Reflections after being in 5* land for 6 months.

Bad

HoundofShadow said:

As for characters being left unused, it's up to the players to find a use for them. Why wait for the dev to force you to use them? Think out of the box or explore the synergies of different characters if you want to use all of them. If you need someone to force you to do something like using unused characters, it simply means that you have no urge or desire to use them because it's not important and not necessary.

If I have a job and a family, I'm not going to use a team of 4*s knowing that my meta team will finish that battle 5 minutes earlier. 
So in every mode which I can use them I will use them.
A lot of players complain about having 4*s in the bench, so using the best and quick team obviously is well shared. Having 4*s in the bench means the player forgets what they are doing and they stay there forever.
However this game forces players to collect all characters. In the same way it should implement more modes beside puzzle gauntlet forcing players to use these characters.
Introducing... kinds of implements that, sometimes, banning characters and loaning but it's a mode only focused to showcase the new character.
A regular mode offering funny battles showcasing a bunch of old characters offering some rewards would be really funny and a lot of players would feel all those characters in the bench have their use, perhaps some characters would revive too.

HoundofShadow

We need to differentiate between "needs" and "wants", and prioritise what's important and what's not.

In your case, using meta to finish nodes quickly is a need because you don't have much time for MPQ.
However, using 4* sitting on the bench is a want. You want to use them, but it's not necessary or a need to use them, essential characters aside.

Using meta to clear nodes is important to you because you need to finish it within a certain period of time. However, using 4* sitting on the bench is not important because it doesn't fulfill your goals of finishing MPQ within a period of time.

Therefore, using 4* sitting on the bench is not an important need. As a matter of fact, it's an unimportant want. Why focus on something that doesn't fulfil an important want/need?  

We have pick 1, 2 and 3 in the game and there easily more than 10 game modes (conditions) in the game. All the dev need to do is to play around with different conditions and we have varieties. 

Bad

The game forces us to roster all characters but if there aren't modes intended to use them, apart from having a single cover for required nodes, players feel that rostering all those characters is useless. 
It would be positive a mode for all those characters, featuring a bunch of them in regular schedule, banning all the other characters and loaning them too.
If one player thinks that in a season it's using characters he usually plays, in the next one with another bunch possibly there will be characters he don't.
A mode like this, and being battles and not puzzles, should be positive both for the gacha all policy and for the player remembering unused characters .

Sekilicious

Bad said:

The game forces us to roster all characters but if there aren't modes intended to use them, apart from having a single cover for required nodes, players feel that rostering all those characters is useless. 
It would be positive a mode for all those characters, featuring a bunch of them in regular schedule, banning all the other characters and loaning them too.
If one player thinks that in a season it's using characters he usually plays, in the next one with another bunch possibly there will be characters he don't.
A mode like this, and being battles and not puzzles, should be positive both for the gacha all policy and for the player remembering unused characters .

I do agree, but should add that adding content isn’t necessarily a good thing. Like you said in your initial post people tend to only have a limited amount of time to dedicate to games before it impacts their personal life. If there is too much to do that can be detrimental to a player’s desire to play as well. 

Bad

I think new content is always positive. 
Now there is Introducing... i.e. It's new content although focused on new characters. There is puzzle gauntlet too, and the player has a whole week to play it or not.
And there is the key: the game offers content and players are free to play it or not.

For each player not playing it possibly there will be 2 enjoying it, if the content is good.

HoundofShadow

You mentioned that you didn't want to use 4* sitting on the bench because of time constraint but you want the dev to create new game mode on top Of existing game mode that will require you to use up more time. 

I'm looking at things from the point that using non-meta characters should be something born out of curiosity or interest, instead of being forced to use them just so they feel more useful.

entrailbucket

Sekilicious said:

Bad said:

The game forces us to roster all characters but if there aren't modes intended to use them, apart from having a single cover for required nodes, players feel that rostering all those characters is useless. 
It would be positive a mode for all those characters, featuring a bunch of them in regular schedule, banning all the other characters and loaning them too.
If one player thinks that in a season it's using characters he usually plays, in the next one with another bunch possibly there will be characters he don't.
A mode like this, and being battles and not puzzles, should be positive both for the gacha all policy and for the player remembering unused characters .

I do agree, but should add that adding content isn’t necessarily a good thing. Like you said in your initial post people tend to only have a limited amount of time to dedicate to games before it impacts their personal life. If there is too much to do that can be detrimental to a player’s desire to play as well. 

MPQ is a little bit strange in that players have some expectations that don't necessarily exist in other games. 

For example, players generally expect to get all progression rewards in an event.  Many many years ago, they added some really crazy high PvE progression rewards that were only achievable with super-optimal play, and people absolutely hated it. 

People also seem to be generally annoyed by not being able to complete all the milestone quests immediately.  I don't get that one at all -- I'd much rather have milestones that go out forever, like the daily rewards do.

The other expectation that I've always found bizarre is that if an event exists, players *must* complete that event, for whatever their definition of "complete" is.  It's so weird that they can't add optional extra stuff without everyone complaining that they're demanding more of our time.

helix72

entrailbucket said: Many many years ago, they added some really crazy high PvE progression rewards that were only achievable with super-optimal play

I think they just changed the name of those rewards to “placement”.

entrailbucket

No, they had placement rewards too!  In the early days they experimented with all kinds of PvE formats and reward structures.  I think this was for the first run of Thick As Thieves, but I might be misremembering. 

The idea (and it's a very good idea that would be great to revisit) is that competitive players who are unlucky and happen to join a bad bracket will miss out on placement rewards despite getting a very high score. 

