Meet Broken Circle Studios - Developer Blog (6/2/22)

DAZ0273

Whilst I have a bunch of max champed 3* with dupes myself, I do question whether these are really necessary? To this extent I could probably free up a decent amount of roster slots to cope with the new schedule as 3* rarely impact my play. I, like others are marching towards the dreaded 300 slot milestone though so I wouldn't say no to any concessions as long as it didn't come at a higher price from elsewhere.

I can't agree however with the concept of people being "refunded" HP if slot costs were reduced, that makes no sense to me.

HoundofShadow

I don't see them mentioning releasing 4 to 6 characters a month. It's at most 3 beginning from September. An extra 2000 HP per month in September affect those who roster dupes, and those who roster dupes are likely your min-max players. The typical casual players, who seem to be the focus of new dev team, won't even know roster slots cost 2000hp,  unless they visit the forums or use LINE.

That's one problematic thing. Players who roster dupes hoping for future retrospective rewards for feeders want to have the best of both world: 1000 HP roster slot and restropective rewards.

In PvPs and PvEs, the 3* and 4* essentials are as good as non-existent for multi-champed 5* players, unless they have some good effects like stunning enemies or creating critical tiles etc. Else, selling and using baby champed 3*/4* don't have much impact on your win rates.

As for feeders, the new dev team mentioned this:

"Feeders are something we're looking at. We're trying to figure out a more organic way of doing that without creating Shardmas 2.0 though."

It looks like we aren't going to get non-new 4* as feeders, unless that character is really unpopular.

Anyway, they have ~2.5 months to work something out. I don't expect an extra 2000 HP slotted into progression just to make people who roster dupes happy. At best, the dev co-shares the 2000 hp roster slot by throwing extra 600-1000 HP somewhere, like increasing the HP sell value of max champed characters, or if they reduce roster slot permanently, our resources get reduced somewhere permanently as well. At least that's how the ex-dev typically do trade-offs.

DAZ0273

HoundofShadow said:

I don't see them mentioning releasing 4 to 6 characters a month. It's at most 3 beginning from September. An extra 2000 HP per month in September affect those who roster dupes, and those who roster dupes are likely your min-max players. The typical casual players, who seem to be the focus of new dev team, won't even know roster slots cost 2000hp,  unless they visit the forums or use LINE.

That's one problematic thing. Players who roster dupes hoping for future retrospective rewards for feeders want to have the best of both world: 1000 HP roster slot and restropective rewards.

In PvPs and PvEs, the 3* and 4* essentials are as good as non-existent for multi-champed 5* players, unless they have some good effects like stunning enemies or creating critical tiles etc. Else, selling and using baby champed 3*/4* don't have much impact on your win rates.

As for feeders, the new dev team mentioned this:

"Feeders are something we're looking at. We're trying to figure out a more organic way of doing that without creating Shardmas 2.0 though."

It looks like we aren't going to get non-new 4* as feeders, that character is really unpopular.

Anyway, they have ~2.5 months to work something out. I don't expect an extra 2000 HP slotted into progression just to make people who roster dupes happy. At best, the dev co-shares the 2000 hp roster slot by throwing extra HP somewhere, or if they reduce roster slot permanently, our resources get reduced somewhere permenently as well. At least that's how the ex-dev typically do trade-offs.

I don't think all players roster dupes for the reason bolded above. It has taken me a long time to be able to get a grip on the concept of selling my maxed 3 characters because a.) Getting them was a milestone and b.) having them on your roster can be quite nice - much like having a max champed Bag Man.

I think there is give and take on both sides - The Devs are still insisting we play 3* PvP regularly so any advantage there can count, however if you insist on having a duplicate Talos next to your max champed one then that is probably on you.

BriMan2222

DAZ0273 said:

HoundofShadow said:

I don't see them mentioning releasing 4 to 6 characters a month. It's at most 3 beginning from September. An extra 2000 HP per month in September affect those who roster dupes, and those who roster dupes are likely your min-max players. The typical casual players, who seem to be the focus of new dev team, won't even know roster slots cost 2000hp,  unless they visit the forums or use LINE.

That's one problematic thing. Players who roster dupes hoping for future retrospective rewards for feeders want to have the best of both world: 1000 HP roster slot and restropective rewards.

