Keep the new rewards system?

DAZ0273

HoundofShadow said:

That's not the point. You are bringing a level 300+ (defensive) team into scl 10 where the enemy levels are between 500 to 650. Naturally, it's going to take a long time (1-2 hours, assuming 3+2). With Polaris +R4G, you can finish scl 9 sub using ~25 minutes clear and ~25 minutes grind. If getting an extra 200 or more 5* shards and a couple 4* cover is more important than having an extra hour in your life per day, then it's a choice you or other players in similar situation chose to make. If someone in such similar situation (spend 1-2 hours in scl 10) and similar roster expect the dev to shave off 50% of playtime for full progression in scl 10 for them, then it doesn't make sense. ~30 minutes clear are achieved by 5* (meta) rosters. If a 4* players using defensive teams start clearing scl 10 in 30 minutes, then something is wrong with the game, unless the dev creates scl 11. But history is going to repeat again anyway because you or other (4*) players are going to jump to scl 11 and spend maybe 2-3 hours instead.

I play scl 9 most of the time and I probably played fewer than 20 or 30 runs of scl 10 pves since its existence. While I miss out on those extra shards and covers in scl 10, which result in slower progress, but it's a tradeoff everyone has to make. 

Where did he/her/they ask to shave time off his/her/they time? He/she/they (Jesus I think is a he?!?! Sorry if not) just responded to your proposition that CL10 can only be for 5* players. And you also make personal assumptions about the player personal life. Go shake your head.

HoundofShadow

You need to read the posts from page 1 where it mentioned 50% reduction in pve clear time to understand the context and he wasn't involved in the initial context. I was replying to Vhailorx in the previous posts.

I didn't say scl 10 can only be for 5* players. I'm saying if 4* players go into scl 10 expecting the dev to reduce their clear time such that they are getting full progression as fast as 5* (meta) rosters, then it doesn't make sense. The levels in scl 10 is 500-650. He's bringing a sub 300 4* roster to fight against enemy teams twice his strength. Of course it'a going to take a long time. On top of that, he's using a defensive team to clear scl 10, which will take even longer. You don't need to clear CN and 5* for full progressions, just in case anyone doesn't know this.

And as for the personal choice assumption, it's a logical assumption. Everyone has 24 hours per day in their life. If someone wants to dedicate 2 hours to clear scl 10 pve because they want to get the best rewards in the game, how is that not a personal choice? 

TheEyeDoctorsWife

This thread was too long I lost my original train of thought but I agree with whoever said a certain type of player is indeed thinking they are entitled to better rewards for playing faster . I’m confused at the irony of the hypocrites who say they’ve played for years because they love the game yet want to spend as little time as possible playing it. I jumped into SCL 10 after 2 years with only the one meta needed for the better 5* rewards. Do I trade off 2 hours of my life a day for doing that? Absolutely! And it’s a personal choice because I’m fortunate enough to have a desk job in my own office . But unless you’re still living at home in your parents’ basement few others can make that choice . In the end it comes down to what you value most.

Bad

It's about the challenge, too.
To try to eat the bigger pie.
When scl10 started my roster wasn't ready for it (I had PX, Iceman and carnage champed). 3 hours or more, a lot of health packs.
But I enjoyed playing it, it seemed as if the rewards were hard rightfully earned.
Right now I can do it in 1 hour total, ranking for t50/25 and it seems more like an automatic grind.
An even I look out for to try to keep grinding on another gacha game, and keep playing the already 3 now. It's kind of an insane time management lol.

Bad

HoundofShadow said:

You are playing a F2P game. Their business model has always been you either play hard (time) or spend hard (money). No norm dev will create a F2P game where you don't have to play hard/spend hard and yet can progress as fast those who play hard. F2P business model has been working (well) for decades, regardless of how much you hate these business models. And Diablo Immoral under Blizzard has also joined this. 

