|
| Thread: Bunch of suggestions | |
|
angren
Tavern Dweller
|
posted July 21, 2020 11:10 PM |
|
Edited by angren at 23:51, 21 Jul 2020.
|
Bunch of suggestions
Hi
I'm gonna do what's called a pro gamer move post several personal suggestions, which IMO can improve the game. I'm aware that this kind of genre is quite hackneyed, so I'll try to overlap with previous lists that I have seen only in most significant parts.
Here we go.
Guild wars:
1) suppress informal alliances between guilds
The problem is that many highest-ranking guilds do not attack each other. I see at least two possible solutions: to make pages in GW shorter and to change shards gain. For example, one attack page can show 10 guilds instead of 20, so that alliance between more than 9 guilds become pointless. Alternatively, shards gain formula may be changed to give less when attacking guilds significantly lower (say, 10 places) in the list. The latter is of course more difficult to implement and balance. Also, there could be other suitable variants.
2) get rid of zombie guilds
There are tons of guilds without active players shown in the initial list at the start of GW. I think there should be a mechanism to automatically disband them. For example, if a guild has no garrisoned armies during 3 GWs in a row it is deleted. More generally, in my view, the criterion should be chosen in a way that should affect also guilds with 1-2 active players who are not leaders. Maybe after leaders are offline for a long time (2-3 months?) active players are forced to choose new leader. This step would also release some new players to feed more active guilds that are constantly insatiable for new players.
Creatures
1) new creatures
It's just that simple, we desperately need them. Ideally, new units in every category with totally new abilities. For example, more abilities that trigger on getting hit with a special ability. Elementals and giants have this, but only in addition when awakened.
2) new tomes
I really like tomes and their swap mechanics and I think it should be expanded. For example, there could be tomes with greater advantages, but also disadvantages, e.g. (+10% ATK and +10% DEF) or (+15% LUK and +15% mana gain), but (-10% PWR) or (halving bonus damage against opposite colour) or (decreased mana gain), etc.
3) combo damage formula
I'm sure there would be many objections, but nevertheless I think it should be changed so that lower combo gives less bonus and higher combo gives more. This stems from the fact that an overwhelming amount of players use the same 'white meta' teams. As far as I understand, currently combo bonus damage is 50% + 12,5% * (combo_multiplier). I think it is reasonable to change it to something like 20% + 20% * (combo_multiplier). I am aware that this is a major change to the game overall, but I think it should be at least considered and discussed. The motivation is that this shift would greatly improve teams' variability and versatility.
Quests
1) adjusting drop rates
I think that the amount of resources you get fom compleating dedicated to a particular type of resource quest is ridiculously low. Doing Might Over Magic, which has wood as featured treasure, on emperor difficulty can result in as low as 1-2 thousand of it. This should be increased several-fold. In the current situation, many quests are simply not worth doing, better to choose the one with a chance of getting a large creature, while the amount of resources will be not much less.
2) personalizing drop rates
Connected with the previous paragraph, but separate suggestion - introduce new possibility to choose which types of drop you will get less and which you will get more. Say, you have a new panel with 6 options: gold, gems, totems, kingdom resources (wood, ore, ...), evolving gear (sigils, ankhs, etc.), other things (tickets, tokens). You can increase the chance and amount of one kind of drop at the expense of lowering another. For example, I choose to switch the gold rate from the default value of 0 to -1 and also make totems rate +1. This option should affect drops from battles, lying on the ground treasures and rewards from chests at the end of quests. This mechanics could be further expanded to affect creatures' drop rates, e.g. higher possibility of getting a creature or +1 combo dot, but the latter option should cost more, maybe even it should put all other drop rates at -1.
3) new quest bonus
In addition to gold, exp and stat bonuses, I propose a new resource bonus. It gives +10% to resources and +1 to totems/gems/sigils/runestones. Or this could be several new separate bonuses.
4) new expert quests
We certainly crave for more challenges. I think it is a nice idea to introduce new restricted expert quests. They could be restricted either in size as current normal quests or by colour. Alternatively, limitation could be more intricate. For example, you have 12 points for building a team, while adding a boss costs 5 points, large - 3, medium - 2, small - 1. Specific numbers are not something I have thoroughly thought over, but the idea is that you shouldn't be able to have more than 1 boss in a team of 5 creatures.
