**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Comments
There's nothing to mend here. I'm not defending anything as low. I'm defending this war on words that really has nothing to do with words. If it was, it would be a simple "That's not what I call low.", and that would be that. The term used was low. There may be some type of internal comparison that we make which says, "I call this low, and 3 Energy per Tile is not low.", but that's got nothing to do with the choice of wording. That's an internal thought process which they're not responsible for. Nor could they predict. They're in the business of providing content. Not being Psychics.
You really think it's about the word low at this point? No. It's about the issues, it's about some kind of view that this is somehow an apology to people, it's about the lack of enthusiasm about Endgame, it's about the resentment people have towards them, it's about the expectation that they were going to lower the Energy, the list continues. That's a lot of bloody responsibility to place on a word. Which is exactly why I said the reaction is blown out of proportion to begin with.
People are expecting an apology over something that they added their own interpretation to when in reality, they called it low. Not lower than before, just low. You're making the assertation they don't register feedback, but that's not at all correct. They register feedback. What people are asking in this case is for them to take responsibility for a great deal more than they're responsible for in the choice to use the word low. Every little begrudging issue, all in one word. They also responded and for some reason, that just ticked people off even more. Why? IT'S NOT ABOUT THE WORD.
The word they used was low. They consider it low for the payout. That's the bottom line. You can't crucify them because their view and our view on low differs. Have a Search for the amount Gold has been requested in the last 6 months or so. They brought back Halls of Fortune at our request, for a limited time. Take a look at the reactions in this Thread, and the expectations that followed, then ask yourself if your statement about them "mending" anything still seems logical. There were even Memes in the Meme Thread about how people thought they expected people to be grateful. I'm sorry, but it's not about the word low. It's about people not being happy with anything, and looking for anything to take to Court. What I'm saying is we have a responsibility for how we react, and that includes perpetuating hatred and disgust to the point where no matter what they do, it will NEVER be enough. Low does not mean lower. That's the linguistics of it.
1.
of less than average height from top to bottom or to the top from the ground.
"the school is a long, low building"
synonyms: short, small, little; More
2.
below average in amount, extent, or intensity; small.
"bringing up children on a low income"
synonyms: cheap, inexpensive, low-priced, low-cost, economical, moderate, reasonable, modest, bargain, cut-price, bargain-basement, rock-bottom More
This shouldn't even be a debate.
Honestly, people are dying of thirst and complaining about the cup the water came in.
The second one is engagement. As a general principle, people value things they have to spend their own time getting more than they do things they get with no effort. There are exceptions, but this is a generally accepted principle of games as a service design. What most people tend to get completely wrong is that most of the design of games like this is not directly targeted at getting players to spend money: that's actually naive in a game design sense. Most of the design of games like this is explicitly targeted at getting players to spend time. Time is engagement, and ultimately engagement equals money in the long run.
You could say the Halls of Healing are a loss leader to get you into the store. And as long as you're playing, you're in the store.
A bunch of people are currently thinking "this is stupid, this obviously doesn't work, why would anyone design games like this?" They probably think the same thing about advertising in general, a two hundred billion dollar industry that would not exist if it did not work.
(The games industry struggles with a third reason for doing this, which I'm not saying Kabam explicitly does, but it is a dirty secret everyone knows but few acknowledge directly. Why would any game developer force you to spend time doing something silly and meaningless for a reward you're pretty much guaranteed to get? Because the ten minutes you spend doing that are ten minutes you can't spend playing anything else.)
That being said, I don’t know why they haven’t moved gold realms to similar setup as halls of healing, 0 energy but limited to 2 entries per difficulty. Maybe they will in future
To put it another way, the game client on your phone shows you random stuff in the reel, but it is the game servers that actually decide what you're going to get, and the servers tell your phone what to stop on. The game servers would never trust your phone to tell them what you got in your crystal, because that is unbelievably exploitable.
There are experiments you can do to verify the behavior of crystals. If you are in an alliance, you can start spinning a crystal and not tap the crystal to stop it, so the reel just spins. However, if you ask an alliance mate to look at alliance chat, they will actually see that all the while you see spinning, the game has already decided what you're going to get. They know this, because your drop will already be in alliance chat. The last person to know what you're going to get is you, because you're stuck watching the crystal spin.
You have a one in a thousand chance to get Goldpool, but you aren't seeing one in a thousand spots on the reel be Goldpool. If that happened, you'd probably never see Goldpool appear at all (because it takes a very long time for one thousand reel spots to spin by), and then you'd suspect he wasn't in there at all.
You could say that Halls of Healing have zero energy cost but entry caps, and Halls of Fortune have energy costs but no entry caps, but in actuality Halls of Fortune have an effective entry cap of two - since the material rewards come from first completion and full exploration which you achieve on the second run. That's not absolutely true for a couple of complicating reasons, but it is close enough to the truth here.
The design seems to say that the game doesn't want us to have to choose between burning energy on potions and burning energy on content, but it does want us to choose between burning energy on gold and burning energy on content, but I can't think of a good reason for this design choice. It might just be one of those things.
Do the gold pool crystals go back to normal crystals after the event ends?
Please @ me in reply....... hard to search through the walls of text in an announcement thread