True Healing Discussion (Live 6/25)

Wobby

Ghast wrote:

gamar wrote:

Ghast wrote:

So when someone attacks me with low true health, do I retaliate against a team with full health or a team with "true health."

Also, what about defense teams? Right now teams that you use to retreat or lose a match become your defensive team at full health. This change means that we still get to fight Lazy Thor/Lazy Daken/ Sentry every match because people can just take their 1 health point characters in for a quick retreat if that is the case.

When did this happen again? For a long time now, you've had to actually win a battle for your team to be put in as the defensive team.

At the exact time the greyouts began. Losses also now show up as retaliation nodes.

So is that how XMen is sitting at 2000?

Unknown

At a high enough level of competition, active players do not have time to prologue heal without dropping a shield. This change only affects us during the rare circumstances when we bring a healer into battle. That's never, ever Spider-Man anymore unless he is mandatory. She-Hulk might have been an option, but not anymore.

First they deprive her of a classy pantsuit and now this.

sinnerjfl

The only thing D3 is trying to accomplish with this is to sell more health packs. Please don't even try to tell us this is about roster diversity, that is a crock of tinikitty and noone believes you.

Congratulations you're gonna kill your game with this "feature".

mjh

you should have another tile that when matched, heals all allies for X health

Spoit

Wait. Doesn't this make Sentry/laken even more p2w than before? You could easily go prologue heal between shield hops with him before, but with these changes it makes paying for health packs to use it even more of a 'i win' button

Bacon Pants

I'm not reading 8 pages of this. This change is stupid. It's another change that seemingly forces players to spend money on an already expensive game. (depending on how you play of course)

I use to abuse prologue healing, along with pre nerf spidey. It became cumbersome after a while and I stopped. I would get health packs here and there, but not fairly often. This change all but forces you to buy health packs.

D3, if you're trying to milk every cent out of players, you're succeeding. If you're trying to make an enjoyable game that people want to come back and share with others. You're still failing miserably.

When is it enough D3? You greedy bastards.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

Absolutely not the case. I can definitely understand that the intent is that we're making this change to increase revenue through Health Packs. That's not the case. We do think that some players will buy a couple more Packs off the back of this change for a couple days after it. This is the case with any change, such as a buff to an ability for a character. Users then go out and spend some Hero Points on respeccing. But we don't buff or nerf an ability because we want it to bring in revenue. We do it because we believe it will be in the best long term benefit for the game and for the users.

I'm sorry, but don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining. All this comes across as is a cash grab, at least be honest about it. I'd respect you all more if you were just up front about it. "Hey everyone, we're not selling enough health packs, so we're killing off prologue healing for everyone. Hope you don't mind. P.S. Please buy more health packs, they give us enough money to feed the hamsters who power our servers."

If you're going to do this, at least change how long it takes heroes to heal up. 3* star characters should all heal in the same time, irrespective of how much health they have. Why should I have to wait 10 hours for my favourite character to heal, simply because I favour Lazy Thor over Human Torch? The same should apply to all levels. You could have 1*s fully healed from downed in 1 hour, 2 hours for the 2* guys! and 4 hours for the 3* guys. That's not excessive, but will still force people to buy health packs if they want to push with the same team constantly. Everyone comes out ahead then.

Unknown

Lol. I come back for a week after rage quitting from having $200 unanswered for dollars of Christmas money be squandered to the rag nerf, thinking things have gotten better, and this.

You're losing money, never mind he people that will quit. You might convince new players to pay money and show them that "they can't miss these features if they didn't know they were there", but with the negative online reviews, and as someguy put it putting down the device more often, there won't be an income. Without positive change, this game won't be sustainable monetarily for d3 in 6-12 months is my guess.

As someone else stated, all your doing is requiring patch and daken to be used, making the rich richer, and pushing those of us without them to be left thinking ****? Let me exchange my 553 Spider-Man for an equal level daken or patch please. And let me exhange obw/rags for the other.

This is ridiculous.