A score of, say, 64,000 (when max prog is 40,000) might get 1st place in one bracket but 20th place in a more competitive one.  Moving part of the placement rewards into really high progression rewards evens out that effect, but it makes everyone else really angry because they feel obligated to get every progression reward.  This is weird.

Bad

HoundofShadow said:

You mentioned that you didn't want to use 4* sitting on the bench because of time constraint but you want the dev to create new game mode on top Of existing game mode that will require you to use up more time. 

Exactly. I want a mode to enjoy all the 4*s characters I rostered without lowering my tier playing with them on free modes(I could try to play all modes with 3*s too "out of curiosity or interest" but I won't do it neither. I want curated content).
Conversely, if I was a 4* player I would like a mode in which I could play with 5*s loaned, in the same way as Introducing but in a gauntlet format.
Before puzzle gauntlet, the only goal to level 4*s was for get some rewards or for to have a good meat shield on pvps.
With new content featuring 4*s or 5*s, more goals would be added.

entrailbucket

Bad said:

HoundofShadow said:

You mentioned that you didn't want to use 4* sitting on the bench because of time constraint but you want the dev to create new game mode on top Of existing game mode that will require you to use up more time. 

Exactly. I want a mode to enjoy all the 4*s characters I rostered without lowering my tier playing with them on free modes(I could try to play all modes with 3*s too "out of curiosity or interest" but I won't do it neither. I want curated content).
Conversely, if I was a 4* player I would like a mode in which I could play with 5*s loaned, in the same way as Introducing but in a gauntlet format.
Before puzzle gauntlet, the only goal to level 4*s was for get some rewards or for to have a good meat shield on pvps.
With new content featuring 4*s or 5*s, more goals would be added.

I think you're talking about Heroic PvE, or roster-restricted events more generally.  They couldn't do these today.

New players always hated them because frequently they were locked out due to not having enough allowed characters rostered.

Veterans used to like them, because veterans had every character, generally had them around the same level, and the characters were generally balanced.  None of these things are currently true.  Imagine a PvE where Okoye or Apocalypse wasn't allowed -- there'd be a riot.

Bad

I'm suggesting this type of gauntlet, without okoye nor apocalypse nor 5*s, and loaning all characters.

StreetPreacher

I am talking about refining the PVE and PVP experiences. I don't want to add to the daily to-do list.

entrailbucket

Loaners solve the problem for new players.

If the rewards for this were at all valuable, veteran players would absolutely lose their minds.  If they couldn't use the best characters in the game you'd get a riot.  Imagine 4* players being forced to do an entire event without Polaris.  Many simply wouldn't be able to play.

If the rewards were bad you'd hear complaints about being forced to spend time on an event with terrible rewards.

Bad

Loaned characters should be at a doable level, and players having them more leveled having an easier time.Rewards, what devs wanted to set.
Without polaris, a lot of people would realize a new game, and this is all what is about.
And complaining, what people freely wanted to discharge.
But a mode in a game should be sized by the people playing and not by complaints on forums.
If it was the opposite, Introducing and puzzle gauntlet would be cancelled.

entrailbucket

StreetPreacher said:

I am talking about refining the PVE and PVP experiences. I don't want to add to the daily to-do list.

Enforcing variety is a really good idea that they can't ever do because most players would hate it.

It sounds like you're suggesting a setup like Combined Arms, which does create some variety, but ultimately players use the same few 2/3/4* teams.

Enforcing variety by, say, requiring you to use a different character each fight, is just a total nonstarter.  There are only so many good characters and many players either don't have the bad ones or won't use them. 

If tiers were more balanced then this would be more possible, but we're a million miles away from that and they've shown no interest in returning to that state.

StreetPreacher

I'm not pushing the Combined Arms idea anymore because there was so much resistance to it. I'm now talking about, in general, how to keep the game interesting.

entrailbucket said:

Imagine 4* players being forced to do an entire event without Polaris.

Now I really feel bad about not having Polaris champed.

entrailbucket

Bad said:

Loaned characters should be at a doable level, and players having them more leveled having an easier time.Rewards, what devs wanted to set.
Without polaris, a lot of people would realize a new game, and this is all what is about.
And complaining, what people freely wanted to discharge.
But a mode in a game should be sized by the people playing and not by complaints on forums.
If it was the opposite, Introducing and puzzle gauntlet would be cancelled.

I agree with you completely.

"Players on the forum (or on Reddit, or Line, or whatever) would complain" is not a valid reason to do or not do anything. 

They should make the game they want to make and  ignore complaints/review bombs/threats/etc.  They should focus on performance metrics across the entire playerbase and not a riot by some entitled few.

Phumade

Personally,  I would play an event with just loaners and no chars from your roster.  Let it be a competition solely based on your skill in recognizing potential matches.  As long as it didn't affect alliances scores.  I'd be fine with either low value prizes or high value prizes (assuming you could make multiple attempts at improving scores)

I think many high level players would just skip it,  but alot would play it based on their free time and availability.  Sorta like these forum post contests.  Which are great for the community but not worth my time to compose a message.

Yepyep

Phumade said:

Personally,  I would play an event with just loaners and no chars from your roster.  Let it be a competition solely based on your skill in recognizing potential matches.  As long as it didn't affect alliances scores.  I'd be fine with either low value prizes or high value prizes (assuming you could make multiple attempts at improving scores)

I think many high level players would just skip it,  but alot would play it based on their free time and availability.  Sorta like these forum post contests.  Which are great for the community but not worth my time to compose a message.

Something like this would be a good lightning round alternative. Offer both, maybe, but you can only participate in one or the other. LRs are, after all, the one big exception to the "everybody feels they have to compete in everything" ethic in this game.