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

corytutor · October 2017

Milk Jugz said:
show previous quotes

I see you.....

And Eye see you...

The rockett · October 2017

If anybody is keeping track, it is now over 24 hrs from when we were promised more details. What's the Over/Under that we will only find out when the event shows up in a few hours.

corytutor · October 2017

We wont know until in game im sure

Vhailorx · October 2017

Spudgutter said:

show previous quotes

Vhailorx said:

corytutor said:

Ummm. Forum polls are dumb. We dont represent the playerbase. We don't even represent the majority of vets.

Anyone who thinks removong a reward accessible to all, and only makes it available to the top 2 % and says its for everyone's benefit is either a liar, stupid, or both.

This isnt to help anyone. Its a ploy to push midrange players up by flooding them with covers that cost hp to roster and to get players closer to 5* land because the majority of purchases are made at the beginning to get a jump on their roster, and once 5* land is in sight. In between that not much spending happens.

At least that was my and most of my alliances experiences. Buy slots early. Buy cp these days.

As for dev response, lack of details etc.

Are you really that surprised? This is the same group that dropped a brand new event that almost instantly failed, and they tpok the weekend, entire event, off. Its also the same guys that deny swaps, give cut and paste answers and rarely read your ticket.

I agree with much of the content of this post, though the tone is a bit more conspiratorial than I think is useful.

But the last parahraph is wrong. You can't conflate demi (the people that designed boss rush so badly and then threw up their hands and said "eh, we'll get it next time" when the problems became super obvious) with d3 (the people who run these forums and administer CS tickets).

Also, ha! not on mobile at the moment and just saw your sig corytutor. Eyesnipe?!!! your posts make much more sense now.

Really? You agree that those of us in this thread who can understand the reasoning are either liars, stupid or both?

It's not the tone I would use, but yeah: It is foolish to take demi/d3 at face value when the say that moving CP from progression to placement was done for the purpose of making CP more available.

And mostly I was agreeing with cory (and actually also with you and daredevil) that it seems quite likely that demi's intent with this change is speed up the 4* transition for middle class players (most casuals won't see much benefit from this change because they won't play 40 matches per event).

But I honestly have little sympathy for demi trying to deal with the problems created by the fragmentation of the playerbase. I can dredge up posts from myself and other players in mid 2015 warning that demi's chosen method of switching to a 4* endgame and then introducing 5*s was inevitably going to fragment the playerbase and cause all sorts of secondary problems. I feel perfectly justified in being upset that Demi ignored the problem for years and may now be trying to solve the problem by punishing 5* transitioners like me.

Vhailorx · October 2017

Daredevil217 said:

show previous quotes

Bubez said:

Great analysis. Being a cognitive psychologist myself, I 100% agree with your post, well done!

Thanks! Mostly a Person-Centered therapist here (work in a University Counseling Center) but still have to know all of that Cognitive/Behavioral stuff for licensing purposes and it does come in handy with clients as well.

I'd be shocked if a game this successful didn't have psychologists in their employ helping guide decisions.

They use continuous reinforcement (every time I play, I get rewarded) which is the strongest for developing a conditioned response early on when learning a new behavior.

They also combine that with partial reinforcement on a variable ratio schedule (the "rush" you get pulling that slot machine, or in this case, opening tokens). This is the schedule of reinforcement that most strongly maintains a desired behavior (how gambling addictions are formed) and is hardest to break.

So in short, they know how to hook you, AND keep you. That's not by accident.

Nah, all that stuff is pretty basic skinner box mechanics that have been used in successful MMOs and freemium games for years. I don't think demi needs to employ an in-house psychologist to know that stuff. You just need to attend some game development conventions/events and pay attention to the industry. Demi seems like a fairly small shop.

D3, on the other hand, may well have some in house psychology staff mandating the inclusion of certain elements in the games they support as a condition of the publishing deals.

The rockett · October 2017

Vhailorx said:

show previous quotes

Spudgutter said:

Vhailorx said:

corytutor said:

Ummm. Forum polls are dumb. We dont represent the playerbase. We don't even represent the majority of vets.

Anyone who thinks removong a reward accessible to all, and only makes it available to the top 2 % and says its for everyone's benefit is either a liar, stupid, or both.

This isnt to help anyone. Its a ploy to push midrange players up by flooding them with covers that cost hp to roster and to get players closer to 5* land because the majority of purchases are made at the beginning to get a jump on their roster, and once 5* land is in sight. In between that not much spending happens.

At least that was my and most of my alliances experiences. Buy slots early. Buy cp these days.

As for dev response, lack of details etc.

Are you really that surprised? This is the same group that dropped a brand new event that almost instantly failed, and they tpok the weekend, entire event, off. Its also the same guys that deny swaps, give cut and paste answers and rarely read your ticket.

