Show your anger the only way you can

Unknown

For those who still want to play the game , even after all this ****, please at least rate the game 1 star in the app store of your choice...Since the devs don't listen to us, it's our only way to show displeasure in this game...

Unknown

I'm going to do this when I finally get to update. Don't have a wi-fi connection right now.

Bacon Pants

WilliamK99 wrote:

For those who still want to play the game , even after all this ****, please at least rate the game 1 star in the app store of your choice...Since the devs don't listen to us, it's our only way to show displeasure in this game...

I knew there was a reason I kept clicking Remind Me Later.

IceIX

If it makes you feel better, feel free. I'll state that it's not very effective as a tool for enacting change though. We look far far more at what people are saying on forums or social media than knee jerk 1 stars that come out of a Patch, which happens every time to every game no matter what it is.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

If it makes you feel better, feel free. I'll state that it's not very effective as a tool for enacting change though. We look far far more at what people are saying on forums or social media than knee jerk 1 stars that come out of a Patch, which happens every time to every game no matter what it is.

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

Unknown

I really love the game, but I did rated it 1*
The devs somehow listen us, but does not understand us.

Unknown

Even if the devs don't listen to the rating posts in the app stores, I'm going to give the game a 1* to warn other players away from this game... until this game gets better or I quit.

Unknown

I absolutely hate the recent changes but dont bash the developers. Get a life and find something else to do if you don't like their recent decisions, in time the game will be perfect but it's a matter of time. The game only has 500,000 downloads so it still hasnt reached its time yet. Rating it *1 hurts the game, the players, the devs, and especially the potieanlly new players.

Bacon Pants

IceIX wrote:

If it makes you feel better, feel free. I'll state that it's not very effective as a tool for enacting change though. We look far far more at what people are saying on forums or social media than knee jerk 1 stars that come out of a Patch, which happens every time to every game no matter what it is.

To quote Kyle from South Park, "REALLY?"

IceIX

Derethus wrote:

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

Given that we run multiple events that feature different characters and many events often overlap, that's a really difficult one to abide by. Right now about the only characters we could probably hit would be a couple Dark Avengers and Bag-Man. The rest of the characters are pretty well featured in other Tourneys.

Unknown

Derethus wrote:

IceIX wrote:

If it makes you feel better, feel free. I'll state that it's not very effective as a tool for enacting change though. We look far far more at what people are saying on forums or social media than knee jerk 1 stars that come out of a Patch, which happens every time to every game no matter what it is.

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

To me, this comes from trying to change too much, too quickly. The intention of the developers seems to be to change aspects of the game to slow the user down - perhaps a little of their own medicine should be taken with regard to making changes. To me, it's been a helter skelter few weeks, and yes, the mid event changes do begin to grate.

Unknown

I'm not even sure if it is a case of too much too quickly or just a lack of resources to really test ideas out before pushing them live.

I honestly can't see how Patch was missed and you will never be able to convince me that Thick as Thieves was properly tested. It seems that they just throw changes out there, see if there is a drop in numbers and they 'get away with it' or not. In fact this:

IceIX wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

Lack of communication aside, is there any chance that they will at least change the cost increase back to normal in Pve and separate Pve/pvp. Not that it necessarily will be change, I know you can't say that. But will you at least confirm it will be discussed at the next meeting or something?

It's possible. What I know will happen is that people will monitor all the changes for the next week or so very very closely and see how people are reacting when they are playing. If retention of players dropped for whatever reason (or retention in a given mode for that matter), there'll be a deeper dig as to what's going on to cause that and there will be a course correction. If it's looked into and it's noted that say, fewer difficult battles are being played due to boosts not being purchased since the usage stats will likely drop, that's pretty visible.

Pretty much confirms that is exactly what they do.

Unknown

I have no problems with nerfing characters, I'll just level up another one, but the boosts for me might be the straw that breaks the camel's back

Unknown

I've honestly never played any other game where the developers listened as much to forumer opinions, and implemented changes as quickly as this game. You may not like everything that they're doing, but you don't need to be whiny **** and pretend that they don't care about improving their game. Go play any other F2P game and tell me how important your opinions are over there.

Unknown

Celerity wrote:

I've honestly never played any other game where the developers listened as much to forumer opinions, and implemented changes as quickly as this game. You may not like everything that they're doing, but you don't need to be whiny **** and pretend that they don't care about improving their game. Go play any other F2P game and tell me how important your opinions are over there.

I have been playing since mid October and IMO the game is worse now than in the beginning...Especially for new players...

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

Derethus wrote:

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

Given that we run multiple events that feature different characters and many events often overlap, that's a really difficult one to abide by. Right now about the only characters we could probably hit would be a couple Dark Avengers and Bag-Man. The rest of the characters are pretty well featured in other Tourneys.