In PvPs and PvEs, the 3* and 4* essentials are as good as non-existent for multi-champed 5* players, unless they have some good effects like stunning enemies or creating critical tiles etc. Else, selling and using baby champed 3*/4* don't have much impact on your win rates.

As for feeders, the new dev team mentioned this:

"Feeders are something we're looking at. We're trying to figure out a more organic way of doing that without creating Shardmas 2.0 though."

It looks like we aren't going to get non-new 4* as feeders, that character is really unpopular.

Anyway, they have ~2.5 months to work something out. I don't expect an extra 2000 HP slotted into progression just to make people who roster dupes happy. At best, the dev co-shares the 2000 hp roster slot by throwing extra HP somewhere, or if they reduce roster slot permanently, our resources get reduced somewhere permenently as well. At least that's how the ex-dev typically do trade-offs.

I don't think all players roster dupes for the reason bolded above. It has taken me a long time to be able to get a grip on the concept of selling my maxed 3 characters because a.) Getting them was a milestone and b.) having them on your roster can be quite nice - much like having a max champed Bag Man.

I think there is give and take on both sides - The Devs are still insisting we play 3* PvP regularly so any advantage there can count, however if you insist on having a duplicate Talos next to your max champed one then that is probably on you.

Well having a max champed talos next to your dupe is probably more due to the chance that talos could eventually become a retroactive feeder and you don't get the retro rewards if you sell the character more than it is due to a max champed talos impacting your gameplay.

jsmjsmjsm00

There aren't even 300 characters released. If you have more than 300 slots, you are playing the game a specific way that is in no way forced upon you. The devs don't need to address the cost increase until they have released 300 characters.

If you are rostering dupes, that is your decision, but you are OPTING into the tradeoff of more expensive slots in exchange for slightly better performance in required nodes. 

It's the classic greed that people want to have their cake and eat it too. If you can't afford the slot prices, roster fewer dupes.

DAZ0273

BriMan2222 said:

DAZ0273 said:

HoundofShadow said:

I don't see them mentioning releasing 4 to 6 characters a month. It's at most 3 beginning from September. An extra 2000 HP per month in September affect those who roster dupes, and those who roster dupes are likely your min-max players. The typical casual players, who seem to be the focus of new dev team, won't even know roster slots cost 2000hp,  unless they visit the forums or use LINE.

That's one problematic thing. Players who roster dupes hoping for future retrospective rewards for feeders want to have the best of both world: 1000 HP roster slot and restropective rewards.

In PvPs and PvEs, the 3* and 4* essentials are as good as non-existent for multi-champed 5* players, unless they have some good effects like stunning enemies or creating critical tiles etc. Else, selling and using baby champed 3*/4* don't have much impact on your win rates.

As for feeders, the new dev team mentioned this:

"Feeders are something we're looking at. We're trying to figure out a more organic way of doing that without creating Shardmas 2.0 though."

It looks like we aren't going to get non-new 4* as feeders, that character is really unpopular.

Anyway, they have ~2.5 months to work something out. I don't expect an extra 2000 HP slotted into progression just to make people who roster dupes happy. At best, the dev co-shares the 2000 hp roster slot by throwing extra HP somewhere, or if they reduce roster slot permanently, our resources get reduced somewhere permenently as well. At least that's how the ex-dev typically do trade-offs.

I don't think all players roster dupes for the reason bolded above. It has taken me a long time to be able to get a grip on the concept of selling my maxed 3 characters because a.) Getting them was a milestone and b.) having them on your roster can be quite nice - much like having a max champed Bag Man.

I think there is give and take on both sides - The Devs are still insisting we play 3* PvP regularly so any advantage there can count, however if you insist on having a duplicate Talos next to your max champed one then that is probably on you.

Well having a max champed talos next to your dupe is probably more due to the chance that talos could eventually become a retroactive feeder and you don't get the retro rewards if you sell the character more than it is due to a max champed talos impacting your gameplay.

Right but that is a player gamble and 100% free choice - you don't need the dupe really.

Chipster22

jsmjsmjsm00 said:

There aren't even 300 characters released. If you have more than 300 slots, you are playing the game a specific way that is in no way forced upon you. The devs don't need to address the cost increase until they have released 300 characters.

If you are rostering dupes, that is your decision, but you are OPTING into the tradeoff of more expensive slots in exchange for slightly better performance in required nodes. 

It's the classic greed that people want to have their cake and eat it too. If you can't afford the slot prices, roster fewer dupes.

