Open letter to the Devs

MarvelDestiny

TL;DR: General complaint about recent changes and the affect on playability.

Devs,

I want to let you know that for the most part the changes I have seen in the game over the last 9-10 months or so have been mostly good.  In fact, I have enjoyed MPQ more since these changes than I ever did before.  But some of the recent changes have me taking a step back to re-evaluate.  I would like to outline those changes and the effect they had on my desire to continue playing (and contributing to) this game.

The biggest change is the scaling increase in the Story mode.  When you guys dropped the scaling months ago the game went from annoying to fun, suddenly I was playing more than DDQ everyday.  In fact, I was getting ready to stop playing but the adjustments pulled me back in.  Now, after the recent changes, it is actually worse than before.  Yes, one can argue that I can simply scale back the levels but doing so changes the rewards drastically.

My SHIELD rank is 66, I have 11 5-stars, 50 4-stars, 44 3-stars, 13 2-stars, & 1 1-star.  The 1-star and all the 2-stars are maxed, and all but one of the 3-stars is championed.  Although most of my 4-stars and all of my 5-stars are unplayable, one would think the new levels at rank 7 or 8 shouldn't be a big problem but they are.  Unlike some players (most forumites for sure) who play to challenge themselves, all I want is a relaxing diversion.  Although I play daily I am not looking to rank high, I just want earn a few covers to inch a little closer to playable 4/5 stars and maybe grab some command points.  However, staying at these ranks makes the game a boring grind and dropping the rank makes the rewards not worth my time.

Command points are my next sore point.  The distribution of these points in the progression awards was great.  But now you've clumped them all into two award thresholds.  I had to roll my eyes when I saw 22 command points at the top tier of every new event recently.  This change is not conducive to casual play since it takes a lot of grinding to get them.


Now, I would like to break out with some numbers; just a few to illustrate how petty these changes appear to me.

5-star: 16 characters, 208 covers to max, 1584 covers to champion-max
4-star: 51 characters, 663 covers to max, 5049 covers to champion-max
3-star: 44 characters, 572 covers to max, 4356 covers to champion-max

This totals to well over 10000 covers.  Even if someone somehow got lucky enough to score 3 covers a day with zero dups that's roughly 9 years of daily gameplay assuming no additional characters are added to the roster. Realistically, it would take probably double that.

I'm curious, what is the impetus of making the game more difficult for players?  (Honestly asking, not rhetorical.)

Anyway, I will be taking a break from the game.  I know you guys make plenty of money so I doubt it matters, but you are losing a paying player.  It's not like I am a whale or anything but I was happy to contribute regularly when the game was fun.

I hope you take some time and re-evaluate the course of the game.

Regards,

MD

Daiches

If the scaling increased for you in the test, that means you were playing in a higher scl than D3 intended you too. Unfortunately there is a large disconnect between scl required to enter a given difficulty range and what roster. And more unfortunately the rewards are not equal to what people should fight for in that slice.

As a 3star roster, you should be in scl6, fighting for scl 8 rewards, but alas until we get scl9 and 10, you're stuck.

NewMcG

MarvelDestiny said:

 Although most of my 4-stars and all of my 5-stars are unplayable, one would think the new levels at rank 7 or 8 shouldn't be a big problem but they are.  

Actually I think this would mean EXACTLY that. Without either usable 4 or 5* characters, the highest-end portions of the game should actually be a big problem.

Lukoil

mexus said:

New McG said:

MarvelDestiny said:

 Although most of my 4-stars and all of my 5-stars are unplayable, one would think the new levels at rank 7 or 8 shouldn't be a big problem but they are.  

Actually I think this would mean EXACTLY that. Without either usable 4 or 5* characters, the highest-end portions of the game should actually be a big problem.

Then maybe the ranks shouldn't open up that early on in the game?
If they're meant for long-term players only and if a short-term player is able to play these ranks then it's a huge flaw.

