Which is entirely different than the perspective of others at times, sure. My point is, this is a Witch Hunt on some wording, but it's dancing around the real issue. The insatiable expectations.

Words when used like 'low' is being used here invoke comparison by default. Someone that's 5 feet 5 inches can reasonably called short by male standards and yet he could very well be the tallest member in his immediate family. When you describe such an individual as short, you are automatically on a subconscious level comparing him to the people you know and are around most of the time. When he describes himself as tall he is comparing himself to the people he knows and is around most. That's what we call diverse opinion. In this case, the players are comparing 3 energy per tile with whatever they are used to in the game which is predominantly not higher than 3 energy per tile. Ergo, 3 energy per tile is not low by any stretch of the imagination. You can have a different opinion about it, but going by what's established for a fact as high energy cost per tile, means that that opinion would be incorrect.

GroundedWisdom

You're baiting them with comments now? Lol. For the record, I don't see anything about that comment that would go against the rules, but then again I'm not a Moderator. Generally, it's not a good idea to test them. Lol.
However, it is incorrect. Low is not an indication of any comparison we can make. LOWER is. Low means they're calling it low for whatever reason. You may be able to debate what they call low, but you certainly can't imply that it meant it was lower than anything because the term is "low", not "lower".
I can walk into Wal-Mart and see any price as labelled, "Everyday Low Prices". I can judge for myself what I consider to be low and not to be. I might even be able to argue my way into a Price Match. I can't tell them what to call low and what not to.

ÐarkŠtar

You're baiting them with comments now? Lol. For the record, I don't see anything about that comment that would go against the rules, but then again I'm not a Moderator. Generally, it's not a good idea to test them. Lol.
However, it is incorrect. Low is not an indication of any comparison we can make. LOWER is. Low means they're calling it low for whatever reason. You may be able to debate what they call low, but you certainly can't imply that it meant it was lower than anything because the term is "low", not "lower".
I can walk into Wal-Mart and see any price as labelled, "Everyday Low Prices". I can judge for myself what I consider to be low and not to be. I might even be able to argue my way into a Price Match. I can't tell them what to call low and what not to.

When you say 'low' it inherently means lower than something that's an accepted benchmark that's not low. I'd like for you to give me an example that uses 'low' in such a way that people don't automatically make comparisons in order to comprehend what you're saying. Considering your Walmart example, if they have a packet of meat priced at 20$ for a pound and you are somebody that has no idea how meat is priced, you're going to believe it is everyday low price if it has that tag on. That's because you don't possess a benchmark of generally accepted prices that are considered low. A person that knows how meat is priced will know immediately that it's daylight robbery. The first individual is you when it comes to defending 3 energy per tile as low. You don't seem to know or understand what's generally accepted as low and hence you fail to grasp how ridiculous it is to call 3 energy per tile as "low energy cost"

Look, they don't register any feedback anyway. If they don't want to mend their ways, the community has no obligation to mend theirs. I'm a F2P anyway so whatever happens doesn't affect me in the slightest. I'm just killing time here.

ÐarkŠtar

You're baiting them with comments now? Lol. For the record, I don't see anything about that comment that would go against the rules, but then again I'm not a Moderator. Generally, it's not a good idea to test them. Lol.
However, it is incorrect. Low is not an indication of any comparison we can make. LOWER is. Low means they're calling it low for whatever reason. You may be able to debate what they call low, but you certainly can't imply that it meant it was lower than anything because the term is "low", not "lower".
I can walk into Wal-Mart and see any price as labelled, "Everyday Low Prices". I can judge for myself what I consider to be low and not to be. I might even be able to argue my way into a Price Match. I can't tell them what to call low and what not to.

When 'low' is used as it has been, it inherently implies comparison to something that's widely accepted as 'low'. Why don't you give me an example that doesn't automatically make me compare with what is the generally accepted benchmark in order to comprehend what you're saying? The salt content in fresh water sources is 'lower' than that of sea water. Why is that? Simply because you know that sea water has a 'higher' salt content than fresh water. If you didn't know that you wouldn't be able to say that fresh water has 'lower' salt content. Coming back to the subject at hand, you defending the 3 energy per tile requirement as low makes perfect sense if and only if you have no clue what low energy requirement is ingame.

ÐarkŠtar

You're baiting them with comments now? Lol. For the record, I don't see anything about that comment that would go against the rules, but then again I'm not a Moderator. Generally, it's not a good idea to test them. Lol.
However, it is incorrect. Low is not an indication of any comparison we can make. LOWER is. Low means they're calling it low for whatever reason. You may be able to debate what they call low, but you certainly can't imply that it meant it was lower than anything because the term is "low", not "lower".
I can walk into Wal-Mart and see any price as labelled, "Everyday Low Prices". I can judge for myself what I consider to be low and not to be. I might even be able to argue my way into a Price Match. I can't tell them what to call low and what not to.

I'm not telling them what's low and what isn't. I'm gonna farm every single difficulty every single round because I need the gold. If they hadn't said anything about the energy requirement, I wouldn't be ticked off. But saying its low, and keeping it 3 per tile is a kick in the nuts. And they've been doing that so much that I'm starting to think they enjoy pushing our buttons. Take the 6.2 release post for example. Rewards are pretty decent especially on the t2a front but there's no awakening gems and only that single rank up gem that is class based. And they go on to say that they are doing something different by buffing up the chapter rewards and toning down the act rewards for a more even spread. Like are you have a giggle mate? Rewards are alright but if these are 'buffed' then it's not nearly good enough. Now, I'm comparing in my head with how act 5 ramped up and I'm thinking act rewards are gonna be mad for act 6 except now they say they are not.

Edgecrusher_13

Pretty low today. Cost me no energy to run halls of healing.

ÐarkŠtar

Pretty low today. Cost me no energy to run halls of healing.

Yep. Absolutely loving HoH. What's done well is done well.