*Update* I've solved the Roster, ISO, and HP problem

MarvelMan

scottee wrote:

My current next roster slot costs 650 HP. I have every 3* and 4* character. It's completely reasonable, and not even that hard, for a F2P player to earn 650 HP every 2 weeks. That's only 325 a week. Between PVP, PVE, and DDQ, if a F2P isn't putting in the effort to earn that much HP that is already available, there's really nothing to complain about. A player who is good enough to win the cover of every new 3/4* at the release event surely is good enough to win 325 HP a week.

I make more than 325hp/wk, in part because I rarely shield, and I have more slots than you. I also put in more time than most, Im borderline hardcore/junkie. But because I dont shield much I also rarely place top 10, havent covered Thoress or quite a few of the newer 3*s.

I also recognize that Im not the average player, and that we need to focus on what can be done for that average player to increase fun and retention. Having to choose which cover to throw out, while interesting strategically, isnt fun.

scottee

papa07 wrote:

scottee wrote:

My current next roster slot costs 650 HP. I have every 3* and 4* character. It's completely reasonable, and not even that hard, for a F2P player to earn 650 HP every 2 weeks. That's only 325 a week. Between PVP, PVE, and DDQ, if a F2P isn't putting in the effort to earn that much HP that is already available, there's really nothing to complain about. A player who is good enough to win the cover of every new 3/4* at the release event surely is good enough to win 325 HP a week.

And that's fine for right now. But in a year, when they have added 25-30 new characters, your next roster slot will cost 1000 HP. There are members of this forum who have a roster cost of over 3000 HP currently. It is manageable at this moment, especially if you have sold most of your 1 and 2 stars, but it will soon not be manageable. Long term health has to be thought of, as well as your short term needs.

The game is not much more than a year old, and people are worrying that they will not be able to pay the costs another year from now? Yes, average roster slot prices cost more now than a year ago, because there are more characters. And guess what? They've increased HP flow to help.

People are assuming that while the roster slot prices keep going up, the HP flow is going to remain static. They just increased HP twice. It's completely reasonable that they will increase it again to match roster slot prices in the future, or that they will cap roster slot prices. The situation is perfectly manageable for a F2P player right now. And if it becomes unmanageble in the future, it seems reasonable based on past history that they will make adjustments to compensate.

PS: Yes, there are people who pay 3000 HP for a roster slot. Expecting the devs to make that much HP earnable is such a laughable request that I'm not even going to bother to make the obvious, logical rebuttal.

Unknown

I want to turn that around on you ask why being a collector should cost so much? Some sure but its quite a lot to keep even all the two stars around and they are regularly featured in some fashion or another. Its not like keeping yelena gives you any in game advantage, just lets you feel a slight tinge of completionism.

scottee

MarvelMan wrote:

I make more than 325hp/wk, in part because I rarely shield, and I have more slots than you. I also put in more time than most, Im borderline hardcore/junkie. But because I dont shield much I also rarely place top 10, havent covered Thoress or quite a few of the newer 3*s.

I also recognize that Im not the average player, and that we need to focus on what can be done for that average player to increase fun and retention. Having to choose which cover to throw out, while interesting strategically, isnt fun.

It's more "fun" to play first person shooters in God mode with unlimited ammo, all weapons, and never dying. That doesn't mean developers should make games that way. Part of what makes people come back is earning incremental progress. A good game has a good balance of that. If the majority of players leave the game, it shows this balance is out of whack. When players keep coming back and show addictive tendencies, it shows they have this balance perfectly worked out.

Unknown

scottee wrote:

MarvelMan wrote:

I make more than 325hp/wk, in part because I rarely shield, and I have more slots than you. I also put in more time than most, Im borderline hardcore/junkie. But because I dont shield much I also rarely place top 10, havent covered Thoress or quite a few of the newer 3*s.

I also recognize that Im not the average player, and that we need to focus on what can be done for that average player to increase fun and retention. Having to choose which cover to throw out, while interesting strategically, isnt fun.

