Are You Happy With the Nerfs/Buffs (Poll).

Unknown

Thanks for the response. Quick question, do you plan on a release schedule (I.e. release balance patches regularly once a month) or is it just a "it's done when it's done" type of situation?

Unknown

@Will Appreciate the response. Please tell us that implementing re-spec is at the top of the to-do list.

Unknown

Yes definitely a good response. I think we would be perfectly content of you didn't try to defend decisions just continue to give a small notice before implementing them. There's been a lot more of this since the rag nerf and I think has eased the minds of a lot of the forum goers.

Demiurge_Will

ihearthawthats wrote:

Thanks for the response. Quick question, do you plan on a release schedule (I.e. release balance patches regularly once a month) or is it just a "it's done when it's done" type of situation?

Thanks for asking!

We do most of our planning against two week release cycles (you might have noticed that the app updates are roughly that frequent). We try to include character/ability balance improvements in each release. Usually we'll plan to touch two characters in that time, sometimes we have time for more or less, and sometimes there will be a systemic fix or few in there, too. (Plus a bunch of bug fixes/new features/a new character that might also have a balance impact.) Some fixes have to wait for the next app update because they involve code changes, but when they just involve data changes, we try to get them out into the world in the next daily update after we've tested them.

I think there are arguments for both saving up balance adjustments for one big patch and getting them out to you as soon as possible. We've been doing the latter - it's easier to manage, so we can make more improvements in the same amount of time, it's more flexible if we need to shift designer hours from character balance to something else that's more on fire, there's less lag before the changes get to you, and hopefully it makes the metagame more dynamic. The downside is that communicating the changes to you in advance involves more coordination, but we're devoting more effort to getting that right going forward.

Unknown

Sounds excellent. Thank you for your time / answers.

Kiamodo

Awwww I can't quit you Dev team. My Negative Nancy attitude is melting away.

Unknown

Demiurge_Will wrote:

I think there are arguments for both saving up balance adjustments for one big patch and getting them out to you as soon as possible. We've been doing the latter - it's easier to manage, so we can make more improvements in the same amount of time, it's more flexible if we need to shift designer hours from character balance to something else that's more on fire, there's less lag before the changes get to you, and hopefully it makes the metagame more dynamic. The downside is that communicating the changes to you in advance involves more coordination, but we're devoting more effort to getting that right going forward.

Ahh, that answers one of my concerns as well! I understand the reasoning behind the patch timing now, and I appreciate the time and response. I feel like you and IceIX just gave the forums a Snickers.

---

>

Unknown

Sounds good. With the IW buff already live, the Wolvie buff doesn't seem that far away at all.

For the moment, I'm still gonna hold off on any of the 4-stars. I'm quite enjoying Hulk atm.

Unknown

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

Unknown

But but but...sometimes I want to just blast my way through a round and not think or take a lot of time.

Spoit

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

More like more luck based. There's only so much you can do to mitigate miracle cascades

Unknown

Spoit wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

More like more luck based. There's only so much you can do to mitigate miracle cascades

I know, but it requires more strategy than luck. I only have that one rare match every 50+ battles where I get a ton of tiles, but it also goes the other way around for the enemy too.

Unknown

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

Speed strategies are just as valid as strategies that require more build up in many games. Each have their own benefits and risks in a balanced game, and I think that MPQ is making a good initial effort into making the game work in that fashion. It's quite a stretch to think that just because some people don't want their games to last for too long, that they don't want a thought provoking game either. Also, this is a match three game, not chess. What thought provoking strategies are you talking about?

Unknown

Oversoul wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

Speed strategies are just as valid as strategies that require more build up in many games. Each have their own benefits and risks in a balanced game, and I think that MPQ is making a good initial effort into making the game work in that fashion. It's quite a stretch to think that just because some people don't want their games to last for too long, that they don't want a thought provoking game either. Also, this is a match three game, not chess. What thought provoking strategies are you talking about?

You won't believe the amount of times I have made a match three when I could have actually made a match 4, plus another match three from the tiles changing lol. Taking a little more time rather than blindly making a match you think is good for the sake of speed, just to see your opponent make an a lot better match is worth it.

Unknown

GT-47LM wrote:

You won't believe the amount of times I have made a match three when I could have actually made a match 4, plus another match three from the tiles changing lol. Taking a little more time rather than blindly making a match you think is good for the sake of speed, just to see your opponent make an a lot better match is worth it.

Hah, everyone has had those moments. I eventually remembered the patterns for 4-5 gem combinations so it takes me less time to make each move. I also notice AI patterns (for example, they always go for 4 gem matches or higher, so I can safely grab 3 red gems knowing the computer will take the four environmental tiles and keeps me safe for a turn) so I can get optimal trades. It's kinda embarrassing how much thought I put into this game, actually.