That's all major suggestions for now, at least those which I remember. I have a number of less significant, but they certainly do not fit in this list. Hope to spark at least some discussion that devs will get aware of.
|
|
Garausis
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 22, 2020 08:22 PM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 01:20, 23 Jul 2020.
|
Nope
angren said:
Hi
I'm gonna do what's called a pro gamer move post several personal suggestions, which IMO can improve the game. I'm aware that this kind of genre is quite hackneyed, so I'll try to overlap with previous lists that I have seen only in most significant parts.
Here we go.
Guild wars:
Creatures
Quests
Don't take this critique as personal attack, but I do think that your proposals lack experience and deeper understanding of a game and business model, that this game is using.
Guild wars:
1) your suggestion actually will make it worse, as that 10th guild will have to defend against 9 visible members of alliance and even more nonvisible alliance members and in the end there will be stable top 10 members from one alliance.
Currently alliances are playing very important social factor(similar to what global chat is giving, that is not directly adding anything to a game), that bounds these members of alliances to this game. Anything that will disband alliances and not offer equally intense reason to attach to a game will cause a drop of interest to continue this game. The problem here is not Russians who are banding together to "**** up westerners"(not all of them are of that mentality, but the ones that are more active in voicing their views are better visible), because of mentality and craze that is going with Russia under Putin, but lack of western players. Would it help, if this game had more Chinese or Korean players with same tribal mentality?
It would make more sense to allow creation of even bigger guilds, but at the end - the sum will be the same and for bigger guilds there would be top rewards and rewards for your guild would be the same.
It might be possible to change PVP model to leagues model, according to loot - legendary, mythic, epic, rare, common but that would definitely change how diamonds are spent in wars and also that would make alliances factor diminish and it will be replaced by whales factor, that was already present in early stages of this game, where the sure way to win was P2W. Currently this is very democratic setting - unfortunately for nonrussians, who are not in majority or not interested in alliances. It might be possible to fight this by setting up anti-Russian alliance, but cooperation is biggest obstacle already.
Actually, if I think about that, then this game lack side setting for players and alliances, where some people would like to RP and join dark or light side or elemental based side, but yeah - that has nothing to do with alliances and won't impact them.
2) All guilds were created by using diamonds. The guilds, that you are calling zombie guilds in most cases contain members, so they are not abandoned guilds, like you imply, but their members are inactive. These players won't suddenly became more active than they are now. And I do not see them as a problem in first step.
Besides, there is a flaw with proposing choosing a new leader, as guilds are sole properties of leaders and I don't think that any kind of democratic robbery should be allowed.
VCME already are taking off empty guilds, but manually so 3 months or 6 months or up to a year does not make that much of a difference.
Creatures
1) It is just simple - "we" do not need more new creatures - you don't either. I am still lacking 8 creatures from my collection.
Elementals and Giants and also Genies and Dragons are special creatures that stands out comparing to others. The main problem is not owning them, but setting them so they can be used in team or in dungeon.
2)not sure how new tomes will change anything, as most of the tomes already are more useless than couple of existing tomes and are not used at all already. I would think, that rebalancing existing tomes and fixing them so that they are working as intended is of bigger importance, than adding new mess.
3)there is no combo damage formula - combos does a lot more:
It seems to me, that COMBOS INCREASE STATS of attacking creature, that helps in doing attack. So, if your blue creature under normal circumstances are under threshold to stun or remove buff of yellow creature, then combos are raising stats that are participating in attacks and with combo it is now possible to remove buffs or stun. So, there is no real reason to overpower those creatures with combos even more, but it is question of understanding how to use those combos accordingly.
Quests
1)I have a constant amount of 1 million wood or stone, 2 million scrolls, 60+ million gold, thousands of experience gems, hundreds of ankhs and dust and there doesn't seem to be any way to decrease their numbers, as there is nothing worth to buy to spend that amount of them. So, increasing anything several-fold will do nothing to most players, if to them those resources are not as important as they are important to you now.