It's more "fun" to play first person shooters in God mode with unlimited ammo, all weapons, and never dying. That doesn't mean developers should make games that way. Part of what makes people come back is earning incremental progress. A good game has a good balance of that. If the majority of players leave the game, it shows this balance is out of whack. When players keep coming back and show addictive tendencies, it shows they have this balance perfectly worked out.

A game can be addictive and profitable, that does not automatically imply that it is also good, and balanced. An addict will always keep coming back for more, but new people will come and play if the game is actually good, fun, and balanced. The type of thing you would recommend to your friends. I may be in the junkie crowd but as it stands now I don't think I would recommend the game to my friends, tons of potential I would say but long way to go to be perfect.

MarvelMan

scottee wrote:

MarvelMan wrote:

I make more than 325hp/wk, in part because I rarely shield, and I have more slots than you. I also put in more time than most, Im borderline hardcore/junkie. But because I dont shield much I also rarely place top 10, havent covered Thoress or quite a few of the newer 3*s.

I also recognize that Im not the average player, and that we need to focus on what can be done for that average player to increase fun and retention. Having to choose which cover to throw out, while interesting strategically, isnt fun.

It's more "fun" to play first person shooters in God mode with unlimited ammo, all weapons, and never dying. That doesn't mean developers should make games that way. Part of what makes people come back is earning incremental progress. A good game has a good balance of that. If the majority of players leave the game, it shows this balance is out of whack. When players keep coming back and show addictive tendencies, it shows they have this balance perfectly worked out.

Not even close to what Im saying. I agree there should be a gap, and hard decisions, but I think that as it stands the gap is too large for the *average* player. I know multiple people who have quit because it required so many hard decisions that it became unfun and they werent willing to be hardcore enough to play more.

Phaserhawk

scottee wrote:

papa07 wrote:

scottee wrote:

My current next roster slot costs 650 HP. I have every 3* and 4* character. It's completely reasonable, and not even that hard, for a F2P player to earn 650 HP every 2 weeks. That's only 325 a week. Between PVP, PVE, and DDQ, if a F2P isn't putting in the effort to earn that much HP that is already available, there's really nothing to complain about. A player who is good enough to win the cover of every new 3/4* at the release event surely is good enough to win 325 HP a week.

And that's fine for right now. But in a year, when they have added 25-30 new characters, your next roster slot will cost 1000 HP. There are members of this forum who have a roster cost of over 3000 HP currently. It is manageable at this moment, especially if you have sold most of your 1 and 2 stars, but it will soon not be manageable. Long term health has to be thought of, as well as your short term needs.

The game is not much more than a year old, and people are worrying that they will not be able to pay the costs another year from now? Yes, average roster slot prices cost more now than a year ago, because there are more characters. And guess what? They've increased HP flow to help.

People are assuming that while the roster slot prices keep going up, the HP flow is going to remain static. They just increased HP twice. It's completely reasonable that they will increase it again to match roster slot prices in the future, or that they will cap roster slot prices. The situation is perfectly manageable for a F2P player right now. And if it becomes unmanageble in the future, it seems reasonable based on past history that they will make adjustments to compensate.

PS: Yes, there are people who pay 3000 HP for a roster slot. Expecting the devs to make that much HP earnable is such a laughable request that I'm not even going to bother to make the obvious, logical rebuttal.

I totally get what you are saying and mostly agree with it, perhaps I'm thinking too far down the road, and yes the flow has increased, but they stated in Q&A #3 they were having issues with increasing the flow because it accelerated newer players into standby mode as they quickly leveled their 1 and 2's and had nothing else.

What I am suggestion through the Deadpool Dailies is a means of control for D3 to regulate the ISO for players that have met certain progession points.

Example. I'm playing a typical RPG and I kill a minion and find this awesome sword, however I am unable to equip it because my dexterity or strength is not yet high enough, so I have to wait, put the time in until I'm strong enough to use the weapon. Once I have that weapon things that used to be hard are easier, but things that were undoable are not open to me, not that I will succeed, but now I can enter dungeon X where instead I could not.