The point about rostering dupes being optional is valid.  

My counter is that is appears they will increase the HP demand by releasing more characters.  It seems reasonable to balance that increase somehow.

I'd like retroactive HP or slots obliviously, but that is less of a concern for me than addressing future HP flow resulting from a change they are making.

MegaBee

DAZ0273 said:

Whilst I have a bunch of max champed 3* with dupes myself, I do question whether these are really necessary? To this extent I could probably free up a decent amount of roster slots to cope with the new schedule as 3* rarely impact my play. I, like others are marching towards the dreaded 300 slot milestone though so I wouldn't say no to any concessions as long as it didn't come at a higher price from elsewhere.

I can't agree however with the concept of people being "refunded" HP if slot costs were reduced, that makes no sense to me.

I've stayed under 300 slots by gradually selling off max champed 3-star characters when I also have champed dupe. The 3-stars are almost never relevant beyond requirements for essential nodes.

HoundofShadow

Definitely not all roster dupes. Your normal players who have no knowledge of farming will simply sell the extra covers of their max champed characters. The >5 year old veterans who play optimally (and competitively) benefitted from many of the past (pre-2018) retrospective rewards. After that, I remember when C5rol got a feeder (while she was still in LT I think), many got 3 or more covers with some getting 12 of her covers. Shardmas in 2019/2020 continue to prove to these veterans that it makes sense to roster a dupe even if it cost 2000hp just in case there's retrospective rewards again. A multi-champed 5* players hardly need max champed 3* or 4* in pvps or pves because their pick-2 5* are doing all the work. All the dev need to do is to publicly announced, without leaving a single doubt, that there won't be retrospective feeders in the future, and if players choose to roster dupes of max champed 4* or 3*, it's their choices. Of course, I'm sure they (not all) will turn around and say that they are being punished for progressing.

The intention of the new dev for adding 3* releases is to make the casual players happy. Whether you believe it or not is another matter. The extra side effect is the extra 2000 hp cost. No way they are going to give players an extra 2000 hp or permanent roster slot discount without any tradeoffs.

jsmjsmjsm00

You don't need dupes to play this game. You don't need dupes for anything. You choose them because you want them. Just because you commit to playing "optimally" does not entitle you to whatever resources you think you deserve. 

Yes, I am aware that when we switched to shards that the vocal minority who choose to play this way bullied the devs into a bunch of free resources. That only furthers my argument that people choosing to play a specific way keep demanding their costs to this playstyle be refunded/offset. 

ThaRoadWarrior

I don’t see the cost of roster slots coming down. It gets progressively higher from launch since forever. So why would it be any different out to 300? That being said I super hate the idea of MORE characters coming out compressed into the same timespan. It isn’t what I, a player, want from the game even if it is what the devs seem to want for the game. But I’m obviously not casual at this point.

ThaRoadWarrior

I also feel like I should tack on that if you want to be competitive on this game, there are only a few viable ways to do so. So whether you choose to compete or not is of course up to you. But once you decide you are going to, you’re either going to be a champ em all player or a grow your meta player. This is because of the way the game works right now.  The game wants to be played one of those two ways and rewards you accordingly. If that suddenly changed, people would have to take stock of that change and either adapt or not, and assuming resource and character acquisition is unchanged, that cannot be done overnight for most. 

I only have a handful of 4* dupes, and those are only because it takes SOOOOOO long to max champ a 4, and the delta between the best 4*s at max champ and the worst 5*s is not a ton, so they are still mechanically useful to me. 2s and 3s are just reward factories and gate keys to nodes, so I flip those ruthlesslessly. If you introduced a mode (that mattered) where I was only allowed to use 3*s I might change that behavior and hang on to max champs and start some dupes for instance, but the way the game exists today I don’t need it. So I don’t do it.

Godzillafan67

Of concern, at various levels and for differing events, the game gates play if you do not have a specific character rostered; the slight exception is for 1* characters for which you only need one of the eight rostered to represent you in the first DDP node. Missing out on rewards pressured me to completely roster all of the 2*, 3* and 4* characters. (Technically 5* characters should provide similar incentive for rostering, but I've never sold a 5* cover since they're hard to obtain, which is its own distinctive pressure.) 