2)That does not add anything to your game, where you experience some shortage of resources and it won't change anything to end game players either for the reasons described in 1)
3)there already exist totems/gems/sigils/runestones bonuses, when you are completing battle in quest and if you are able to stay healthy and do not have casualties, then all of these items in rewards are giving up to 50-100% more rewards.
4)that type of quest exists as a battle tower - only there are more reward points if boss is not added.
____________
|
|
Garausis
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 22, 2020 08:40 PM |
|
|
I've tried to play Ubisoft M&M mobile games(Might & Magic: Elemental Guardians and Might & Magic: Era of Chaos) and I found them irritating because they take much more time and involvement leaves no time for other activities. And there was very punishing attitude for not sinking money into a game, so it was not rewarding to play these games in the end, once the curiosity element was exhausted.
I've found some similarities between them and Creature Quest, but that seems, that it is the way how many mobile game genre games are constructed.
Creature Quest is surprisingly better balanced in these matters and maybe try these Ubisoft games first, to appreciate how Creature Quest is "lacking" those additions, that are present in Ubisoft games.
____________
|
|
angren
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 23, 2020 12:14 AM |
|
Edited by angren at 00:25, 23 Jul 2020.
|
Garausis said:
your suggestion actually will make it worse, as that 10th guild will have to defend against 9 visible members of alliance and even more nonvisible alliance members and in the end there will be stable top 10 members from one alliance.
Ackchyually, no, it won't inevitably make things worse (but can, of course), it depends on how to balance this tweak. Anyway, as I said, I'm not convinced at all that this is the right way to deal with current situation. Besides that, I'm not playing in any of top guilds, I just think that such relationships should be properly restricted by established rules, not by self-organizing, which in case of limited options for action would lead to tribalism reigning supreme – in this sense you are totally right.
Garausis said:
These players won't suddenly became more active than they are now
I didn't say that and I don't see any reason they will. My point is different. Every now and then I stumble upon guilds with one active member, while everyone else including leaders is off for a very long time. I want only those people to be returned to the pool of guildless players. I agree that deleting guilds maybe not the best decision – as with all my suggestions it's just a proposal to deal with an apparent problem.
Garausis said:
"we" do not need more new creatures - you don't either. I am still lacking 8 creatures from my collection.
Lacking creatures is one of the main reasons people continue to play, it's just basic psychology behind every 'collect them all' games. So adding new ones cannot do any harm, if done properly it only encourages players to stay. Besides that, this suggestion comes in conjugation with new quests, which should need them. And in general, aren't you tired of using the same creatures to beat the same defenders in a dungeon? Silver league has at least some variety, while gold has close to zero.
Garausis said:
not sure how new tomes will change anything, as most of the tomes already are more useless than couple of existing tomes and are not used at all already. I would think, that rebalancing existing tomes and fixing them so that they are working as intended is of bigger importance, than adding new mess
Both agree and not. It's true that at least half of tomes are quite useless, but others existing do not fit well with many current abilities. The general idea behind this suggestion is the same – to increase the versatility of playable teams.
Garausis said:
there is no combo damage formula - combos does a lot more:
It seems to me, that COMBOS INCREASE STATS of attacking creature, that helps in doing attack.
You are completely wrong here. There certainly is formula and combos don't seem to increase stats. Display tips clearly say that combos do affect the chance of debuffs, I think this is related to a separate multiplier, not connected to stats themselves. And my point for revising the formula was totally different and unequivocally stated, this has nothing to do with it.
Garausis said:
I have a constant amount of 1 million wood or stone, 2 million scrolls, 60+ million gold, thousands of experience gems, hundreds of ankhs and dust and there doesn't seem to be any way to decrease their numbers, as there is nothing worth to buy to spend that amount of them. So, increasing anything several-fold will do nothing to most players, if to them those resources are not as important as they are important to you now.
It's good that you are an old player, I guess about 2 years or more. Congratulations on that. All my proposals about resources were aimed at players of low and medium levels, who still need massive amounts of wood and ore to upgrade castle. No need to brag about your wealth.
