Time Gem Season Updates *Updated (10/19/17)

Zappa

All I can say is have fun playing 40 5* matches every single pvp

astrp3

Vhailorx said:

 My best guess would be:

(3) there are many thousands of players with a small number of 5* champs and very deep 4* benches.  This group fills out the top alliances or headlines the top 51-200 alliances.

Geez, I guess this shows how differently people see the game.  I'd be flabbergasted if "many thousands" of players had even a single 5* champ. Not saying you're wrong - it may well be that I'm the one who's wrong and a lot more people play this game than I think.

corytutor

Its got a lot of downloads on google. 

sinnerjfl

24 hours later... no details, no explanation... whatever

Spudgutter

Milk Jugz said:

Spudgutter said:

Vhailorx said:

Spudgutter said:

This is another thing that got me thinking...how many high end players do we hear from that say they play scl6, 7 and 8 to save time and get top rewards?

Scl9 gives 10(i think) cp more than 8 just in total rewards, not including daily, so that has to be even less as it goes down the chain.

I dont mean to assume, but if you are mad about this cp change, but don't play scl9, isn't that a little hypocritical? 

In short, no.  

Here's why:  the main veteran complaints here focus on moving cp from progression to placement.  Pve CLs ask players to choose between less time/difficulty and extra cp.  The new pvp system is just telling players that only 2% will ever get the best prize (and also asking us to grind 2x for the 4* cover.  But that is an easier fix).  It's not a useful analogy.

??

Vhailorx said:

Also, please do the math.  We are talking about 45 cp a week.  That's more than 90 latest legends pulls or 14ish expected 5* covers a year.  This is a fairly big source of cp income for a decent number of veterans.

So it's ok to be mad that they take CP out of the versus, and it's ok to choose an SCL in story that gives less CP, and there is no relation?

Either CP is the end all resource, and it is your only thing to chase, or it's not.  it can't be both.  maybe they looked at the number of high end people that played down in story mode, and made this decision based partly on that? 

If you don't avail yourself all of the possible choices for CP income in the game, then please don't lecture to others about how much CP you/we are losing with this change.  you might not think it's a good analogy, i think it makes you sound like a hypocrite.  especially when one required absolutely no HP(shield), no outside coordination(line) and could be accomplished but just doing the clears at your own pace(play whenever you want).

Hate to bust your point but pvp doesn't require any of those to get 1200. I personally get 1200 playing when I want (I've done it with a day left and with 15 minutes left) and I use no outside coordination to do it. I do use shields. However, I've talked to people that have gone straight to 1200+ (in my own alliance) in one sitting, shielding only to preserve placement. So, no, 1200 does not require hp, line, or sticking to a set schedule.

Would it burst your bubble if i told you your experience =/= mine?  Or other peoples?  We've had this discussion before.  When will you realize that you seemed to have lucked into a near perfect set of circumstances, that allow you to accomplish this?  In other words, if it were so darn easy, everyone would do it.  Plenty of people cannot accomplish this, ergo, it is not easy for everyone.

My point overall isnt even the cost associated, but the fact that people are upset that they are "losing" cp, claiming it is the only resource that that they play this game for, while at the same time not going after all the cp they could get.  

Daredevil217

Milk Jugz said:

1) Sure 5* match damage is off the charts comparatively and, yes, you can have a nice cascade or two and have a quick match. On the flip side, you have those matches that you just can't get your strong matches. The board is flooded with team-up tiles. The AI keeps matching that color you need. Etc. And the matches just. Drag. On. And. On. And. On. Mostly, a 3 match hop without using boosts takes 10-15 minutes. With full 100% match damage boosts inside 5 minutes. I don't use the boosts unless I'm hopping at a busy time.

But is that exclusively a 5* problem?  I'm sure at any tier, if you have a dry board, matches will no doubt take longer.  I think 5 minutes a match is probably about right at any tier (though I have no research to back this).  Obviously certain characters will speed up a match (Grocket/Guardian at my tier), or slow it down (Carnage / Medusa).

With speed being the main draw of the current (soon to be changing) meta, it'll be nice to see more variety in teams instead of the former on offense and the latter on defense.