OzarkBoatswain

My opinion:

It's good to not force players to play for several hours every day, which is currently the fastest way to power up. This is a step in the right direction. However, the "pay-to-win" element muddies this and maybe you should place a limit on the amount of health packs you can buy every day.

It also won't effect me much since I've outgrown OBW and never had a decent Spider-man.

Unknown

There have been a lot of suggestions in this thread and others already for ways to improve healing as a mechanic, or reduce the need for it. I'd like to add another idea for how it could be tweaked to improve the player experience. With the constant barrage of PvP, PvE, Lightning Rounds, part of the issue is feeling like health is too precious of a commodity to spread thin. If the route of "fully healed characters after each battle unless downed" is out of the question (I hope it's not, I like that idea), a lesser idea would be to make characters' health Event(or sub-event)-dependent. So, for example, if I was using Punisher in a PvE event and he went down to about 50% of his health over the course of a couple of nodes I could still use him at full health in a concurrent PvP event, but if I wanted to take on another node in PvE he'd still be at half-health. This way, players don't have to worry about wasting their health packs in one event or the other, especially when multiple events share an end time (hate that!).

Regarding the encouragement to use a wide variety of characters, I don't think healing mechanics are what holds people back (I could be wrong), I think it's the sheer amount of time (or money, if you buy ISO) required to level a character up to a competitive level. And that's if you have enough covers to raise the soft cap high enough anyway. I use the same handful of characters over and over because that's who I've got at level 100+, and of that crew, it's hard to get a good rainbow of coverage without certain key individuals staying in. CMags is great for a lot of reasons, one of which is he's an excellent character that actually does something worthwhile with purple AP. I guess what I'm saying in this paragraph is that, fine, if IceIX says the intent of the developers is to promote roster diversity with this change, I'll accept that point - but I think the relative impact on roster diversity from this change is likely to be dwarfed by what other changes could do with much better player base reception.

Unknown

Nobody wants them, but my 2 cents is that it'd be a lot simpler just to add a new rule/logic/code/whatever that "you can't have more health at the end of a fight than you did at the start." That takes out prologue healing, but leaves in in-battle healing. Unless, of course, the actual goal is not to remove prologue healing, but to make health packs the only (non character-specific) form of healing. [lying] But I'm not cynical enough to believe that's the impetus behind this change. [/lying]

Also, the idea that this will make me bust out Cap/Moonstone/etc. for PvP is pretty funny. I'd rather run Bagman/Bagman/loaner. At least he's already got the "Kick Me" sign on him. The idea of having (and utilizing) a deep roster is good, but the defensive team mechanic is a complete anathema to that. No one's going to try to pick up a win or 2 with Bullseye if it means he ends up in someone else's crosshairs.

Unknown

OSU Buckeyes wrote:

I know I'm probably in the minority but I welcome this change and see where they are coming from. I see this leading to more diverse matches and it rewards having a good team instead of 2 max characters.

It's amusing how people ignore any hint of reality. You will see nothing but patch, daken and some third underleveled guy that leaves the other two take colors. Diversity a'la'D3.

Unknown

RemusThirty wrote:

There have been a lot of suggestions in this thread and others already for ways to improve healing as a mechanic, or reduce the need for it. I'd like to add another idea for how it could be tweaked to improve the player experience. With the constant barrage of PvP, PvE, Lightning Rounds, part of the issue is feeling like health is too precious of a commodity to spread thin. If the route of "fully healed characters after each battle unless downed" is out of the question (I hope it's not, I like that idea), a lesser idea would be to make characters' health Event(or sub-event)-dependent.


Do not get the title of this thread wrong. They have clearly already decided how this would work based off of ice's responses.

Unknown

Emeryt wrote:

So very true. Yet we DO it, as what sensible commander sends WOUNDED soldiers right to the next battle? Send his heroes to the front instead of the sick bay? Let them die -- or miss the battle?

A *true* designer, when facing players do things that are not fun and tedious starts asking the WHY questions and figures out a fix for the root cause. Remove the necessity. Rather than just banning the the workarounds one after the other that somewhat keep his bucket of braindead ideas afloat.