If a quest says that it has featured treasure, it should give reasonable amounts of it. Otherwise, different featured treasure should be assigned. Good example - Wealthiest tavern, I have no reason to complain about it.
The problem of accumulation of some resources towards endgame is well known for many games, but I don't yet have any suggestions on how to deal with it specifically in CQ. Looks like you don't have either.
Garausis said:
there already exist totems/gems/sigils/runestones bonuses, when you are completing battle in quest and if you are able to stay healthy and do not have casualties, then all of these items in rewards are giving up to 50-100% more rewards.
This bonus depends on type of resource. It only doubles the number of ankhs, but totems, gems and gold are increased more than twofold in case of finishing with full health. But you can't get ordinary resources like wood from battles. It also doesn't drop from chests at the end of quest. I think these things could be changed.
Garausis said:
that type of quest exists as a battle tower - only there are more reward points if boss is not added.
New quest is something much bigger than a level in tower, IMO. I agree, that some similarities are traceable. But in tower you choose the team to deal maximum damage, while I mean that you will have to play with team that does low damage to enemies, cause they will be of unfavorable opposite colour.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 23, 2020 01:19 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 01:21, 23 Jul 2020.
|
Welcome to the forums, guys 
I sadly don't have much the time of running through all points brought up here, but I'll go with the ones that are affecting me the most.
Quote:
Guild wars:
1) suppress informal alliances between guilds
The problem is that many highest-ranking guilds do not attack each other. I see at least two possible solutions: to make pages in GW shorter and to change shards gain. For example, one attack page can show 10 guilds instead of 20, so that alliance between more than 9 guilds become pointless. Alternatively, shards gain formula may be changed to give less when attacking guilds significantly lower (say, 10 places) in the list. The latter is of course more difficult to implement and balance. Also, there could be other suitable variants.
I agree with the issue, but not with the cure. I think this would result that instead of having 1 "locked page", there will be two. Plus for the one or two guilds that are not part of any alliance it will make it even harder as they won't be able to retaliate to the guilds on the second page. What I suggest would rather be that you cannot exceed a certain amount of attacks or damage done on a specific guild within 24hrs. That way, when there is something like 10 or 15 guilds with alliance pacts they would be forced to attack each others to not run out of shards. There certainly is a better solution, but that is the best I could think of.
Quote:
Creatures
1) It is just simple - "we" do not need more new creatures - you don't either. I am still lacking 8 creatures from my collection.
I do think new creatures is a primordial need. Not because I have all of them, but because the meta needs to shift every once in a while. I basically stopped playing pvp about 2 years ago because of how monotonous it has become: everyone in the high tiers has been running the same dungeons and the same attack teams since forever. I remember a time when VCME would release a new legendary every month, and I feel it was a bare minimum. As a player, you want to try out new teams and synergies, and as a developer, you want to give incentive to the players to summon. That's how gacha games in general works, new creatures are released, players summon on the banners and some spend some money for it. I do not think we only need new legendary creatures though, but as well as new of all sizes, so the dungeons can evolve, the game can offer new strategies to explore, and of course there is also the collection aspect. On top of summons, these new creatures could also be gained through questing, at least a first copy and you can awaken it later with essences if you can resist the temptation of summoning.
____________
|
|
Garausis
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 23, 2020 11:05 PM |
|
Edited by Garausis at 23:21, 23 Jul 2020.
|
It is meant as reply for Galaad, even if I was too stupid to edit and add new quotes...
Quote:
Guild wars:
1) suppress informal alliances between guilds
Alternatively, shards gain formula may be changed to give less when attacking guilds significantly lower (say, 10 places) in the list.
There are some problems with mechanics how it works - many guilds on certain pages are not full and won't be, because for some people even 3 is a crowd. So, they won't compete for a Page 1, but they can get away with squeezing in some places where big cats are fighting and while they are tearing each others throats out, third much weaker guild will surpass those guilds, because it is not perceived as a threat - not always, as sometimes there is a chance to attract attention from bullies, who will attack weaker guilds, but that is a calculated risk to take into account.