Yes. That's the problem. There is also problem in how ranks are earned. You can be rank 100+ without single 4* (just by leveling 2* again again and again). Of course it will take more time then just leveling 4*, but it is possible.

fmftint

You describe  the difference in rewards between SCLs  as DRASTIC and not worth your time playing a lower rank, yet the reality is there's very little difference in rewards from 7-8

Jarvind

"lol" - devs, probably.

pheregas

Everybody wants all the rewards and think they are entitled to them.  And while I agree that rewards are still too low for CL8 and that there definitely should be a bigger difference between CL7 and CL8, I do think that they opened up the different difficulties too low.  With scaling "fixed" during the event, it felt like the game I always dreamed of playing after serving my time in the trenches.  Everyone complaining about increased scaling only just now experienced regular gameplay and it should have opened your eyes to what CL you should have been playing in all along.

And please, lets give a little credit to the devs.  Rewards are higher than they've ever been, even if they should be higher.

MissChinch

MarvelDestiny said:

TL;DR: General complaint about recent changes and the affect on playability.

....  However, staying at these ranks makes the game a boring grind and dropping the rank makes the rewards not worth my time.

... well over 10000 covers.  Even if someone somehow got lucky enough to score 3 covers a day with zero dups ...
Regards,

MD

I think I understand where you're coming from...  The change in scaling resulted in less rewards for me.  With regards to that, I'm hopeful because I think the system is better, I think the experience can be remedied by re-evaluating the rewards in each tier, which I'm still hopeful for (despite the small attention paid to these forums and lack of any actual in game changes in line with the few comments we've gotten from the devs).

Cover acquisition picks up dramatically, getting 3 a day will sound very slow before long even if you never hit max progression in PvE... Duplicate covers are absolutely welcome though, don't put a stipulation on not getting duplicates, you're looking at needing 113 covers for these characters, the only time duplicates are even an issue is in the first 13 when you want 2 duplicates in every color before getting 5 duplicates in any single cover...  Its also worthwhile to keep in mind that the first 13 covers provides excellent value per cover.

Ducky

*Off to Feedback*

KGB

The problem is the Dev's have never clarified what kind of roster they consider to be an 'average' one for a particular clearance level.

Someone with a mostly 3* champ roster (as the OP has) and lots of developing 4* would seem to me to be exactly what SCL7 is meant for. The OP is saying they are struggling in SCL7 with that kind of roster.

That also describes my roster/experience. I have better 4* than the OP but I too found this event in SCL7 to be about 30 levels above my normal scaling. That's not insane at the final clear (4th) but my initial clears used to start at around 100 and now start at 200. That's a DRAMATIC difference. Big enough that in events with tile movers I will be lucky to clear even twice much less 4+ times (for example the Rider Awakens wave node with 4 waves of tile movers will be impossible for me to clear even once if the initial clear is 200 for me instead of 100 as it was on the last event). Events like the Simulator with virtually all tile movers is going to be about 5* as hard as it was.

On the other hand if SCL7 is meant for rosters with multiple champed 4* then I'm definitely in the wrong clearance level.

So that's the real question on the table. What kind of rosters are the Dev's envisioning for the various levels.

KGB

Khanwulf

I'm with the @MarvelDestiny and @KGB at this point. The recent changes have made the game harder, effectively reduced rewards, and forced much higher commitment levels at the same roster strength.

It's great that for truly dedicated players armed with enough time rewards are up. Even those, however, will have real trouble if they are not already potent enough to handle clears at SCL 7 and earn a 4* progression cover to go with the CP. If one or more teams of boosted 4*s are available then of course SCL 7 should be no problem (healthpacks aside), however even with the focus on the Latest 12, reduced draw rates from less CP and progression will make champing 4s even more difficult.

I think... that some kind of developer vision comments would be helpful. And I'm not even being sarcastic. Getting to and playing well in 3* land has long been not a problem. Champion levels only make this easier. Getting to 4* land--defined as creating a collection of characters to unlock gated nodes--has always been more challenging. Creating a roster of playable 4*s in any quantity has been a work of years or very large sums of money. (This is perspective from start-of-game; my own roster is not there yet.)

So, if we as players understood better what the Dev vision is for reward rates, SCL (difficulty, as of now) and roster capabilities, that would help us moderate expectations. Where is the median on the bell curves for "average player?"

