Enemy Cascade Limiting (6/12/18)

135

Comments

  • brollbroll Posts: 4,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    While I appreciate the clear effort you guys are making to address commonly suggested problems, I really I hope very little dev time was spent on this.  The problem here is player perception, not reality.  I doubt this change will do anything to improve player perception and people will still have the same complaints.  I can't see you guys getting much if any ROI for this change.  We'll see though.  
  • AXP_ismeAXP_isme Posts: 725 Critical Contributor
    It’s interesting that the implementation is only partial. If this is being done in response to concerns from newer players that the AI cheats (i’m sure we’ve all thought that at one tone or another) then why not implement it in PvP too? This won’t prevent cascades from happening and the biases that come into play when they do. 

    I guess the metrics either suggest that newer players don’t play much pvp or that the number of PvE fights is significantly higher than pvp. Either way if this is going to address the concerns of the people complaining in an effective way it will need to have a significant, and last, effect on the perception of AI cascades. I would worry that for those people who don’t know how this is implemented it will just change the cry from “the AI is cheating” to “the other player’s AI is cheating” which is not an improvement, it’s just different. 
  • ThaRoadWarriorThaRoadWarrior Posts: 4,581 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2018
    I don't think newer players even can play PVP, doesn't it unlock at a certain (admittedly low) SCL now?
  • brollbroll Posts: 4,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    AXP_isme said:
    It’s interesting that the implementation is only partial. If this is being done in response to concerns from newer players that the AI cheats (i’m sure we’ve all thought that at one tone or another) then why not implement it in PvP too? This won’t prevent cascades from happening and the biases that come into play when they do. 

    I guess the metrics either suggest that newer players don’t play much pvp or that the number of PvE fights is significantly higher than pvp. Either way if this is going to address the concerns of the people complaining in an effective way it will need to have a significant, and last, effect on the perception of AI cascades. I would worry that for those people who don’t know how this is implemented it will just change the cry from “the AI is cheating” to “the other player’s AI is cheating” which is not an improvement, it’s just different. 
    Because you'd be nerfing other 'players' and making winning a defensive battle less likely.  Looking at this thread several vets are already like, 'why?', if they did it for PvP they'd be trying to burn down the forum...
  • smkspysmkspy Posts: 2,024 Chairperson of the Boards
    Making rosters harder to build, but matches easier to win. Good strategy for player retention, especially new ones...yeah no, building able to build a usable roster quickly makes people ignore bad luck Cascades. 

    But honestly this is what I expect at this point with their view of so-called "QoL improvements." I'm just on auto-pilot with game at this point.
  • QuebbsterQuebbster Posts: 8,070 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't think newer players even can play PVP, doesn't it unlock at a certain (admittedly low) SCL now?


    Very low. When I have switched devices and started new accounts on the new device (to eventually get my old account transfered there) it has never taken me long tu unlock PvP.

  • smkspysmkspy Posts: 2,024 Chairperson of the Boards
    Borstock said:
    smkspy said:
    Making rosters harder to build, but matches easier to win. Good strategy for player retention, especially new ones...yeah no, building able to build a usable roster quickly makes people ignore bad luck Cascades. 

    But honestly this is what I expect at this point with their view of so-called "QoL improvements." I'm just on auto-pilot with game at this point.
    It's a mobile match-3 game. Do you have any idea how many people play this while they're on the toilet?  For a large segment of the playerbase, auto-pilot is all this game is.

    Honestly, it's strange to me that so many people are micro-managing the developers' time. Oh, somebody spent 45 minutes on this change? That's too much. Should've only spent 40, max.  This is a change in the game that literally has zero negative affect on the player. It only benefits the player and hurts the AI.  But... but... NO ONE ASKED FOR SUPPORTS!

    Honestly, folks. It's okay to read the note, say thank you, and continue complaining in the 15,000 other threads about how much supports suck, and colorless covers, and why it's the game's fault you finished 11th instead of 10th.
    Do you have any idea how people play on the toilet? No, obviously you don't, which makes it a very silly excuse. 