League fighting would definitely end any alliances, but then there would be no reason to spend ~200 gems per day(and watch ads), if outcome of the battle will be known. Most of the income for VCME is from ad watching - sadly, but any major change that would diminish this factor, will impact income for this game in quickly changing mobile game world. So, there are no really good solutions here, but to band together and create new alternative alliance against current alliance. That has been a common solution in other games I have been playing before and that is the only way to end fun for those bullies - and the great side of this solution is that it is a choice that can be made by players, not something that is forced upon them. All the other "solutions" might just kill the game instantly.
So, deal with it and work on anti-alliance, if you are interested to change things there.
The main reason why gems diamonds are spent in PVP, is because diamond summoning is not efficient way to summon legendaries - the best way is to spend diamonds in guild wars and then you are guaranteed 100% legendary. That is another reason why people are actively attacking in PVP.
Quote:
Creatures
1) It is just simple - "we" do not need more new creatures - you don't either. I am still lacking 8 creatures from my collection.
I am not whining that I need more creatures, and I have not given consent for anyone to speak on my behalf, so the main emphasis was on usage of "we".
Besides, I have played CQ under 2 years, and I suppose there will be differences between more active players and even more for players who were playing longer, but I find unreasonable complain from player who is on the same level as me about the lack of creatures and do not have fully awakened team and not all of them are 4dot. I am also not complaining, that I am placed in a guild, that is receiving less from spoils of Guild Wars, but clearly I have made more progress in finishing my Castle and other buildings in the same time as Angren was playing. The numbers that I posted were not meant for bragging, but for inevitable future anyone will encounter, as those resources will pile up, as there is nowhere to spend them after everything is build up. Maybe it would be possible to use them to give temporary boost, but clearly there are diamonds for that.
The reason why CQ was giving out new creatures every month, was because it was a new game in development. At this stage it is enough to have 1 new creature per year to give other players chance to catch up and fill their ranks with these creatures. Elder Scrolls: Legends had a new card every month and frankly I was frustrated about that because I came to realize that there would be no way to get full collection without serious investment. Eventually Elder Scrolls: Legends crashed down and people left it for other more serious reasons - including people, who were frustrated about lack of new cards, because 1(and sometimes more) card per month was still not enough for them.
I would worry more about some bugs that are not fixed up for years, than lack of new creatures. My goals for CQ are clear to me - when I will gather all creatures, I will stop playing this game and do something else, because even if CQ is nicely done, there are many other similarly nice games to play and things to do. So, lack of new creatures is perfectly fine to me. I would rather see VCME releasing new game - better than CQ and then I would play that, but I would not be seriously depressed because of lack of new content for a 3 year old game on mobile market, that is already old content for mobile game, where things shift very quickly - including taste and memories of gamers.
____________
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 24, 2020 12:47 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Most of the income for VCME is from ad watching
I'm sorry but, how do you know that? Because I find it to be extremely unlikely.
My point was moreso that these types of games need regular new content to keep players interest. Most of the day one players are now gone, or like me mostly inactive in most sectors of the game. In the current game state, I think it has a longevity of around 2 years before a player loses interest, and in my opinion is a shame, because so much more could be done with this game. In comparison, the best sellers in this market release new cards every week and have big events at least once a month.
____________
|
|
Garausis
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 24, 2020 02:15 PM |
|
|
Galaad said:
Quote:
Most of the income for VCME is from ad watching
I'm sorry but, how do you know that? Because I find it to be extremely unlikely.
My point was moreso that these types of games need regular new content to keep players interest. Most of the day one players are now gone, or like me mostly inactive in most sectors of the game. In the current game state, I think it has a longevity of around 2 years before a player loses interest, and in my opinion is a shame, because so much more could be done with this game. In comparison, the best sellers in this market release new cards every week and have big events at least once a month.
Adsense gives 0.01-0.03$ per view, however AdMob is giving more earnings - probably up to 10x more.
Each player per day can watch ~10 ads. Adsense earnings from static ads would make 0.1$/per day, but with AdMob it can be around 1$ - maybe even more, as some of those videos are quite long and offer installation option. There is a room to calculate and someone who is developing and using AdMob or something similar on iPhone could tell even more precise numbers.