The right term would be gacha game.
From wiki:
Gashapon (ガシャポン), also called gachapon (ガチャポン), are a variety of vending machine-dispensed capsule toys that originated in the 1960s[1] and became popular in Japan and elsewhere. "Gashapon" is onomatopoeic from the two sounds "gasha" (or "gacha") for the hand-cranking action of a toy-vending machine, and "pon" for the toy capsule landing in the collection tray. "Gashapon" is used for both the machines themselves and the toys obtained from them. Popular gashapon manufacturers include Tomy, which uses the shortened term gacha (ガチャ, gacha) for their capsule machines, and Kaiyodo. In the United States, "Gashapon" is a registered trademark of Bandai,[2] and gashapon are referred to as blind box sets due to packaging requirements by retailers prior to official distribution of the actual gashapon machines. The gashapon model has been adapted digitally into numerous gacha video games.

The way in what freemium mobile games imitate this is on the summoning process of the characters, and giving a small % on the best oddities.
It's a tested successful way to virtually monetize the product, and so has been quickly copied by all game designers worldwide.

DAZ0273

HoundofShadow said:

You need to read the posts from page 1 where it mentioned 50% reduction in pve clear time to understand the context and he wasn't involved in the initial context. I was replying to Vhailorx in the previous posts.

I didn't say scl 10 can only be for 5* players. I'm saying if 4* players go into scl 10 expecting the dev to reduce their clear time such that they are getting full progression as fast as 5* (meta) rosters, then it doesn't make sense. The levels in scl 10 is 500-650. He's bringing a sub 300 4* roster to fight against enemy teams twice his strength. Of course it'a going to take a long time. On top of that, he's using a defensive team to clear scl 10, which will take even longer. You don't need to clear CN and 5* for full progressions, just in case anyone doesn't know this.

And as for the personal choice assumption, it's a logical assumption. Everyone has 24 hours per day in their life. If someone wants to dedicate 2 hours to clear scl 10 pve because they want to get the best rewards in the game, how is that not a personal choice? 

OK fair enough. It wasn't clear who you were referring to. 

Godzillafan67

HoundofShadow said:

You need to read the posts from page 1 where it mentioned 50% reduction in pve clear time to understand the context and he wasn't involved in the initial context. I was replying to Vhailorx in the previous posts.

I didn't say scl 10 can only be for 5* players. I'm saying if 4* players go into scl 10 expecting the dev to reduce their clear time such that they are getting full progression as fast as 5* (meta) rosters, then it doesn't make sense. The levels in scl 10 is 500-650. He's bringing a sub 300 4* roster to fight against enemy teams twice his strength. Of course it'a going to take a long time. On top of that, he's using a defensive team to clear scl 10, which will take even longer. You don't need to clear CN and 5* for full progressions, just in case anyone doesn't know this.

And as for the personal choice assumption, it's a logical assumption. Everyone has 24 hours per day in their life. If someone wants to dedicate 2 hours to clear scl 10 pve because they want to get the best rewards in the game, how is that not a personal choice? 

To be fair, this thread is about PvP, and YOU are the one who mentioned PVE.

True, you didn’t say that SCL10 was only for 5* players, but I tend to think that “veteran” players have surpassed the 4* tier and are primarily/solely using champed 5*s. Do I expect the devs to make SCL10 easier? No. Given what we’ve already seen, I do expect that we’ll be getting more covers and a slight increase in resources for the same work/time. (Granted, the PvP win count was reduced by half up through the 4* prizes and by one-third for the final CP prize.)

Alfje17

Well, it worked for me: did 25 wins instead of my usual 13.

Vhailorx

HoundofShadow said:

You need to read the posts from page 1 where it mentioned 50% reduction in pve clear time to understand the context and he wasn't involved in the initial context. I was replying to Vhailorx in the previous posts.

I didn't say scl 10 can only be for 5* players. I'm saying if 4* players go into scl 10 expecting the dev to reduce their clear time such that they are getting full progression as fast as 5* (meta) rosters, then it doesn't make sense. The levels in scl 10 is 500-650. He's bringing a sub 300 4* roster to fight against enemy teams twice his strength. Of course it'a going to take a long time. On top of that, he's using a defensive team to clear scl 10, which will take even longer. You don't need to clear CN and 5* for full progressions, just in case anyone doesn't know this.