I agree with much of the content of this post, though the tone is a bit more conspiratorial than I think is useful.

But the last parahraph is wrong. You can't conflate demi (the people that designed boss rush so badly and then threw up their hands and said "eh, we'll get it next time" when the problems became super obvious) with d3 (the people who run these forums and administer CS tickets).

Also, ha! not on mobile at the moment and just saw your sig corytutor. Eyesnipe?!!! your posts make much more sense now.

Really? You agree that those of us in this thread who can understand the reasoning are either liars, stupid or both?

It's not the tone I would use, but yeah: It is foolish to take demi/d3 at face value when the say that moving CP from progression to placement was done for the purpose of making CP more available.

And mostly I was agreeing with cory (and actually also with you and daredevil) that it seems quite likely that demi's intent with this change is speed up the 4* transition for middle class players (most casuals won't see much benefit from this change because they won't play 40 matches per event).

But I honestly have little sympathy for demi trying to deal with the problems created by the fragmentation of the playerbase. I can dredge up posts from myself and other players in mid 2015 warning that demi's chosen method of switching to a 4* endgame and then introducing 5*s was inevitably going to fragment the playerbase and cause all sorts of secondary problems. I feel perfectly justified in being upset that Demi ignored the problem for years and may now be trying to solve the problem by punishing 5* transitioners like me.

Here is the rub, they don't want the vets anymore. They want new players and new money. That's what's more important. Well at least that's what it feels like.

corytutor · October 2017

It does feel that way rockett. And its horrible for business.

Sure i want that new guy who may buy a few starks to start up. But i also want to keep the guy that buys one every month or blows a grand every sale.

At least smart business would

corytutor · October 2017

This company reported over 100million in sales a year ago. They shouldnt be hurting for cash soo much that they need to give the shaft to its long time consumer base. I mean come one. They employ 3 cs guys. They've got change to spare im sure

Spudgutter · October 2017

Vhailorx said:

show previous quotes

Spudgutter said:

Vhailorx said:

corytutor said:

Ummm. Forum polls are dumb. We dont represent the playerbase. We don't even represent the majority of vets.

Anyone who thinks removong a reward accessible to all, and only makes it available to the top 2 % and says its for everyone's benefit is either a liar, stupid, or both.

This isnt to help anyone. Its a ploy to push midrange players up by flooding them with covers that cost hp to roster and to get players closer to 5* land because the majority of purchases are made at the beginning to get a jump on their roster, and once 5* land is in sight. In between that not much spending happens.

At least that was my and most of my alliances experiences. Buy slots early. Buy cp these days.

As for dev response, lack of details etc.

Are you really that surprised? This is the same group that dropped a brand new event that almost instantly failed, and they tpok the weekend, entire event, off. Its also the same guys that deny swaps, give cut and paste answers and rarely read your ticket.

I agree with much of the content of this post, though the tone is a bit more conspiratorial than I think is useful.

But the last parahraph is wrong. You can't conflate demi (the people that designed boss rush so badly and then threw up their hands and said "eh, we'll get it next time" when the problems became super obvious) with d3 (the people who run these forums and administer CS tickets).

Also, ha! not on mobile at the moment and just saw your sig corytutor. Eyesnipe?!!! your posts make much more sense now.

Really? You agree that those of us in this thread who can understand the reasoning are either liars, stupid or both?

It's not the tone I would use, but yeah: It is foolish to take demi/d3 at face value when the say that moving CP from progression to placement was done for the purpose of making CP more available.

And mostly I was agreeing with cory (and actually also with you and daredevil) that it seems quite likely that demi's intent with this change is speed up the 4* transition for middle class players (most casuals won't see much benefit from this change because they won't play 40 matches per event).

But I honestly have little sympathy for demi trying to deal with the problems created by the fragmentation of the playerbase. I can dredge up posts from myself and other players in mid 2015 warning that demi's chosen method of switching to a 4* endgame and then introducing 5*s was inevitably going to fragment the playerbase and cause all sorts of secondary problems. I feel perfectly justified in being upset that Demi ignored the problem for years and may now be trying to solve the problem by punishing 5* transitioners like me.

Foolish for taking them at face value, I can understand. Liar or stupid? Give me a break. If that is an easy threshold to cross, every time I call you foolish from here on out, it's me secretly calling you stupid. Sound fair?

carrion_pigeons · October 2017

Foolish and stupid are literally synonyms. Not much secret about that.

broll · October 2017

The rockett said:

show previous quotes

Vhailorx said:

Spudgutter said:

Vhailorx said:

corytutor said:

Ummm. Forum polls are dumb. We dont represent the playerbase. We don't even represent the majority of vets.

Anyone who thinks removong a reward accessible to all, and only makes it available to the top 2 % and says its for everyone's benefit is either a liar, stupid, or both.