ComatoseJackal

PVP to me without the cp in progression will become just maintaining a nice enough score for end of season rewards. I don't care about hitting 40 wins for the stupid 4* that I rarely use as it is. Score is the only important thing still. Sucks I'll never get that cp reward though as I don't gun for top 10.

Daredevil217

astrp3 said:

broll said:

Such a fallacy.  Just because someone is new doesn't mean they aren't paying (and vice versa).  I paid more for this game in my first month than I have most of the rest of the game combined due to spending lots on HP for roster slots.  

Here here. That's been my experience as well. I spent quite a bit on this game, but the vast majority of it was when I was in 2* land (though, as a newbie, I also spent a lot of it poorly). Now, I rarely spend on anything besides VIP and I'm even considering dropping that - not because I'm upset about recent changes, but because it just isn't worth that much to me anymore. 

I can't say whether that's typical or not because I don't have access to their internal data, but I do agree that the idea that veterans or whales spend the bulk of the money that's been spent on this game is far from obviously true - at least to me. It might be true. It might not. And even if individual veterans spend more on the game on average than newbies, it still doesn't mean that collectively, they spend more. If newbies are a significant majority of the player base, their microtransactions could far outweigh the cetacean megatransactions. 

Of course, if that were the case, one might ask why those newbies don't transition into veteran players, but that may be standard for mobile games.

We don't know that.  All vets were newbies at one time.  I believe every new player has a chance to be the next big whale if a) they have the disposable income and b) you hook them and provide a product interesting enough to get them to open their wallets.  If you turn off new players all together (which PVP has been said to be a turn off for many many players- mostly newer), the well will eventually dry up as you lose older players to attrition. 

ComatoseJackal

Also there are 11,834 alliances that completed the Ragin' Cagin pvp. There are thousands of players..lol

Stax the Foyer

Spudgutter said:

My point overall isnt even the cost associated, but the fact that people are upset that they are "losing" cp, claiming it is the only resource that that they play this game for, while at the same time not going after all the cp they could get.  

This is a silly point, there are more factors at play here than raw CP earnings.  People value both CP and time. 

The marginal CP difference between PvE CLs is coupled with a significant change in time requirement.  Choosing to give up a few CP a week in exchange for hours of your time is a totally rational decision, and one that's completely consistent with complaining about possibly getting 45 fewer CP/week in PvP and having to spend more time to get the remainder of the rewards.

SangFroid

All of the people who are cheering this change will come to hate it as they progress through the game. The way this is being implemented will end up making you enjoy this game a lot less a lot faster for a short term gain. Just know that you are rooting for something that is not in your best interests long term. 

ronin_san

sinnerjfl said:

24 hours later... no details, no explanation... whatever

EXACTLY!

They knew exactly what the heck they were doing, when they had @Brigby make the last minute announcement in lieu of "more details to come tomorrow".

Guys. It's past 5PM PST, when Brigby made the announcement yesterday.

* They've prematurely announce the change
* They're making an edit to the change
* They're feigning that it's terrible and letting people stew, so the end announcement seems "less" of a loss.

* They've had a meeting and re-considered the change (let me dream).


In any case, Brigby doesn't deserve the flak he got, but they should be ashamed for throwing him out amidst the wolves like this.

Spudgutter

Stax the Foyer said:

Spudgutter said:

My point overall isnt even the cost associated, but the fact that people are upset that they are "losing" cp, claiming it is the only resource that that they play this game for, while at the same time not going after all the cp they could get.  

This is a silly point, there are more factors at play here than raw CP earnings.  People value both CP and time. 

The marginal CP difference between PvE CLs is coupled with a significant change in time requirement.  Choosing to give up a few CP a week in exchange for hours of your time is a totally rational decision, and one that's completely consistent with complaining about possibly getting 45 fewer CP/week in PvP and having to spend more time to get the remainder of the rewards.

A few?  It's 7 across progression from a 3/4 day event, 10 if you drop down to scl7.  Throw down some extra for the extra sub rewards, if there are any. 14 to 20 per week, plus all of the extra covers and tokens, which feed the farms, which gets you more cp....