And as for the personal choice assumption, it's a logical assumption. Everyone has 24 hours per day in their life. If someone wants to dedicate 2 hours to clear scl 10 pve because they want to get the best rewards in the game, how is that not a personal choice? 

Who said anything about 4* players wanting rewards "as fast" as 5* players?

I just don't understand why you so strident objects to okayers advocating for more rewards/shorter playtime?  Why is it whiny and entitled to say "I should be able to keep up with the 5* release schedule on 45 minutes per day and no more than $5 a month (or equivalents)?"  but somehow not just as arbitrary and self-interested for d3/bcs to offer $30 costumes or 5x LT packs?

I get that everything in this game is a balancing act between too many rewards (bye bye player spending) and too few (bye bye player retention). I just don't understand why some here on the forums seem to think that players are the only ones who need to recognize that tension and just accept whatever the dev/pub offer without complaint.

HoundofShadow

We are playing a gacha game. This is a fact.
Like any other gacha games, the business model has always been either spending hard or playing hard to "catch up". Regardless of how much you despise this business model, players all over the world has proven that such model works really well financially.

You don't travel to a desert expecting to be surrounded by water. Likewise, you don't play a gacha game expecting the dev to run the game like how a pc/console game would be runned where you can play leisurely anytime you want or spend a little money and at the same, progress as well as the better/competitive players, hour played wise. If you want to play such game, look for a console or pc game, not a gacha game.

There are MPQ players in reddit who have been playing MPQ for over 7 years, and their best rosters are a few champed 4*, with none of the 5* champed. Strangely enough, they don't talk about how they have to "catch up" or how they have to "grind" hours everyday to "progress"? As a matter of fact, they still enjoy playing MPQ with that kind of roster. Why? How is this even possible? Why is it that this group of players look at MPQ so differently from other group of players?

Bad

Obviously because they are just casual players. 
Right now I'm playing 3 gacha games (fire emblem heroes and the walking dead NML).
I'm starting to enjoy the third quite a bit, and there are alliances too. But I can't possibly play it die-hard competitively without quitting the second, there is no material time in life.
If I can keep playing MPQ kind of competitively and the others casually I will enjoy the 3, just like those players in reddit.
(But knowing me I can't say it for sure )

HoundofShadow

It's not just because they are casual players. It's because they set realistic expectations for themselves. They understand what are expected of them from a gacha game. They worked out the tradeoff or benefits between spending an extra hour in MPQ or in thier real lives. However, if they expect themselves to champ half of the 4* by playing casually or able to champ all 5* by spending a total of $60, then they won't be happy.

I think Diablo Immortal is a good example of setting expectation. The reactions of long -time Diablo players towards Diablo Immortal were negative because it is a F2P/gacha game, and these players knew that it means grinding or paywall. A lot of them hated it and many of them quit playing it within a few days. If we are talking about console/pc version of Diablo, you don't see such hate. Both are Diablo games; however, both uses different business models. When players bring their console/pc game mindset into a gacha game, these are the typical reactions you expect. Likewise, players who expect MPQ to function/cost similarly to a pc/console game will continue to be frustrated or unhappy with the dev's decision or bundles. Expecting the dev to turn a gacha game experience into a console/pc gaming experience will only lead you to years of disappointment, unhappiness or frustration. 

Bad

Yes looking at that game's players reviews you can grind until level 60 and then there is a paywall which no matter how you grind you will never progress any further. 
It's good to know that info nevertheless, but the wrong approach imo is thinking that there is a democracy and player opinions will matter, or bombing review. 
No, those devs just set the trap. The player must accept that f2p is over at that point (possibly when the game is most interesting) and start paying. 
And for 1000 players not willing to accept the deal perhaps 100 will try. And possibly for those players accepting, the move is more ludicrous than releasing a pc game with many expansions.
Morally doubtful but on revenues grateful.