As it is, my phone is in the shop and when it comes back bare I won't put MPQ on again. That'll be -$10/month. Change my mind, I dare you.

--Khanwulf 

MissChinch

KGB said:

The problem is the Dev's have never clarified what kind of roster they consider to be an 'average' one for a particular clearance level.

Someone with a mostly 3* champ roster (as the OP has) and lots of developing 4* would seem to me to be exactly what SCL7 is meant for. The OP is saying they are struggling in SCL7 with that kind of roster.

That also describes my roster/experience. I have better 4* than the OP but I too found this event in SCL7 to be about 30 levels above my normal scaling. That's not insane at the final clear (4th) but my initial clears used to start at around 100 and now start at 200. That's a DRAMATIC difference. Big enough that in events with tile movers I will be lucky to clear even twice much less 4+ times (for example the Rider Awakens wave node with 4 waves of tile movers will be impossible for me to clear even once if the initial clear is 200 for me instead of 100 as it was on the last event). Events like the Simulator with virtually all tile movers is going to be about 5* as hard as it was.

On the other hand if SCL7 is meant for rosters with multiple champed 4* then I'm definitely in the wrong clearance level.

So that's the real question on the table. What kind of rosters are the Dev's envisioning for the various levels.

KGB

I think the most effective way to figure out what SCL your roster maps to is to take a peek at your hardest nodes in a scaled event (I did this on the event before the iso-8 test, but this current howard event should work fine) See what the highest level you get up to is, then map it to the level ranges that were given in the info thread from Brigby.

FWIW a roster with 5-10 champ 4*s (with not many levels beyond 270) encounters scaling between what SCL7 and SCL8 were tested at...

It might be useful for folks wondering about their rosters proper SCL to post what their current highest level enemies are in these scaled events.

MarvelDestiny

fmftint said:

You describe  the difference in rewards between SCLs  as DRASTIC and not worth your time playing a lower rank, yet the reality is there's very little difference in rewards from 7-8

That's true, I normally played those ranks.  What I'm saying is that to play at the level of my 3-stars I would have to slide down a couple levels and the rewards for those those ranks aren't worth my time.

Astralgazer

I'm afraid I have to disagree with OP in some points.

First off, there should be a wide gap between players who invest time to play the game vs those who play casually. Casual play should always mean casual rewards. I would like to add that there should be a narrow gap between paying players vs wholly F2P players--but the nature of this kind of games is that it always is P2W. The game has done a well enough job, however, to separate those whales from the Great Unwashed. Anyhoo, the game should award those who invest in developing their rosters.

Secondly, champion-maxing is not the requirement to have a  strong roster or to enjoy the game. A roster with deep 3* champions is good enough to reach 575 in PVP, for example. This is the foundation on which to base development of 4* rosters. And the rate of acquisition of 3* covers is not 3 covers/day; it's much higher. Furthermore, one would only need to have 13 covers with no dupes before banishing any worry about dupes forever--championing is one of the most brilliant gameplay changes made by the devs. It could take 9 years to champ every 3* and 4* in one's roster, but do we need to max champ them all? You only need a regular championed 4* to reach 900 in PVP--thereby gaining guaranteed 3* and 4* covers. Furthermore, if players need 9 years to max champ everyone, this is a good thing. The game would have longevity and we can enjoy destroying Juggernauts every day for the next 9 years.

Thirdly, having a game that is too easy for players is not a good thing. Players would get bored in no time. Striking a sweet spot between stupid easy and punishingly difficult is the job for all game designers. A good game should reward you for discovering new combos, new ways to play the game, new metas. When too many players have found the game too easy, devs should find a way to make it more difficult without disturbing the balance too much. I played many mobile games for a while before getting bored because it's either too easy or too difficult--I have played MPQ for 500+ consecutive days precisely because it's not too easy. The game gives me frustration at times, punishing me for mistakes or bad luck, but also give me opportunities to get better and stronger--only to face new and more difficult challenges.

MarvelDestiny

I'm not sure who or why someone flagged my post as spam but this was an honest inquiry to the devs and not spam in any way.

That is all