They Managed to Make it Worse

135

Comments

  • Mr_Sinister
    Mr_Sinister Posts: 356 Mover and Shaker
    Vhailorx wrote:
    Reading between the lines of some of the puzzle warriors 3 interviews, it seems clear that the vaults are intended by the game design team as another method for players to spend specific resources on specific 4* covers (to ease some of the irregularities of RNG roster building).

    So I think what we are seeing here is the internal struggle between the game design team and the monetization team. Game design recognizes that the player transition experience isn't great and wants to improve it. Monetization is concerned that making too many 4* covers available to too many people at too low a cost reduces the push to buy resources (and speeds up transition, which means people won't play the game as long). These goals are in tension. Sadly (for players!), I think we can all guess which of these two competing interests will triumph in the end. . .

    "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush".

    They went chasing the bushes here, and they will come out not only with nothing in hand, but bruised and cut as well.
  • broll
    broll Posts: 4,732 Chairperson of the Boards
    MojoWild wrote:
    Do we know that this was intentional?

    It was intentional to take our mind off of their horrible decision on the buttons. icon_lol.gif

    Oh the power of misdirection...
  • bbigler
    bbigler Posts: 2,111 Chairperson of the Boards
    Vhailorx wrote:
    Reading between the lines of some of the puzzle warriors 3 interviews, it seems clear that the vaults are intended by the game design team as another method for players to spend specific resources on specific 4* covers (to ease some of the irregularities of RNG roster building).

    So I think what we are seeing here is the internal struggle between the game design team and the monetization team. Game design recognizes that the player transition experience isn't great and wants to improve it. Monetization is concerned that making too many 4* covers available to too many people at too low a cost reduces the push to buy resources (and speeds up transition, which means people won't play the game as long). These goals are in tension. Sadly (for players!), I think we can all guess which of these two competing interests will triumph in the end. . .

    It's more like the game design person and monetization person; I'm sure they are a very small operation. Even if progress/transition was faster, people would still play forever because of the constant release of new characters. There is no end to this game.
  • Vhailorx
    Vhailorx Posts: 6,085 Chairperson of the Boards
    bbigler wrote:
    Vhailorx wrote:
    Reading between the lines of some of the puzzle warriors 3 interviews, it seems clear that the vaults are intended by the game design team as another method for players to spend specific resources on specific 4* covers (to ease some of the irregularities of RNG roster building).

    So I think what we are seeing here is the internal struggle between the game design team and the monetization team. Game design recognizes that the player transition experience isn't great and wants to improve it. Monetization is concerned that making too many 4* covers available to too many people at too low a cost reduces the push to buy resources (and speeds up transition, which means people won't play the game as long). These goals are in tension. Sadly (for players!), I think we can all guess which of these two competing interests will triumph in the end. . .

    It's more like the game design person and monetization person; I'm sure they are a very small operation. Even if progress/transition was faster, people would still play forever because of the constant release of new characters. There is no end to this game.

    It is absolutely clear that demi/d3 keep a pretty tight cap on the rate of cover distribution. That's why new releases are top 100 only, instead of 1 cover for everyone who participates in the event, the way it should be. And why the best rewards are placement only, and why it took so long for 4* prog covers in PVE, and why the drop rate for 4*s in heroic tokens is so pathetic.

    The only plausible reason to suppress player progress that I can see is concern that players will lose interest/not spend if they can build their roster too quickly.

    And while demi is a small operation, it's not THAT small. They have multiple teams of multiple people working on game design alone, so that doesn't count artists or other departments. And I suspect d3 is even larger (and has a fair bit of say on the monetization side of things.
  • Partyof5
    Partyof5 Posts: 62 Match Maker
    I guess I'll post this here since they just removed the thread this came from.
    ammenell wrote:
    don't spend money. eliminate competitiveness. stop grinding and only play when you feel like it.
    accept your crawling progress, and move mpq just a bit down on your priorities.
    you will wonder how much time you suddenly have.
    you win. they lose.
    I have done all those things you mention, yet my progress is below even crawling.

    I have 30+ 4* characters, none with more than 8 covers. All but a few are sitting at 4 covers or less. Each time they release a new one, my chances of pulling a 4* cover for an already rostered character is reduced. So I sit with half a roster that hasn't been useful to me for months and won't be for many more. 3 months from now I'll just have more useless 4* characters on my roster in the hope that sometime in the next 3 years some of them will eventually be fully covered due to luck of the draw. I don't expect to keep up with the pace of new releases, but the mechanisms in place for building characters up doesn't work for someone who doesn't grind or whale.

    It's not fun still not having a useful 4* after all this time and all these matches.
  • smkspy
    smkspy Posts: 2,024 Chairperson of the Boards
    Just when I thought their greed could get any worse, they manage to surprise me. Love it.
  • Omega Red
    Omega Red Posts: 366 Mover and Shaker
    Well, at least this proves me right. These vaults WERE good deals for players. Good enough for d3 to pull the plug on them this fast anyway. icon_lol.gif

    It's kind of embarrasing though, the math was so easy. They were effectively selling a four star plus a bag of extras for average 1500 hp. How could they miss it?!

    At least now they made it easy with the new deal. Just another vault I can ignore without doubt. icon_e_biggrin.gif
  • Calnexin
    Calnexin Posts: 1,078 Chairperson of the Boards
    bbigler wrote:
    Boycott this Agent Venom vault everyone. If we all do, then they will get the picture and hopefully change it back.

    Done. I will not be putting any HP into this vault.

