Thanks everyone for submitting your questions in our latest Q&A session! As always, we tried to answer as many as we can and I suspect we would've gotten a wave of questions had we not cut off the deadline when we did. I'm sure you've got some questions already queued up so until then, please enjoy the read!
Thank you so much for the feedback.
Sounds as if the MPQ engine has been and is a huge time and resource vacuum. Good luck restoring that old car; another ten years she’ll be a classic!
More answers to come ?
Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens.
On question 26. We have had this behavior before and was changed to the current practice of highest health remaining. Its not that big of a deal either way, but people definitely have their preferred behavior and this need to be a player select toggle not necessarily a unilateral design decision.
@tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens.
@tonypq said: More answers to come ?
Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only.
@Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only.
@Bowgentle said:
Can't hurt to ask, other players have inquired about this in the past. BC has never really chimed in if this would ever be considered or not. Would be nice to get a "it's something we've thought about, or a heck no that will never happen", at least players would know where they stand.
You'll get a diplomatic "it's not on our agenda, but we'll talk about it" and never hear of it again and you know it 🤣
But by all means keep asking! Can't hurt to keep trying.
@tonypq said: @Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only. Can't hurt to ask, other players have inquired about this in the past. BC has never really chimed in if this would ever be considered or not. Would be nice to get a "it's something we've thought about, or a heck no that will never happen", at least players would know where they stand.
@tonypq said:
They actually did used to do this. When 5 stars first came out they were released in a special store where the new 5 star was the only 5 star in the store. I assume they thought this made it too easy to cover the new 5 star. I remember finishing thanos and black panther in their special stores pretty trivially when they were the only 5 star you could pull.
I really appreciate the active dialog of these Q&A's!
@BriMan2222 said: @tonypq said: @Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only. Can't hurt to ask, other players have inquired about this in the past. BC has never really chimed in if this would ever be considered or not. Would be nice to get a "it's something we've thought about, or a heck no that will never happen", at least players would know where they stand. They actually did used to do this. When 5 stars first came out they were released in a special store where the new 5 star was the only 5 star in the store. I assume they thought this made it too easy to cover the new 5 star. I remember finishing thanos and black panther in their special stores pretty trivially when they were the only 5 star you could pull.
@BriMan2222 said:
I remember that too, I just don't recall if at the time 5s were released as fast as they are these days though. Would be nice to see it that way again, or at least hear from BC their thoughts.
These days many players pull as they go or as a 5 is set to rotate out of LLs, others hoard roughly 260-300 pulls. In many cases that might get someone enough covers for the three 5s in LLs to champ and maybe have a small number of extra covers.
I feel like for many players that just gets them a tiny bit above regular champed levels. If BC wants to increase the flow of players entering and competing at max level 550 tier, being able to target and dedicate one's resources to just those 5s one chooses would help them get to 550 tier faster and easier. Seems like the current LL trio set up is better for catchem all types and not necessarily those who want to target characters they prefer most or will be best suited to reach the top tier.
Everyone has their own preferences of course and that's fine certainly. It would still be nice however to hear BC comment on future plans. Especially with some new content changes they might implement or if tougher SCLs are introduced with better rewards. It would be nice to have an easier way to level up 5s of ones choice that will help them most and not be impeded so much with the LL trio dilution and RNG.
@tonypq said: @BriMan2222 said: @tonypq said: @Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only. I feel like for many players that just gets them a tiny bit above regular champed levels. If BC wants to increase the flow of players entering and competing at max level 550 tier, being able to target and dedicate one's resources to just those 5s one chooses would help them get to 550 tier faster and easier. Seems like the current LL trio set up is better for catchem all types and not necessarily those who want to target characters they prefer most or will be best suited to reach the top tier.
@BriMan2222 said: @tonypq said: @Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only.
@tonypq said: @Bowgentle said: @tonypq said: More answers to come ? Still quite a few unanswered including if LL trio of 5s will ever be changed so each has their own store which players can spend CPs/LL tokens. Why would they do that? They have no interest in letting you pick specific 5s only.
I think they care less about the 500+community and more about getting EVERY player 3 covers of a 5* they can reliable use at their current scl.
This month's Q&A is quite uninteresting. After 8-9 months of Q&A, there's probably nothing much to ask.
There are some questions they answered that could help silence some. And that's those who want the dev to stop creating new characters and work on fixing the game. Bad news: both are handled by different teams. Shutting down the design team won't help them fix the bugs any quicker.
The game is undergoing massive engine change, so we have to ride through the pain in the coming days.
I don't know how many times I can say this: they cannot ever stop releasing new characters, or reduce the release cadence in any significant way.
New characters are how they make money. They make money primarily from selling roster slots and the continuous release schedule is what keeps it flowing. Unless you want them to somehow devise and implement a new business model after 10 years (and by the way, a new business model would almost certainly be much worse for most of us) they're not changing this.
@entrailbucket said: I don't know how many times I can say this: they cannot ever stop releasing new characters, or reduce the release cadence in any significant way. New characters are how they make money. They make money primarily from selling roster slots and the continuous release schedule is what keeps it flowing. Unless you want them to somehow devise and implement a new business model after 10 years (and by the way, a new business model would almost certainly be much worse for most of us) they're not changing this.
@entrailbucket said: I don't know how many times I can say this: they cannot ever stop releasing new characters, or reduce the release cadence in any significant way.
Preach. People will still ignore it.
Lol at design and engine "teams". We know it's two guys total.
I think there will be a ton of questions next Q/A with the whole supports announcement.
@Daredevil217 said: I think there will be a ton of questions next Q/A with the whole supports announcement.