Unknown

Oversoul wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

Speed strategies are just as valid as strategies that require more build up in many games. Each have their own benefits and risks in a balanced game, and I think that MPQ is making a good initial effort into making the game work in that fashion. It's quite a stretch to think that just because some people don't want their games to last for too long, that they don't want a thought provoking game either. Also, this is a match three game, not chess. What thought provoking strategies are you talking about?

Agreed. Iove strategy games..fighting games...board games. This isn't exactly apple's to apple's or farmville but its not mancala, guilty gear, or math blaster either. Probably closer to...Sorry. as in the boardgame Sorry...in "skill vs luck.". A huge % of your damage is based off random cascades. I mean, don't tell me you KNEW that using thor red then hulk green would lead to a 18 red cascade that let you use 3 more mjolnir's and 30 yellow ap and a victory. Maybe you knew to use hulk's green vs thor's or choose to match a 3 that you could see would make a small.cascade...but the majority of high damage is pretty luck based.

That said, there is certainly some sembelance of thought involved if you want. The game's nature though is frustrating for ppl trying too hard as that random 3 green match drops 3 blacks that combo off the black nearby to make a match 5 which then hits the 2_1 yellow to form match 4 that clears some for ap etc etc...and in comparison your well thought out match 3 red to make the green drop to make a 4 match that will clear this line and give me another match 3 both looks and feels pitiful.

The shorter the match, the more starting board luck matters as opposed to cascading luck...its luck either way.

Unknown

The strategy of speed pretty much only applies to lighting rounds and the last hour of PvP tournaments. Besides that, taking it calm and easy in PvE, especially in story matches without a villain is crucial.

Spoit

GT-47LM wrote:

Oversoul wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Does anyone else think it's funny that people who aren't happy with the nerfs biggest problem is that a game that is based on strategy is becoming too slow and thought provoking? I do.

Speed strategies are just as valid as strategies that require more build up in many games. Each have their own benefits and risks in a balanced game, and I think that MPQ is making a good initial effort into making the game work in that fashion. It's quite a stretch to think that just because some people don't want their games to last for too long, that they don't want a thought provoking game either. Also, this is a match three game, not chess. What thought provoking strategies are you talking about?

You won't believe the amount of times I have made a match three when I could have actually made a match 4, plus another match three from the tiles changing lol. Taking a little more time rather than blindly making a match you think is good for the sake of speed, just to see your opponent make an a lot better match is worth it.

And I lost count of the number of times I only had 1 match available, which perfectly set up the board for the AI (or refreshed it)

Dauthi

Narkon wrote:

Marvel Puzzle Quest took the match 3 concept and transformed it into a superhero fighting game
(with enough imagination you'll see I'm right ). Now, if abilities are more difficult to use
and you spend most of the time making basic matches (3 or even 4 tiles) it stops feeling like a game
where heroes and villains use their powers to win the fight and starts feeling more like any other
game that uses the match 3 concept.

When you make matches there are "thumps" from melee characters punching/kicking, "zaps" from storm, slicing from wolverine/dakken etc. Even before a major power is unleashed, im picturing all that. Sometimes you get a combo or cascade in which case im imagining them unleashing a combo of attacks on the enemy all at once, gaining the upper hand to launch a major power.

soenottelling wrote:

Agreed. Iove strategy games..fighting games...board games. This isn't exactly apple's to apple's or farmville but its not mancala, guilty gear, or math blaster either. Probably closer to...Sorry. as in the boardgame Sorry...in "skill vs luck.". A huge % of your damage is based off random cascades. I mean, don't tell me you KNEW that using thor red then hulk green would lead to a 18 red cascade that let you use 3 more mjolnir's and 30 yellow ap and a victory. Maybe you knew to use hulk's green vs thor's or choose to match a 3 that you could see would make a small.cascade...but the majority of high damage is pretty luck based.

That said, there is certainly some sembelance of thought involved if you want. The game's nature though is frustrating for ppl trying too hard as that random 3 green match drops 3 blacks that combo off the black nearby to make a match 5 which then hits the 2_1 yellow to form match 4 that clears some for ap etc etc...and in comparison your well thought out match 3 red to make the green drop to make a 4 match that will clear this line and give me another match 3 both looks and feels pitiful.

The shorter the match, the more starting board luck matters as opposed to cascading luck...its luck either way.

I wouldn't say it's luck based to that extreme. Cascades help, and they can be fairly random. If the match is longer it is likely both sides will get a lucky cascade or two due to probability. But when you activate hulks green, you know there is a high probability that you will get at least a small cascade, which is the point and strategy of that move. It's a small gamble that usually pays out, and sometimes pays out a lot.

Unknown

want to see the result of this poll after new updates.....