    I don't really have a choice. Whenever I get to 2k I buy another roster slot and stick a 1* in there to buffer for 4* releases. But I'm in no way tempted to spend cash to open this vault. Or any of the past ones. I might've put in the 150 for a single, just for that lottery ticket thrill when I'm in the mood. 2k is too big an investment for a 50% chance at a single cover of a character I don't care about.
  • GritsNGravy
    GritsNGravy Posts: 114 Tile Toppler
    Yep, not single pull, no way. Not cool.
  • Calnexin
    Calnexin Posts: 1,078 Chairperson of the Boards
    Partyof5 wrote:
    I have done all those things you mention, yet my progress is below even crawling.

    I have 30+ 4* characters, none with more than 8 covers. All but a few are sitting at 4 covers or less. Each time they release a new one, my chances of pulling a 4* cover for an already rostered character is reduced.

    RNG is a fickle mistress. If you hit it right, you win. If you don't, you beat your head against the wall until your number comes up, or quit out of frustration.

    It took me almost 2 years to build and champ my first 4*. I'm on day 758, and I've only got 6. I've got a couple others max-covered, and a few at 11-12, but the rest are garbage. I have no idea when those covers are going to come up, if they ever do. This is a long game. Improving draw rates would make a lot of people happy in the short-term, but it would also piss off a lot people who built their rosters under the more restrictive conditions. Changing anything about the accumulation rate is a dicey proposition for the devs.
  • turbomoose
    turbomoose Posts: 815 Critical Contributor
    I certainly won't be buying from it

    Hope the devs listen to us but I doubt it
  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,037 Chairperson of the Boards
    Tony Foot wrote:
    Vhailorx wrote:

    It is absolutely clear that demi/d3 keep a pretty tight cap on the rate of cover distribution. That's why new releases are top 100 only, instead of 1 cover for everyone who participates in the event, the way it should be. And why the best rewards are placement only, and why it took so long for 4* prog covers in PVE, and why the drop rate for 4*s in heroic tokens is so pathetic..

    To be fair the very next PVE these days gives you that new 4* cover for very little effort. I think that's a good balance, there's no need to go hard on the event, just get it the next event. They want you to have it, they want the 1000HP for the roster slot. It make sense for them to give it away easy. As for heroics, again I can see why the rate is lowish. I am a 4* progress only pve player and 575 and drop on pvp and I am now getting the equivalent of a 10 pack of heriocs and usually 10 elites per day to open. That is fantastic. If the drop rate was better for 4 stars we would all have them covered in 6 months.

    They are giving me more 4 stars that ever before, more cp, more ISO and HP. I personally feel it's in a pretty good place right now for what this game should be. I no longer have to set timers, interrupt sleep etc for some CP and 4* progression.

    I agree. CP has gone way up for me with the 575 PVP progression reward which means an extra 1.5 legendary pulls per week. ISO has gone up from about 25K per day to almost 40K per day with the same amount of effort. Even the elite tokens have helped since my farm flips faster meaning more rewards quicker which in turn means more heroic token pulls, CP, HP and ISO. The devs have taken a great step in the right direction in terms of what is available. And the changes to PVE were super positive for my play style, one long session every night is much better for me that the old log in every 8 hours gambit we used to have.

    As for these vaults I can't say the change really affects me since I hadn't spent any HP on any of them when they were single pulls and I won't be now that they aren't. The only really good deal available for HP is the daily deal and if I like the vault I'll pull those. If there was a 4* I had to have to keep a cover from expiring I would probably pony up the 3600 to clear the vault but so far there simply hasn't been a cover that valuable to me.
  • Brigby
    Brigby ADMINISTRATORS Posts: 7,757 Site Admin
    Hey everyone. Just wanted to let you know that I reached out to the development team to inquire about these changes.
    They're currently trying out some different things with the weekly Limited Vaults, so you might see some changes until the right solution is found.

    Apologies for the inconvenience, but thank you for your patience and understanding.
  • Swish
    Swish Posts: 33 Just Dropped In
    aesthetocyst wrote:

    The creation of a MPQ Eschatology subforum is long overdue.

    Not going to lie, this made the theologian nerd in me giggle more than a little bit. Kudos!
  • Mr_Sinister
    Mr_Sinister Posts: 356 Mover and Shaker
    Brigby wrote:
    Hey everyone. Just wanted to let you know that I reached out to the development team to inquire about these changes.
    They're currently trying out some different things with the weekly Limited Vaults, so you might see some changes until the right solution is found.

    Apologies for the inconvenience, but thank you for your patience and understanding.

    Before VIP was implemented, they did a survey to gauge how it would work or and what people were willing to pay. Rather than toss feces are the wall and see if it sticks, why not poll the players more often for these things? Of course you'll get low ballers, but you also get those of us that understand it's a business and rate things that strike a balance between what we want and what the money counters are looking to get.
  • Felonius
    Felonius Posts: 289 Mover and Shaker
    I also do not like the change to the new vault, and will be showing my displeasure by NOT buying anything from the vault (note that with the previous vaults, I did buy from them).
  • Dormammu
    Dormammu Posts: 3,531 Chairperson of the Boards
    When I saw the vault this morning I didn't even notice the single-pull option was gone. I was too busy laughing at the vault's pathetic contents.
  • DrDevilDinosaur
    DrDevilDinosaur Posts: 436 Mover and Shaker
    Its just because they don't want too many covers for new characters in circulation yet, right?
  • snlf25
    snlf25 Posts: 947 Critical Contributor
    For an Agent Venom, this is poop. For a Peggy, I'd do it. All depends on the prize.
  • Sluggo
    Sluggo Posts: 504 Critical Contributor
    These vaults have been a non-issue for me. Invisible Woman? Spider-Woman? Agent Venom? I haven't given even a half-second thought to spending HP to get these characters. And it doesn't help that these vaults only have one 4*.

    I get the feeling these vaults are an experiment, meant to answer the question, "what will players spend HP on?" Don't spend HP on them and they'll have to make them better.

Categories