**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Comments
Level 3 Permission Slip (Heroic Difficulty) - 500 S.H.I.E.L.D. Markers (Available for Proven and beyond)
Level 4 Permission Slip (Master Difficulty) - 750 S.H.I.E.L.D. Markers (Available for Conqueror and beyond)
Level 5 Permission Slip (Epic Difficulty) - 1000 S.H.I.E.L.D. Markers (Available for Uncollected and beyond)
Depending on your roster, you shouldn't need more than 3 champs to finish an epic path. So if you are not capable of writing something down, remembering or just throwing both gated champs and thee top champs in, well, shame on you then. Granted it'd be easier if kabam spelled out which path you finished. A little x over the one gate would solve that problem, but it's not like you can't take steps to remember all on your own.
Heck, just do the center path to completion. Then do one gate. You have enough energy to start the 2nd gate so it should be fresh in your head who you just used since you have to swap them out. Then start the 2nd gate and finish when you have enough energy. Rinse and repeat. I think the one with agent evenom I just brought both gate champs along with synergy with Rulk and x23 and whatever random champ to use.
Doing master and unc EQ as well made it a nice month for 5* crystals and rank up help. And for me it was the first time I've explored uncollected.
I don't think it's a very good reason, but I'd bet it went into the discussion of rewards.
I have a problem, I mistakenly bought 3 super mission tickets in epic, but I already passed it, now I can't sell or use them, what can I do?
Asking why games insist on making random rewards is like asking why fast food restaurants keep making food no one wants to eat. Nobody cares what anyone asks them to cook. They only care what people actually want to pay for. People asked McDonalds to make healthier food. When they did, sales dropped dramatically. Their conclusion was to stop listening to the people asking for healthier food, because they were only asking, not buying. The only healthy options that still exist are the ones people actually ended up paying for.
McDonalds makes the food they make not in spite of what people want, but because that is what people want, and everyone who says differently is just wrong. The people saying no one likes random rewards or wants them reduced or eliminated are just wrong. They can get a lot of people to agree with them, but can't seem to get anyone to spend time or money on anything else.
There's a lot of room for nuance, for people willing to discuss nuance. How exactly we should implement and integrate random rewards into games is an ongoing discussion in the industry. But once you argue for removing random rewards on principle, because you believe people don't want random rewards in general, you're basing your arguments on a principle already proven wrong too many times for anyone to be willing to waste time making a game just to prove them wrong again.
You're arguing that relativity is wrong because you don't understand it, and no one you knows understands it either. What you don't seem to understand is that I'm not advocating for random rewards because I think they are "logical" I'm simply stating the completely uncontroversial fact that they work in games like this because players gravitate to the games that have them, and away from the games that lack them. Why is a question for psychologists. That it happens is an observable fact.
I have yet to see anyone complaining about pulling 6* Cull or Corvus.
People's frustration is not the problem: frustration drives people to try again. That's one of the fundamental drivers behind all gambling behaviour; and that's what keeps the game going - people want to 'win'.
You want proof? You don't need fancy scientific or psychological theory here: Have you ever been to Vegas or Atlantic City? Those massive shiny casinos don't stay in business by giving money away. They offer the possibility of getting rich; but the vast majority of patrons leave poorer than they arrived. Sure, some will never come back. But as long as you can keep pulling in new customers, you don't need to retain all the old ones; just sustain enough interest to keep the business going.
Seriously: frustration is part of the business model!
There's a theory in psychology I happen to be a proponent of called overjustification. Experiments suggest that when you deliver fixed and predictable rewards to an activity people were already predisposed to do, they psychologically "transfer" a desire to do the activity into a desire to earn rewards for the activity. When you remove the rewards, the people either stop doing the activity or do it far less than before you started rewarding it. The conjecture is that the reward displaces enjoyment of an activity, which is another way of saying rewards make people like activities less. This is problematic because of acclimation: when you provide some kind of stimulation to people, they get used to it, and it takes larger and larger levels of stimulus to generate the same reaction.
Combine overjustification with acclimation and you get a situation where providing rewards that are too fixed and too predictable is an unsustainable situation: you are invisibly causing people to be repelled from an activity unless an unsustainable spiral of increasing rewards is given. Switching to variable randomized rewards causes the opposite effect: the operand conditioning effect where people are psychologically encouraged to pursue the activity in spite of the lack of rewards, provided they happen often enough.
This makes the whole situation of what is ethical in game design very tricky. People often say that psychological manipulation is intrinsically wrong, but they presume only random rewards are manipulative. Evidence suggests fixed rewards are also equally manipulative, just in different and often counter-productive ways. So unfortunately you can't take the coward's way out and say you'll avoid manipulation, because it isn't random rewards that are manipulative, it is rewards themselves that are manipulative. You have to ask the more difficult question what kinds of manipulation are fair, and which are not.
Incidentally, something I've been thinking about for a while now is whether the game is often not random enough. Consider T5B rewards in AW. For a lot of people, that's the reward they focus on. It is a random reward, but is it psychologically unpredictable? Doesn't everyone predict 1k? If they do, the reward isn't random in the psychological sense, and it can actually be damaging the enjoyment of those rewards that it is "random" but not "unpredictable" enough. Maybe they are triggering both overjustification and acclimation.
Aren't a lot of people complaining that they are only participating in seasons for that reward, and it is always not enough for the effort, and it is always 1k (even if it technically isn't)? Doesn't that sound like overjustification and acclimation? That's not proof (and it is a big oversimplification), but it is interesting.
Obtained this.
As to this quest specifically, in about a week I think Kabam is supposed to be rolling out some defeat objectives that you can grind out to get specific champs. A lot of people say that grinding a lot of effort for a guarantee at something is better than relying on random chance. If they also complain they don't want to grind for that specific champ to unlock the gates because grinding isn't "fun" then they simply want what they can't have.