This isnt to help anyone. Its a ploy to push midrange players up by flooding them with covers that cost hp to roster and to get players closer to 5* land because the majority of purchases are made at the beginning to get a jump on their roster, and once 5* land is in sight. In between that not much spending happens.

At least that was my and most of my alliances experiences. Buy slots early. Buy cp these days.

As for dev response, lack of details etc.

Are you really that surprised? This is the same group that dropped a brand new event that almost instantly failed, and they tpok the weekend, entire event, off. Its also the same guys that deny swaps, give cut and paste answers and rarely read your ticket.

I agree with much of the content of this post, though the tone is a bit more conspiratorial than I think is useful.

But the last parahraph is wrong. You can't conflate demi (the people that designed boss rush so badly and then threw up their hands and said "eh, we'll get it next time" when the problems became super obvious) with d3 (the people who run these forums and administer CS tickets).

Also, ha! not on mobile at the moment and just saw your sig corytutor. Eyesnipe?!!! your posts make much more sense now.

Really? You agree that those of us in this thread who can understand the reasoning are either liars, stupid or both?

It's not the tone I would use, but yeah: It is foolish to take demi/d3 at face value when the say that moving CP from progression to placement was done for the purpose of making CP more available.

And mostly I was agreeing with cory (and actually also with you and daredevil) that it seems quite likely that demi's intent with this change is speed up the 4* transition for middle class players (most casuals won't see much benefit from this change because they won't play 40 matches per event).

But I honestly have little sympathy for demi trying to deal with the problems created by the fragmentation of the playerbase. I can dredge up posts from myself and other players in mid 2015 warning that demi's chosen method of switching to a 4* endgame and then introducing 5*s was inevitably going to fragment the playerbase and cause all sorts of secondary problems. I feel perfectly justified in being upset that Demi ignored the problem for years and may now be trying to solve the problem by punishing 5* transitioners like me.

Here is the rub, they don't want the vets anymore. They want new players and new money. That's what's more important. Well at least that's what it feels like.

Beer40 · October 2017

Brigby said:

show previous quotes

ronin-san said:

-snipped for clarity-
Orion said:

Brigby, I would love for you to get a developer on here so they can explain the logic behind awarding the 15 CP to only the top 10 of CL6-CL8. Normally, I can understand the logic, even if I don't agree with it. But this I can't figure out. You are taking 15 CP away from rosters that could get to 1200 but not make top 10 and giving it to whom? For those rosters, the CP is the only way to progress in the game. If my progression is slowed down by too much, then what incentive do I have to keep playing?
I don't know the exact reasoning, but I'll inquire with the developers, and provide info once I hear back from them.

So without concrete information as to the why, you walked into an already quarreling senate, donned your gas mask, pulled the pin, and said, "We'll have a chat on the morrow, lads".

My kids get upset when I tell them to do something they don't like, and don't first get an explanation as to why.

Exactly what was the outcome you expected, when you dropped in to sprinkle in dissent, and dashed out?

This is freaking childish, Brigs. Shame on you, and shame on your manager, who advised you to do this. Incomplete information caused a craptonne of dissent. No matter what side of the fence you're on regarding this change, the way this was handled was tactless.

Enjoy your "How are we doing" Surveymonkey comments.

I'm afraid my original comment may have appeared a bit disengenuous. The original reason for this implementation was because the developers determined there would actually be more players that achieved the CP reward if put in placement, than if they tried to acquire it in progression.

The reason I said that I didn't know the exact reasoning in the above comment, was more so that I wanted to reaffirm with the developers if this was still the case, after reviewing the results of the test. I apologize for the confusion.

Their answer is too open ended, in my opinion. There are two ways to understand it, in my opinion, and I'm not sure which, or if either, is correct.

Optimist: With a little tweaking of SCL and slice, all 1,200 point players willing to adjust will still get 15 CP because there are actually more 15 CP placement slots than players that can get to 1,200.

Pessimist: We mean more players will achieve some sort of CP reward. There are more CP rewards than players who hit 1,200 points so they'll still get "something", although it may be far less than the 15 CP they currently get...even if they make adjustments to SCL and slice...and players not hitting 1,200 will also see "some" of the CP from placement too.

Optimist seems highly unlikely. Pessimist actually seems accurate. I think in that case more people would rather hear, "Too many people get 15 CP so we're cutting that number down. Hopefully you don't miss the cut. If you do, enjoy your lesser rewards. Also, we made sure to give a few new people "some" CP, so hopefully their voices will drown out yours".

Who knows, with such vague statements and no follow up...

Spudgutter · October 2017

corytutor said:

Yes. How else could you justify taking a reward available to all, limit it to the top 2% and say it helps the little guy? It doesnt. If anything its going to further seperate the top from everyone else.

It wont be helpful to the little guy for years, and then hes going to hit a wall trying to transition to 5* land.

Its pretty obviously flawed.