Timemachinego

HoundofShadow said:

I play scl 9 most of the time and I probably played fewer than 20 or 30 runs of scl 10 pves since its existence. While I miss out on those extra shards and covers in scl 10, which result in slower progress, but it's a tradeoff everyone has to make. 

This is fun. If only you spent as much time in game as you do on the forum telling us how the game is perfect and we're all jerks for wanting more!

Daredevil217

HoundofShadow said:

There are MPQ players in reddit who have been playing MPQ for over 7 years, and their best rosters are a few champed 4*, with none of the 5* champed. Strangely enough, they don't talk about how they have to "catch up" or how they have to "grind" hours everyday to "progress"? As a matter of fact, they still enjoy playing MPQ with that kind of roster. Why? How is this even possible? Why is it that this group of players look at MPQ so differently from other group of players?

I agree with pretty much all of the points you are making. I agree that the game’s model is to grind or spend. I agree that you can’t play half as hard or spend half as much and expect to “catch up” to vets. I agree that managing expectations is important.

My only question is: who are the “group of players” here that are disagreeing with these points? Or are they constructed of straw?

HoundofShadow

It's not about being a jerk for wanting more, it's about expectations. Do you not realise that a lot of problems that players have with MPQ for years is simply solved by asking the dev to create a console/handheld version of it?

Look, these are the problems that players want the dev to solve for years without wanting to spend a lot of money or to spend a lot of time playing:

1) Roster slots
2) MPQ is all about speed --> which leads to rebalancing of characters or DOA characters 
3) Impossible to max out all Supports, including Infinite Stones
4) Paywall/Predatory pricing/Pay2Win
5) Specific grind time/lack of timeslice
6) forced to play 1-2 hours a day in order to progress
7) Feeders
8) RNG
9) Impossible to "catch up" for new players or players who don't want to grind.
10) constant release of new characters

Unfortunately, they are not creating a console/handheld version of MPQ. They are creating a gacha version of it. Everything you hate about Gacha MPQ is solved by creating Console/handheld MPQ.

That's what I meant by you don't travel to a desert expecting to be surrounded by water. And the closer your request is to making F2P MPQ into a console/handheld version of MPQ, the less likely it is to be fulfilled.

DAZ0273

There is a console version of MPQ. It is very boring.

Bad

DAZ0273 said:

There is a console version of MPQ. It is very boring.

Yes, despite all the hate the truth is that everyone of us just want to play with the new cool small toy.
And we are at ages where we can't possibly ask our dad for to buy us the ball without people looking at us in a really weird way.

atomzed

HoundofShadow said:

Unfortunately, they are not creating a console/handheld version of MPQ. They are creating a gacha version of it. Everything you hate about Gacha MPQ is solved by creating Console/handheld MPQ.

That's what I meant by you don't travel to a desert expecting to be surrounded by water. And the closer your request is to making F2P MPQ into a console/handheld version of MPQ, the less likely it is to be fulfilled.

While I agree with the pointers about managing expectations, I also see such discussions as important to the health of the game. 

Such discussions about “player preferences” provide an additional source of data point for the devs to to make game decisions. This is above and beyond the metrics that they collect. While some “player preferences” may never get realised due to reality, it is still possible for minor tweaks and trade offs to be made. 

For example, QOL changes such as turning off graphics were implemented after many rounds of feedback. Does it affect the financial reality? Probably not, as in you can’t measure the additional spending from this change. But it certainly improve customer satisfaction.

so while I support your words in helping to managing player expectations, please also recognise that such discourse are helpful in improving the products. It should not be put down. 

TheEyeDoctorsWife

DAZ0273 said:

There is a console version of MPQ. It is very boring.

I think I remember that as a child . All I remember was it was a Match 3 game and possibly had a Spider-Man story threaded through it. Very vague recollection of it , could be my imagination