So here I am an MPQ player and I find X-Force, I can't use him, because I'm not ready, but I don't want to sell him either since he will be needed down the road. Now in an RPG I can shove it in my treasure chest until I need it, in MPQ I can do the same thing by buying a roster slot, I'm fine with, but like in most RPG games the items get insanely expensive later on, but guess what, the rewards also get bigger later on as well.

Sure the in flow has increased, but if it gets too much the newer players don't have the fun of actually progressing through the game, they just jump to level 25 and then wait. Much like in an RPG I shouldn't be able to go into an insanely difficult dungeon if I haven't leveled high enough (in my example having enough characters at a certain level) or have the proper equipment. Creating nodes where these things keep certain players out that haven't progressed, but also offering higher rewards with a higher difficulty to help me purchse those insantely costed powerful items (roster slots) is what I'm asking for. Nobody wants to trying to buy level 100 gear with only level 1 income and resource gains.

scottee

Cryptobrancus wrote:

I want to turn that around on you ask why being a collector should cost so much? Some sure but its quite a lot to keep even all the two stars around and they are regularly featured in some fashion or another. Its not like keeping yelena gives you any in game advantage, just lets you feel a slight tinge of completionism.

Oh, people make decisions in games are completely disadvantageous for different reasons all the time. And there's nothing wrong with that. Some people like winning zerg games in Starcraft by massing all ultralisks. Fine, go ahead. It's fun. That doesn't mean the game should be balanced around it. It's an absurdly inefficient use of resources, yet hilariously awesome. But then complaining about the game balance, and there not being enough gas available to build support that strategy is also a bit absurd.

If you want to be a collector, no problem. Make it your goal to save up HP and spend every bit of it on roster slots. But saying I should be able to:
-Collect every character, including 1* and 2* characters I never use
-Have high level characters that can compete for top prizes in both PVE and PVP
-Complete the 4* transition and compete with top paying accounts
-Play a reasonable amount and not devote my entire life to the game
All on a F2p account. That sounds like quite lofty expectations. I find nothing unreasonable with having to choose some of these goals, but not being able to accomplish all of them.

Unknown

scottee wrote:

The game is not much more than a year old, and people are worrying that they will not be able to pay the costs another year from now? Yes, average roster slot prices cost more now than a year ago, because there are more characters. And guess what? They've increased HP flow to help.

People are assuming that while the roster slot prices keep going up, the HP flow is going to remain static. They just increased HP twice. It's completely reasonable that they will increase it again to match roster slot prices in the future, or that they will cap roster slot prices. The situation is perfectly manageable for a F2P player right now. And if it becomes unmanageble in the future, it seems reasonable based on past history that they will make adjustments to compensate.

PS: Yes, there are people who pay 3000 HP for a roster slot. Expecting the devs to make that much HP earnable is such a laughable request that I'm not even going to bother to make the obvious, logical rebuttal.

People also assume that PvE top50 will continue to be worth 2 covers. Everybody knows what happens when we assume things. You can assume that they will increase the flow of HP in the future, I will believe that things will stay static until changes are made. And if there was a cap implemented on roster costs, then this discussion would go away.

scottee

MarvelMan wrote:

scottee wrote:

MarvelMan wrote:

I make more than 325hp/wk, in part because I rarely shield, and I have more slots than you. I also put in more time than most, Im borderline hardcore/junkie. But because I dont shield much I also rarely place top 10, havent covered Thoress or quite a few of the newer 3*s.

I also recognize that Im not the average player, and that we need to focus on what can be done for that average player to increase fun and retention. Having to choose which cover to throw out, while interesting strategically, isnt fun.

It's more "fun" to play first person shooters in God mode with unlimited ammo, all weapons, and never dying. That doesn't mean developers should make games that way. Part of what makes people come back is earning incremental progress. A good game has a good balance of that. If the majority of players leave the game, it shows this balance is out of whack. When players keep coming back and show addictive tendencies, it shows they have this balance perfectly worked out.