    And never said it had a negative effect on the player base...it does benefit us, but I owe them zero praise for a change imo could have been a change implemented elsewhere.

    And you know that is it also okay, to ignore posts that you don't agree with such changes and try so hard to defend those changes because "it's just a match 3 game." Guess now I'll go buy my new TV cause my last one when bust after just 3 years and suck it up with no complaints that products are now being made to last only a short period. Be happy and never say anything about the products we spend our money on is the new normal, amirite.
  • JaedenkaalJaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    LakeStone said:

    Hi Everyone  - 

    Passing this message below along from the team. 

    From Marvel Puzzle Quest’s release until now, every tile that’s dropped from the top of the board has been random, with the same drop rates for players and the enemy team. But our brains have this quirk called negativity bias: we remember the worst things that happen to us the most clearly (when the enemy team got a 6-match cascade and downed our whole team) and forget the times when we got just as lucky. Negativity bias probably helped us survive until we invented video games, but it’s making us enjoy Marvel Puzzle Quest less.

    Most experienced players know that the drop rate is random, but newbies in particular sometimes come away thinking that the AI is cheating and getting extra cascades. It’s our most common complaint from new players. MPQ isn’t alone in this - this was one of the most common complaints in previous games in the Puzzle Quest series, despite the tile drops being totally random in those games as well.

    We think game developers ought to make games for the pleasure of people and their actual brains, with all their quirky biases, not for some Platonic ideal of fairness. So in order to make the game feel fair to more people, we’re making it a little bit unfair, in your favor, and limiting the cascades that the enemy team gets in Story and Prologue missions. (In order to avoid disrupting the current balance when you’re fighting other players, we’re keeping the behavior of Versus battles unchanged.)

    This will have a relatively modest effect on the balance of the game. With the previous, random drop system, the enemy team was only cascading into 3 or more matches 0.66% of the times they changed the board. But we’re hopeful this will reduce the number of phones that get thrown across the room and improve people’s first impressions of the game.

    This will go live starting tomorrow with the daily patch on June 13th. Here are the precise details on how the new behavior works:
    Neat. 

    I wonder how far this will go to mitigate bias, though. There's still literally every other random thing in the game to feel bad about.

    I'm not opposed to this change, it just sounds like yet another one of those things that we'll just have to trust you on.
  • BowgentleBowgentle Posts: 5,038 Chairperson of the Boards
    I hope this isn’t their solution to the Wakanda event, because I have a feeling it is, and it’s not the solution.
    No, I recognize that this change isn't going to address feedback on Fight for Wakanda. (We've taken that event out of rotation and hope to make some tweaks before we re-introduce it.)
    Best news in a long time - thank you.
    Maybe consider letting Brigby do a thread when you "vault" events.

    We've been wondering what happened to Heroics for two years.
  • Nick441234Nick441234 Posts: 1,496 Chairperson of the Boards
    I hope this isn’t their solution to the Wakanda event, because I have a feeling it is, and it’s not the solution.
    No, I recognize that this change isn't going to address feedback on Fight for Wakanda. (We've taken that event out of rotation and hope to make some tweaks before we re-introduce it.)
    Thank god! It was awful. 
  • JaedenkaalJaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    Can we make the AI more intelligent? For examples, not matching own special tiles immediately after placing it on the same turn, letting it create a match-5.
    Hey, HoundofShadow - that's something we've playtested a few times over the life of MPQ and ultimately decided against. Our lead engineer Justin goes into more detail in this developer diary: https://www.demiurgestudios.com/engineering/a-worthy-opponent/
    Hah. Yeah. No need to give the AI any real agency. It feels evil enough as it is. 
  • PhumadePhumade Posts: 1,946 Chairperson of the Boards
    I appreciate this change. and here is where I see it every day.

    in the 5e nodes, where the enemies have enough health to start autofiring.  I think this cripples any story AI team that features a 5*thore or sentinel drone.

    whether its a fair or balanced is a seperate question.  but this is a great change that is specifically designed to help in those super hard nodes where the AI has enough time to stockpile AP.
Sign In or Register to comment.