There are currently 264 characters in the game. Once 36 more characters are added, anyone rostering a single version of every character will meet the 300 threshold. How soon is 36? 12 months @ 3 per month and 18 months @ 2 per month. Should the game charge players more for rostering everyone? It certainly starts to look like a pay-to-play scenario.

Ptahhotep

What could be done is to tie the slot cost increase point to the number of characters. When the number of characters reaches 300 make the cost of slots up to the current character count 1000 HP and 2000 HP above that. Then only players rostering dupes would pay the higher price.

Tony_Foot

nycjonny said:

Lol no one is “swimming in hp” unless they buy it constantly. And those people tend to use it up just as fast.  

I am, well I think so. Your definition might be different to mine. I have 450k currently and have never given this game a penny in the last 6+ years. I used to play to 900-1200 so got two shields per event typically. When they gouged out some of the HP I stopped shielding, other than that I spend normally 50-100K per year on the anniversary vaults.

I was still able to build that pot, but I will admit this year since hitting 300+ the last 12 months I will probably only bank about 65k. So growing that pot has stopped. Partly because I don't play PVP past 500, partly because they gouged out some of the HP but mostly because of the roster cost.

ThaRoadWarrior

Honestly there needs to be an economy overhaul to account for the character bloat. They can cost that much if incoming resources scaled up accordingly, but with dilution I don’t really think it is right now.

Chipster22

It is not only those of us who have over 300 slots that for whom the thought of addition HP should be considered but also those earlier on in the game.  

When I played a secondary account for a while, one of my biggest choke points was getting enough roster slots to field all the 3* and start rostering important 4*s. 

Making more 3*s will require more roster slots for the mid-level players as well and therefore more HP.

HoundofShadow

HP is their main source of income. Naturally that would be the chokepoint. If the ex-dev were so liberal with HP and actually took up players' advices on this financial matter, this game would have shut down in 2015/2016.

Iso-8 is another chokepoint but it's significant only for "champed it all" players.

Since many min-max love to roster dupes, I suggest the dev to increase the selling price of max champed characters instead. Increase the selling price to 250, 1000, 2000HP for 2*/3*/4* respectively. One, it discourages them from keeping unnecessary number of max champed 3* and maybe 4* (some have 3 4* dupe) and two, they are increasing HP supply. If those players still refuse to sell their unnecessary number of duped 3* and 4* just because they want to capitalise on future windfall, then it's on them.

KGB

There will never be another Shardmas windfall. In fact if I was BrokenCircle, I'd come right out and state that just because it was done that way with a prior developer, doesn't mean it will be done that way going forward because it's a whole new day. If a few players lose their minds, so be it but at least it's stated outright from the beginning before they ever come close to deciding on retro active feeders.

I'd still love to see an increase in champ levels for 4* from 370 to 420 (+50 levels) and add in feeders for more 5* for every 4* so there would be tons of feeders after L370 (incentive to max as many as possible).

I also think the roster slot cost thing can be solved by charging a price based on level as I mentioned above a couple pages ago (5* - 2000, 4* - 1000, 3* - 500, 2* - 100, 1* - 50). Then new 3* releases don't cost much for those of us who want to farm (which I do and I'm swimming in HP even though I have 320 rostered characters). And no, you can't roster a 1* for 50 hp, sell it then roster a 5* in that slot because all the game has to do is when you sell a character, designate that slot as 'only' accepting a character of that rank.

KGB

Chipster22

KGB said:

There will never be another Shardmas windfall. In fact if I was BrokenCircle, I'd come right out and state that just because it was done that way with a prior developer, doesn't mean it will be done that way going forward because it's a whole new day. If a few players lose their minds, so be it but at least it's stated outright from the beginning before they ever come close to deciding on retro active feeders.

KGB

I'd be fine with that.  Then we would know how to approach things.  

I've always thought the main problem with Shardmas wasn't whether or not players received tons of retroactive rewards, but expectations management.

My recollection is that they announce retroactive rewards were going to be given, and the players erroneously expected to get the full set of rewards as had been previous practice.  There were days of speculation and hype right up until the day rewards were given out and then it was discovered that the rewards were only partial as compared to previous time.

If the expectations had been tamped down prior to the initial retroactive pared down rewards, it would have gone down easier in my opinion.  Its as if a child somehow came to believe they were going to receive a pony or the latest video game system for Christmas and went on for days about it.  On Christmas day when they actually get socks and underwear, which are useful, the child still will be disappointed.  The parents should have managed expectations a bit better.