Not even close to what Im saying. I agree there should be a gap, and hard decisions, but I think that as it stands the gap is too large for the *average* player. I know multiple people who have quit because it required so many hard decisions that it became unfun and they werent willing to be hardcore enough to play more.

I was merely highlighting the difference between strategically interesting and fun.

But I would agree that the gap was getting a bit large for a while. However, I think the current DDQ closes that gap hugely.

I think part of the problem is that the progress in this game is innately competitive. People are looking for the type of progress you get in a single player game, and that's not what this is. I think a lot of people would be more satisfied with playing Puzzles Quest 1 and 2, and just pretending all of the characters have Marvel names.

Unknown

I am not disagreeing with you, no a F2P should not be able to reach all of those goals. I just don't see why roster slots are quite so unrealistic of a goal. I stand at 8 166, many more fully covered underleveled 3*s and to buy enough roster slots to have *every* character in the game would cost me roughly ~$50. That is not a trivial amount. I have bought HP a few times, and would likely do so more often if I felt like I was actually getting a good value/price ratio but $50 bucks just for the right to collect covers? Way too much.

scottee

Cryptobrancus wrote:

I am not disagreeing with you, no a F2P should not be able to reach all of those goals. I just don't see why roster slots are quite so unrealistic of a goal. I stand at 8 166, many more fully covered underleveled 3*s and to buy enough roster slots to have *every* character in the game would cost me roughly ~$50. That is not a trivial amount. I have bought HP a few times, and would likely do so more often if I felt like I was actually getting a good value/price ratio but $50 bucks just for the right to collect covers? Way too much.

I actually suspect that players might be finishing content far faster than the devs intended. My guess is that they wanted something like, "You've got a team with Dr. Doom and Hood? I can take them down with my team of Spider Man, aided by Falcon." Instead of everyone having different teams, people are completing characters too quickly, and hence, everyone has the same teams. When you read or watch their interviews, they think of these much more as comic book fights, and much less as a competitive match-3 game.

Unknown

I see it more as a new character is released, an elite few max him out right away and the rest of us wait and see if they are going to be good or not. If yes, they eventually get leveled and added to the "usable" team, if not then they likely will sit at level 40 for a very very long time, because, collecting covers is only the very first step to "completing content" actually leveling them is the long con.

Unknown

scottee wrote:

I actually suspect that players might be finishing content far faster than the devs intended. My guess is that they wanted something like, "You've got a team with Dr. Doom and Hood? I can take them down with my team of Spider Man, aided by Falcon." Instead of everyone having different teams, people are completing characters too quickly, and hence, everyone has the same teams. When you read or watch their interviews, they think of these much more as comic book fights, and much less as a competitive match-3 game.

Even MTG, a game with a considerably higher cost of entry, you eventually have people settle on the same 'complete deck' for the formats that don't have cards that rotate out and only once in a while when something truly overpowered shows up do you even see a minor change in that format. There's always a 'best' whatever and MPQ seems to put no thought whatsoever as to what you're supposed to be playing for once you reach there, which didn't take very long to begin with.

KrazyKeylime

By design this game should allow a F2P user to be able to accomplish everything in the game with considerable effort, but there is the option to do it with less effort and time by paying. or am i getting the whole concept wrong of F2P? it is not adding a puchase only 5* that wrecks face.
roster slots is a ridiculous invention of MPQ is there any other game where you are required to purchase a place holder for new character in order to have them on your team? give me a break i must of "unlocked" juggernaut like 3 or 4 times already. It is about time they remove this awful character tax with 42 slot i have sold off all 1* but jugg for DDQ . only have ares and OBW for 2* and the rest is 3 and 4 *. As of now the character tax is approaching 5$ for each new hero most of which are going to be in cold storage for months besides the occasional essential. the whole pricing in general in this game is absolutely horrible $130 to max a 3* on covers alone. they can't keep this up forever, the sooner they realize this the better for everyone.