Available to all? Are you serious? Your stance is that every single player (aka all) should be hitting 1200 in Black Vortex right now? Now who is being foolish?

As far as helping the little guy, I am at day 1400ish. My kid is around 150-200. He has four 5*, one with two covers, and several well covered 4*. The newer players are way different from when I was a new player. It will be much different 400-500 days from now

corytutor · October 2017

Available to all in the sense that all had a chance to obtain it.

If the cp is on the progression side, anyone who chooses to get it can do so.
A lot more people can hit x number of wins than can creep into t10. Its not rocket science.

larzilla · October 2017

Philly484 said:

Well the reasoning of more players being able to obtain top 10 is completely inaccurate. They are punishing the Veteran players who have took time to develop their roster. Players shouldn't feel like they are being punished, and that is clearly how more of the majority feels. I understand new players are excited about the change it helps develop the roster faster, but then the "Brick Wall" will hit the new players faster, and they will either quit playing because they don't want to spend money, or they will stick with it and spend money. I have a feeling the higher percentage will be new players dropping off.

The purpose serves new players in roster development, but hurts developed rosters, and from comments from new players they are only looking at the quick 4* cover versus long-term effects of the change. Which will result in not having applicable CP once they want to try to move into 5* territory. Also to the players who want to bad mouth those of us who spend money on the game, that isn't a fair statement(s). If that is what makes the game enjoyable for us, then that is what makes the game enjoyable for us. This move isn't justifiable in regards to veterans, and in my opinion even new players, because all you are looking at is getting a quick 4* cover.

Yup! Couldn't have said it better.

fmftint · October 2017

The reason command points aren't in progression is simple, they don't want EVERYONE to earn it. But saying that directly is bad PR so we get the spun version, more players make T10 than 1200!

High five

broll · October 2017

Spudgutter said:

show previous quotes

corytutor said:

Yes. How else could you justify taking a reward available to all, limit it to the top 2% and say it helps the little guy? It doesnt. If anything its going to further seperate the top from everyone else.

It wont be helpful to the little guy for years, and then hes going to hit a wall trying to transition to 5* land.

Its pretty obviously flawed.

Available to all? Are you serious? Your stance is that every single player (aka all) should be hitting 1200 in Black Vortex right now? Now who is being foolish?

As far as helping the little guy, I am at day 1400ish. My kid is around 150-200. He has four 5*, one with two covers, and several well covered 4*. The newer players are way different from when I was a new player. It will be much different 400-500 days from now

I think he means if they made it 40 or 45 wins or whatever it would be available to all (when it wasn't in the old system), which is a change they don't want. It's not bad logic tbh.

tiomono · October 2017

corytutor said:

Available to all in the sense that all had a chance to obtain it.

If the cp is on the progression side, anyone who chooses to get it can do so.
A lot more people can hit x number of wins than can creep into t10. Its not rocket science.

But the chance for every player to get into top 10 is still there. So in that sense it's still available to all.

broll · October 2017

tiomono said:

show previous quotes

corytutor said:

Available to all in the sense that all had a chance to obtain it.

If the cp is on the progression side, anyone who chooses to get it can do so.
A lot more people can hit x number of wins than can creep into t10. Its not rocket science.

But the chance for every player to get into top 10 is still there. So in that sense it's still available to all.

ROFL!! What?! No it's not... By default 10 people get T10 and another 490 cannot (assuming full bracket). People can snipe, but only 10 per bracket would get the T10 sniping. It's a mathematical impossibility for everyone to get T10 the way the game works.

Lucifier · October 2017

Philly484 said:

I understand new players are excited about the change it helps develop the roster faster, but then the "Brick Wall" will hit the new players faster, and they will either quit playing because they don't want to spend money, or they will stick with it and spend money. I have a feeling the higher percentage will be new players dropping off.

why would be a Brick wall for new players, specially very new players (as start day one after this change, so they did not saw the "old or current" PVP system).

for very new players, it is like, i got 10 cp from progression + other rewards + placement rewards.
for new player they will develop 4* roster faster, saving more time.
now to the point, after player have multiple 4* champed, after moving cp from progression to the placements, and lets only talk about the players who will not place in top10 (before they were getting 15cp from each PVP), how much cp did they lost, they lost about 20% of their cp income.

total cp income is:

about 25 cp from PVP progression / 3 days
about 30 cp from PVE progression / 3 days.
2 cp / day from ddq = 6 / 3 days.
lets say 5cp / day from other sources (champ rewards, daily rewards, VIP (both daily rewards + intercept), someone in your alliance make purchase or renew VIP). = 15 / 3 day.

now the total is 25 + 30 + 6 + 15 = 76 cp / 3 day, losing 15 cp from it, 15 / 76 x 100% = 19.7% lets say 20%

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

Comments

Welcome!

Welcome!

Quick Links

Categories