Unknown

pasa_ wrote:

Emeryt wrote:

So very true. Yet we DO it, as what sensible commander sends WOUNDED soldiers right to the next battle? Send his heroes to the front instead of the sick bay? Let them die -- or miss the battle?

A *true* designer, when facing players do things that are not fun and tedious starts asking the WHY questions and figures out a fix for the root cause. Remove the necessity. Rather than just banning the the workarounds one after the other that somewhat keep his bucket of braindead ideas afloat.

They care about our fun and enjoyment? You actually believe that snot?

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

Spoit wrote:

Is there any plans to change any of the other systems to accommodate these? Or is the 8 hours of downtime for 3*s working as intended?

We both plan to check in on the downtime for characters as you say and also monitor the healing values for the characters that offer Temporary Healing as well. The former would probably have changes made before the latter, and we actually have some temp values for healing timers that we've got in mind for play patterns. Whether that's rolled out with this change or not is a different matter.

A-ha, the usual large-buisness sequence:

We switch to left-hand traffic. Effective tomorrow.
But to ensure smooth transition, for the first 2 months it applies only to tracks and buses.

Unknown

Ghast wrote:

At a high enough level of competition, active players do not have time to prologue heal without dropping a shield. This change only affects us during the rare circumstances when we bring a healer into battle. That's never, ever Spider-Man anymore unless he is mandatory. She-Hulk might have been an option, but not anymore.

First they deprive her of a classy pantsuit and now this.

I like to think I was a pretty "advanced" player and I used prologue healing in two situations:
1) Fighting highly scaled enemies in PVE
2) While shielded in between trying to make a couple of shield hops to 1100 or 1200

So this would definitely affect me - there's no way I could keep up the pace I'm used to with only 5 health packs to rely on, unless I cMags cheese every battle

Unknown

Albert Reed in one of his blog posts (http://venturebeat.com/2014/04/24/marvel-puzzle-quests-road-to-the-mythical-1-arpdau-part-6-alliances/) about MPQ said that Alliances created a problem of the rich becoming richer. This change seems like it will have a similar effect.

If you main a team with 2 3*s, but that's all you have in your roster, won't you still be going to be up against the same opponents as a roster with a backbench of 3*s? The deep roster fights the same opponents, but can play longer. So for example, My 141 Punisher and IM40 play 5 matches, use up my heals, and then I'm done for the tournament, but the people with 8 3*s can play 20 matches, resulting in a much higher score. I can really throw my 2*s into the fray to keep going or fear death by a thousand cuts.

Are the healing changes going to affect matchmaking? Or is matchmaking going to get updated to recognize you can only play 5 matches where some can play 20?

Given how difficult it is to get those 3* covers from tokens, isn't this kind of also making it real darn difficult to place high in the pvp tournaments with the cover you need to progress into the 3* game? And it'll be a billion times worse if the pvp is for a newly introduced character.

Unknown

wharrrgarbl wrote:

Nobody wants them, but my 2 cents is that it'd be a lot simpler just to add a new rule/logic/code/whatever that "you can't have more health at the end of a fight than you did at the start." That takes out prologue healing, but leaves in in-battle healing. Unless, of course, the actual goal is not to remove prologue healing, but to make health packs the only (non character-specific) form of healing. [lying] But I'm not cynical enough to believe that's the impetus behind this change. [/lying]

Also, the idea that this will make me bust out Cap/Moonstone/etc. for PvP is pretty funny. I'd rather run Bagman/Bagman/loaner. At least he's already got the "Kick Me" sign on him. The idea of having (and utilizing) a deep roster is good, but the defensive team mechanic is a complete anathema to that. No one's going to try to pick up a win or 2 with Bullseye if it means he ends up in someone else's crosshairs.

The way I read the change this is what they are planning on doing so not sure what you are trying to say.

Unknown

They've been tanking their Steam rating for the past 6 months.

http://steamcharts.com/app/234330

Clearly it's still too high, so they have to roll out more **** like this.