I'm not saying you cant make that rational decision, I'm just pointing out that if you say you want all the cp you can get, then make that decision, it's a little hypocritical 

broll

* They are always making changes down to the wire with any new feature add. Several times they’ve had preview screenshots a day or two before that end up wrong when there was no outrage (SCL release comes to mind).  These last minute down to the wire changes are why things are often so broken on release...

Vhailorx

Spudgutter said:

Stax the Foyer said:

Spudgutter said:

My point overall isnt even the cost associated, but the fact that people are upset that they are "losing" cp, claiming it is the only resource that that they play this game for, while at the same time not going after all the cp they could get.  

This is a silly point, there are more factors at play here than raw CP earnings.  People value both CP and time. 

The marginal CP difference between PvE CLs is coupled with a significant change in time requirement.  Choosing to give up a few CP a week in exchange for hours of your time is a totally rational decision, and one that's completely consistent with complaining about possibly getting 45 fewer CP/week in PvP and having to spend more time to get the remainder of the rewards.

A few?  It's 7 across progression from a 3/4 day event, 10 if you drop down to scl7.  Throw down some extra for the extra sub rewards, if there are any. 14 to 20 per week, plus all of the extra covers and tokens, which feed the farms, which gets you more cp....

I'm not saying you cant make that rational decision, I'm just pointing out that if you say you want all the cp you can get, then make that decision, it's a little hypocritical 

It's a 9-11 cp difference for a 3 or 4 day event from cl8 to cl9 (1 per sub from the 5* essential, and 7 cp from the prog rewards).

And of course we want all the cp we can get; it's the only way to progress a 5* roster.  But i think it is also obvious that there are extrinsic limitations on how much cp any player can get (e.g. real life schedule, wealth, roster strength).  I mean, theoretically, we can all have infinite cp at $100 per 7cp (or your local sale prize), but are you really criticizing players that don't improverish themselves buying cp on credit card debt?

The problem here is that demi has made cp harder to get than it was before for lots of players.  That's not a player choosing not to chase some cp prize because of extrinsic considerations, that's demi preventing players from ever making such a determination.

Everyone is subjective and hyporcritical about something at some time.  But i absolutely reject the notion that i can't criticize moving 45 cp a week to top 10 placement just because i sometimes play cl8.

ZeiramMR

@sinnerjfl
I can assure you that Top 25 and even Top 10 is not ending above 1200 across the board for the highest SCLs. My last three PVPs had 10th place in the 900s range (925 for Gambit and at least one other SCL 8 player in my alliance was also low 900s for the tourney). It really depends on the slice and when people join. I don't use Line; maybe the coordination rooms contribute to stacking players into specific brackets? (No judgements about playstyle; just hypothesizing on the discrepancy)


Apologies for not directly quoting the few posts on this; my phone is choking on the formatting today for some reason.)

ursopro

The change is done, you all just need to try harder in order to place for that sweet cp, don't let the uber whales hoard all the top spots, try to be competitive for once instead of shield trading hits with your buddy John Doe. Make PvP great again.

Or stop spending in the game, quit and make a retirement thread about it and give the app a negative review in the Play Store, much easier.

Spudgutter

Vhailorx said:

Everyone is subjective and hyporcritical about something at some time.  But i absolutely reject the notion that i can't criticize moving 45 cp a week to top 10 placement just because i sometimes play cl8.

Ah, i agree.

I also criticized the move.  But then again, i am also not railing against people who are ok/indifferent with this change, nor am i chastising them for all the lost cp we are no longer getting, because we would have gotten "eventually" if they hadn't made the change.

smkspy

SangFroid said:

All of the people who are cheering this change will come to hate it as they progress through the game. The way this is being implemented will end up making you enjoy this game a lot less a lot faster for a short term gain. Just know that you are rooting for something that is not in your best interests long term. 

So many people, including myself said this exact same thing about vaulting, but it ended up being a boon. 

But hey, if it doesn't work out, the devs can change it. Nothing is permeant just as vaulting taught us, twice.

dudethtsawesome

Maybe the silence from the Dev's is them trying to fix this storm. Hopefully they realize that the win based system needs more work than just 2 runs with basically no change. 

//Removed Profanity -Brigby