Survey time...

The Herald

Obviously this one seems to be working out slice times, but they kindly gave us the option to rate how likely we are to recommend this game.

I voted a 5, neutral.

Gave the reason that the story mode is too tedious even though the core game is pretty good.

Anyone else want to share their polling?

wymtime

I think the more interesting part of the survey was asking about end times for PVP and PVE. Especially with the new PVE format the current end times are rough since the start of the next sub is not an optimal time any more for making 4 clears.

Alsmir

2.

I would switch it to ~7 if extra covers wouldn't expire if you have no roster space.

It's fun in the beginning but suddenly you realise that you will either pay for extra roster slots or you will loose valuable covers that you have no space for. You can exchange those covers for others, and selling a 4* for 1k ISO is like a slap in the face.

firethorne

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

The Herald

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

My bad sorry, couldn't remember if there WAS a zero option O.o

dr tinykittylove

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

The Herald

dr tinykittylove wrote:

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

I see a zero vote as a protest, more than a zero interest vote.

WEBGAS

I gave 3 in hope that devs finally give us PROGRESSION rewards only for PVE....
it could possibly be switched to 9 (there is always a way to make better )..... or ZERO instead

Mawtful

I always love a chance to vote the game 0. And if I'm lucky, it'll play havoc with whatever metrics they're trying to gather.

Diarchos

Actually I can't believe that people give 1-4 votes still play this game. If I felt that way about a game I would stop playing immediately. If you don't like it, don't play it! It's as simple as that.

GrumpySmurf1002

dr tinykittylove wrote:

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

Likelihood to recommend is not the same as enjoyment of the game.

I still get a 7-8 out of enjoyment playing (down from 8-9 a few months ago).

I consistently give it a 0-3 for recommending, depending on my mood. I think it's foolish to tell other people "check out this game I really like where if you join now you're almost 3 years behind and have no earthly prayer of catching up without dropping a dump truck of cash."

DTStump

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

dr tinykittylove wrote:

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

Likelihood to recommend is not the same as enjoyment of the game.

I still get a 7-8 out of enjoyment playing (down from 8-9 a few months ago).

I consistently give it a 0-3 for recommending, depending on my mood. I think it's foolish to tell other people "check out this game I really like where if you join now you're almost 3 years behind and have no earthly prayer of catching up without dropping a dump truck of cash."

Agree. I like this game and play it obsessively because I'm an insane person, but I don't expect everybody to be as crazy as I am

firethorne

The Herald wrote:

dr tinykittylove wrote:

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

I see a zero vote as a protest, more than a zero interest vote.

A vote of no confidence is certainly part of it.

As for why I still play, part is probably sunk cost fallacy. Also, the question is would I recommend it to someone, not do I personally enjoy any part of it. Things like ddq are fine. But, I realize by being two years in, while I'm still behind the meta, that the problem for a new player would be significantly worse. Progressing and leveling on this game is huge problem. I couldn't in good conscious recommend they start a game where they'd start at such a huge disadvantage. With the stingy flow of rewards and ISO, I think it is insurmountable for any new player. There isn't a way to catch up.

fmftint

Had to give it a 2 on recommending, reason given, the developers refuse to evolve the reward structure to the current Gane play. +400 enemies should not reward 70 iso and crit boosts.

Prefered end times
Story 8pm est
Vs 12 am est

JVReal

I gave it a 5, though I enjoy it (and am playing it less and less each day) the thought of someone starting at the beginning 3 years behind is horrifying. I won't even play my newbie Steam account because of the drowning feeling I get when i try to play it, but know I can't compete in any of the events for any real reward.

I've never watched NASCAR, but I imagine it would be like being the car at the back of the pack thinking he's gaining when he passes two cars... only to find out that they are like 3 laps ahead of him so that gain, really isn't a gain at all.

CT1888

I gave it a generous 4 on recommendations. I can't imagine starting now with all the characters, roster slot costs, time taken to get anywhere etc.

I still enjoy it, having a decent roster, but early stages now, no thanks.