The problem is the PVE event. The whole event (enemy levels) are balanced around the old Thor and Wolverine. Then you Nerf them and still expect us to face level 230 Maggia and Dark Avengers? The icing on this cake is that the boosts cost twice as much and the +3 to all AP costs 100HP. Speaking for myself I needed the +3 AP boost to get through any missions. This is just a terrible decision from the devs to try and bleed HP from he top 1% of players that have basically an infinite supply of hero points. It didn't work when the doubled the shield cost because everyday players suffered, and the same thing will happen again. This patch is by far the worst on released, and it has nothing to do with the balance changes. The changes would of been fine if they compensated by lowering the levels of the PVE matches.

I was almost assured a DD cover, now I am assured to be stuck with the Cap. I can't even do the missions anymore. I only can do them with the ridulously expensive 150% to Maggia boosts. The only way the devs can make themselves look good again is to award an additional DD cover on top of the free one we are already getting. There needs to be some sort of compensation as many people who might of at least had a small chance at a DD cover have all but lost the opportunity.

S

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

Derethus wrote:

If you guys listen on the forums, could you please stop nerfing characters in the middle of tournaments featuring those characters? It's wonderful that you charge people for an avengers tournament and then nerf the two most played avengers in the middle of it.

Given that we run multiple events that feature different characters and many events often overlap, that's a really difficult one to abide by. Right now about the only characters we could probably hit would be a couple Dark Avengers and Bag-Man. The rest of the characters are pretty well featured in other Tourneys.

Last Friday there was just one event. Also happened 2-3 weeks ago. Might be a better time.

Unknown

You can look at shield prices and DC as a perfect example. Double the price, far fewer people buying shields. Boom, Army of One shield prices back to normal. After nobody spends the ridiculous cost on boosting all colors, it will probably normalize again.

Unknown

The boost costs are ridiculous now, but the worst part is that it shut down to update in the middle of a match and cost me a ton of health packs to get back in the same match. Probably cost me some covers too since one match can make a difference in a ranking, especially when everyone is grinding to get daredevil and patch wolvie covers.

IceIX

abuelo wrote:

I'm not even sure if it is a case of too much too quickly or just a lack of resources to really test ideas out before pushing them live.

I honestly can't see how Patch was missed and you will never be able to convince me that Thick as Thieves was properly tested. It seems that they just throw changes out there, see if there is a drop in numbers and they 'get away with it' or not.

Not the case, but I can see how you would think that. Patch was tested quite a few times before he came out. Just prior to him releasing, a change was made in the client-side code to a function that was thought to have been deprecated. That function handled the creation of enemy tiles by any character and it hit Patch as a result. The build was tested, everything major checked out so the button was pressed to put it into submission. After that as QA was going down the more exhaustive testing checklists, it was noted that Patch's abilities weren't working properly. At that point, we made a decision to push out the build with that in place since the alternative was to have no new PVE events until a new build was also put through internal tests, then placed into submission queueing again.

Thick as Thieves was tested fairly well, but it wasn't anticipated how much the PVE scaling would take effect with a large playerbase. The thing you may not see is that it's not just *your* performance in missions that raises or lowers your scaling, but also others performances. If you're doing well on a given mission and everyone else is too, that scaling will ramp quicker. Conversely, it's possible that a mission is there that people lose at constantly, so scaling is much slower.

And no, no changes are just made with the "lets see what we can get away with in numbers" mentality. That one is impossible to prove, but it's simply not the way things are done.

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

abuelo wrote:

I'm not even sure if it is a case of too much too quickly or just a lack of resources to really test ideas out before pushing them live.

I honestly can't see how Patch was missed and you will never be able to convince me that Thick as Thieves was properly tested. It seems that they just throw changes out there, see if there is a drop in numbers and they 'get away with it' or not.

Not the case, but I can see how you would think that. Patch was tested quite a few times before he came out. Just prior to him releasing, a change was made in the client-side code to a function that was thought to have been deprecated. That function handled the creation of enemy tiles by any character and it hit Patch as a result. The build was tested, everything major checked out so the button was pressed to put it into submission. After that as QA was going down the more exhaustive testing checklists, it was noted that Patch's abilities weren't working properly. At that point, we made a decision to push out the build with that in place since the alternative was to have no new PVE events until a new build was also put through internal tests, then placed into submission queueing again.

Thick as Thieves was tested fairly well, but it wasn't anticipated how much the PVE scaling would take effect with a large playerbase. The thing you may not see is that it's not just *your* performance in missions that raises or lowers your scaling, but also others performances. If you're doing well on a given mission and everyone else is too, that scaling will ramp quicker. Conversely, it's possible that a mission is there that people lose at constantly, so scaling is much slower.

And no, no changes are just made with the "lets see what we can get away with in numbers" mentality. That one is impossible to prove, but it's simply not the way things are done.

This is my favorite response to anything yet. This is detailed, factual, and to the point. We need more of this kind of response.