That deserves it's own thread, with BCS actually around to answer questions.
Well, the devs totally ignored my question about Kang's insta-win power lol...
@S0kun said: 12. @Glockoma [Official Forums]Question: Where’s this game heading? Passive has to be trumped by previous passive. Active has to have a passive component to nullify the previous passive. QoL aside, what mission distances the game from the rabbit hole the previous developers failed upon?Answer: We've been having a lot of discussion about that, and what a lot of it comes down to is "speed meta". Whenever we open up the game to a non-speed related gameplay, creativity opens up from the player base. PVP is 100% speed meta. PVE is as well if you're after T10. But events like Boss Battles and Puzzle Ops we suddenly see people taking their time and having novel solutions to gameplay, AND opening up their rosters. That's not to say that speed isn't fun. It is! But it results in a specific metagame and roster that runs counter to much of what Puzzle Quest should be, and it's something we're actively discussing how to tackle.
If you're trying to get away from "speed meta", then why did you guys give Kang an insta-win via his Away power?
@justsing said: Well, the devs totally ignored my question about Kang's insta-win power lol... @S0kun said: 12. @Glockoma [Official Forums]Question: Where’s this game heading? Passive has to be trumped by previous passive. Active has to have a passive component to nullify the previous passive. QoL aside, what mission distances the game from the rabbit hole the previous developers failed upon?Answer: We've been having a lot of discussion about that, and what a lot of it comes down to is "speed meta". Whenever we open up the game to a non-speed related gameplay, creativity opens up from the player base. PVP is 100% speed meta. PVE is as well if you're after T10. But events like Boss Battles and Puzzle Ops we suddenly see people taking their time and having novel solutions to gameplay, AND opening up their rosters. That's not to say that speed isn't fun. It is! But it results in a specific metagame and roster that runs counter to much of what Puzzle Quest should be, and it's something we're actively discussing how to tackle. If you're trying to get away from "speed meta", then why did you guys give Kang an insta-win via his Away power?
@justsing said: Well, the devs totally ignored my question about Kang's insta-win power lol...
Not mutually exclusive, and fixing speed meta isn't a silver bullet "just change this" thing anyway. Sure, alternate win conditions CAN make things faster when you can manufacture that condition. But it doesn't mean that this win condition means that speed meta is now more locked in.
@IceIX said: @justsing said: Well, the devs totally ignored my question about Kang's insta-win power lol... @S0kun said: 12. @Glockoma [Official Forums]Question: Where’s this game heading? Passive has to be trumped by previous passive. Active has to have a passive component to nullify the previous passive. QoL aside, what mission distances the game from the rabbit hole the previous developers failed upon?Answer: We've been having a lot of discussion about that, and what a lot of it comes down to is "speed meta". Whenever we open up the game to a non-speed related gameplay, creativity opens up from the player base. PVP is 100% speed meta. PVE is as well if you're after T10. But events like Boss Battles and Puzzle Ops we suddenly see people taking their time and having novel solutions to gameplay, AND opening up their rosters. That's not to say that speed isn't fun. It is! But it results in a specific metagame and roster that runs counter to much of what Puzzle Quest should be, and it's something we're actively discussing how to tackle. If you're trying to get away from "speed meta", then why did you guys give Kang an insta-win via his Away power? Not mutually exclusive, and fixing speed meta isn't a silver bullet "just change this" thing anyway. Sure, alternate win conditions CAN make things faster when you can manufacture that condition. But it doesn't mean that this win condition means that speed meta is now more locked in.
@IceIX said:
It's gonna get worse when supports become easier to level. Everyone will be able to access level 5 supports and one-turn wins will be more common. The speed meta will become speedier.
Not saying that the changes to support is bad, it definitely is a welcome change. But you can't deny that the current point system and placement rewards will always force players to gravitate towards speed metas. If you really wanna move away from this, you need to address this flawed system in pve.
@Bzhai said: @IceIX said: @justsing said: Well, the devs totally ignored my question about Kang's insta-win power lol... @S0kun said: 12. @Glockoma [Official Forums]Question: Where’s this game heading? Passive has to be trumped by previous passive. Active has to have a passive component to nullify the previous passive. QoL aside, what mission distances the game from the rabbit hole the previous developers failed upon?Answer: We've been having a lot of discussion about that, and what a lot of it comes down to is "speed meta". Whenever we open up the game to a non-speed related gameplay, creativity opens up from the player base. PVP is 100% speed meta. PVE is as well if you're after T10. But events like Boss Battles and Puzzle Ops we suddenly see people taking their time and having novel solutions to gameplay, AND opening up their rosters. That's not to say that speed isn't fun. It is! But it results in a specific metagame and roster that runs counter to much of what Puzzle Quest should be, and it's something we're actively discussing how to tackle. If you're trying to get away from "speed meta", then why did you guys give Kang an insta-win via his Away power? Not mutually exclusive, and fixing speed meta isn't a silver bullet "just change this" thing anyway. Sure, alternate win conditions CAN make things faster when you can manufacture that condition. But it doesn't mean that this win condition means that speed meta is now more locked in. It's gonna get worse when supports become easier to level. Everyone will be able to access level 5 supports and one-turn wins will be more common. The speed meta will become speedier. Not saying that the changes to support is bad, it definitely is a welcome change. But you can't deny that the current point system and placement rewards will always force players to gravitate towards speed metas. If you really wanna move away from this, you need to address this flawed system in pve.
@Bzhai said:
My question "Why can't PVE rewards, both individual and for the alliance, be distributed by progression only, like in boss events? Let the more competitive part of the game to PVP." wasn't answered, so probably they have nothing to say about that subject at this time.