Eichen

I remember reading on here the other day that there is no good end time for the US East Coast. (I don't live there so I don't/didn't know that)

My bet is someone saw that and realized that since almost 40% of the US population lives on the east cost there was an opportunity for some increased revenue there.

illusionist_KA

dr tinykittylove wrote:

firethorne wrote:

You forgot zero, my vote for various reasons. From the absurd ISO economy to RNG based progression into the current meta, wild imbalance between players at different stages of the game while still trying to cram them all into the same system, making the misguided assumption they can make that equatable for everyone, many parts of this seem broken, and like they don't know what to do to course correct.

Zero? If you dislike the game this much, why are you still playing?

I gave it a zero for the following reason. This game is meant for me, i can't recommend this game to anyone at the state this is at. I started this game 2 years ago with about 50 some characters available. We have surpassed 100 now and no end in sight. Someone coming in, will have to do harder work, and spend so much money that they will give up when they find out how difficult it will get later on. most veterans took time and to build the roster when it was doable. DDQ was introduced to make it easier to make the transition easier to complete the 3* and start working on the 4*.

I've spent so much money on this, that now i am wondering why i did it in the first place. Just to keep up with the big boys, impress my friends, make me stare at my roster for 10 minutes knowing i don't have the iso to move not one cover. Its way harder for PVE. I cant play at one sitting (life, kids, 2 jobs etc....) 8hr interval was very manageable for me. The scaling is out of control. my roster cant hardly keep up with the scaling. Here i thought the ultron scaling was ridiculous. I wonder what the Gauntlet is going to bring.

they have attempted to fix some areas of this game, but what they intend to fix, breaks something else. Cycle goes around and around.

No new person will have that kind of patience. I've kept up with this system for this long (day 755), but i think the time is coming where i will hang up my hat and say fair winds and following seas. Pokemon Go looks really good right now.....

Sluggo

I've been playing for a year and have finally pushed through to the point where I usually cruise to top 50 in each PVE and my HP flow is positive, meaning I make enough HP each month to roster 2 new characters and even buy a few vault tokens if the rewards seem good enough.

But the fact that I'm enjoying the game now is very different than asking if I'd recommend it to someone else, who'd be starting from scratch and staring down months of glacial progression before they'd even have a decent 3* lineup. Which is why I answered that question with a 3, and considered that generous. Honestly, this game is so stingy with its rewards, I'd feel guilty recommending it, as if I was trying to inflict pain on them.

babinro

8

I believe the first time they did this survey I only gave them a 2 so there's been a lot of positive improvement in this game over time. As a 5* player I admit that the game I'm playing today is a lot less fun than it was before 5*'s were introduced to the game.

But when it comes to actually recommending this game I can objectively look at it beyond the viewpoint of a several year vet seeking only 5* covers to progress. This game is FUN and it's made huge strides to improving the experience for someone whose new. I'm confident to recommend this to new players with the understanding that they'll probably not stick with the game for as long as I have.

Phumade

I voted 3 for these reasons.

1. Too many new chars, too fast: Hard to enjoy a character when you dont really get to use and engage with it. And this is coming from a PVE player that generally ends the event with 4 or 5 covers. This is something they really need to consider.

2. No real game road map/ poor communications: Its incredibly hard to make decisions about rosters/leveling/events to participate in based on vague and inaccurate information. This is most evident when it comes to new 5* intros, because we are never told how the draw odds will change based on who goes into who token pack. However, this has also been demonstrated by the character deconstruction fiasco that occurred during championing. Currently, there is still a lack of adequate communication with respect to the game crashes in R104/5/6. Specifically, alliance members have emails from CS stating that they will receive compensation once the game crashes are fixed. Is this offer based on the submission of a CS ticket, is this a global compensation? Do I need to resubmit a crash issue? IDK? Finally, the whole championing mechanic was poorly explained. I appreciate the nice graphics and faq that was written, but the failure to explain what happened to the 3* damage curve really crippled how people transitioned into the new paradigm. Lastly, the failure to mention the double iso event was just lazy. Even if the unveil of Peggy was embargoed, they could have printed double iso event in the sneak peek. Its hard to recommend a friend check out an event, when you have no idea whats going on and why.

3. To many game crashes. The stability of the game has steadily gotten worse and worse. When I started in R49, the game was rock solid stable and loaded fast. Now the only question is "How many times will MPQ crash today".

Its still a fun game to play and I really enjoy the friends I've made through my alliance. However, its incredibly embarassing to say that "You'll meet a lot of cool people through the game, but you need to download a 3rd party app to actually chat with them.