I have used real money to buy from store, and Google is taking share from that money, so it is ~50% that VCME would be getting from purchases - probably even less if things are bought from apple store and with ads I have definitely made more earnings for VCME, than by using money in buying anything in the store.
How do I know? I used ye ole google and reading skills.
Currently no new players for CQ is not because of lack of interest, but because:
1. there is not much advertisement going on
2. interest for this game was mainly from M&M series and most of the players have already played it from the beginning - I heard about it when it was being developed and did not thought much of it and only 2.5 years later I remembered that such game exists and started to play
3. thanks to the global chat, there seems to be another interest from a very young audience, that does not come from M&M
Whenever I am doing something, I am always calculating estimate how long that will last(because realistically everything has beginning and end) - basically how much time I would have an interest. Initially I was giving CQ 2 years, but I had a break from it, so this number has reset and it has now extended to 3 years. So, there is really clear estimations for me when I would lose interest and that has nothing to do with adding new content. You clearly do not know yourself and how your mind operates and can't calculate how long your interest will last and you are just trying to fool yourself, that it has anything to do with adding new content. New content is not going to make changes in game(there are already two main categories for more useful and less useful creatures) - it can only cause earlier breakdown for this crowd with packrat mentality.
____________
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 24, 2020 03:59 PM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 16:03, 24 Jul 2020.
|
I am not sure you realize how much some people are actually sinking -or willing to sink- in gacha games. I believe you, that, in your case, you give them more by watching ads, but 1% of total players are actually the ones supporting the game sufficiently for it to run. I understand VCME is also relying on ads as they lack players, and you are right about the lack of advertising or marketing strategy.
I cannot agree that new content does not make changes to the game. New creatures are released in order to shift to meta, and that makes changes to the game. Some units get powercrept, and you regularly need to adapt and change strategies depending on what is put on the table. I personally find it both exciting and refreshing. A long time ago, phoenix was king. Then it was Stegosaurus. Etc. In the last two years 90% of offensive teams are focused on mono white or dual white/red, or white/another color. Each core of dungeon defense is green and white nymphs.
I know many players want different things, and I don't have the pretension of thinking what I think is what is the best for everyone. I do have experience, had regular contact with developers back when they were open to openly discuss with players, and saw a common pattern among many, many players that had been affecting their experience negatively due to lack of new content.
Now, I am not saying, that releasing new content would fix all the problems, just that it is in my beliefs, that it has much more of an impact than you would think.
____________
|
|
Garausis
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted July 24, 2020 11:14 PM |
|
Edited by Garausis at 23:20, 24 Jul 2020.
|
Galaad said:
I am not sure you realize how much some people are actually sinking -or willing to sink- in gacha games. I believe you, that, in your case, you give them more by watching ads, but 1% of total players are actually the ones supporting the game sufficiently for it to run. I understand VCME is also relying on ads as they lack players, and you are right about the lack of advertising or marketing strategy.
I cannot agree that new content does not make changes to the game. New creatures are released in order to shift to meta, and that makes changes to the game. Some units get powercrept, and you regularly need to adapt and change strategies depending on what is put on the table. I personally find it both exciting and refreshing. A long time ago, phoenix was king. Then it was Stegosaurus. Etc. In the last two years 90% of offensive teams are focused on mono white or dual white/red, or white/another color. Each core of dungeon defense is green and white nymphs.
I know many players want different things, and I don't have the pretension of thinking what I think is what is the best for everyone. I do have experience, had regular contact with developers back when they were open to openly discuss with players, and saw a common pattern among many, many players that had been affecting their experience negatively due to lack of new content.
Now, I am not saying, that releasing new content would fix all the problems, just that it is in my beliefs, that it has much more of an impact than you would think.
The ad revenue would make from non-paying players about 30$(I might be wrong on this exact number, but that does not change anything that much) income per month. IMO, there are better options for decent MMO games with subscriptions, that does not cost that much. So, I doubt that anyone who is sinking that amount monthly(where only 50% or less is getting to VCME) and not watching ads are making more income to VCME, than non-paying crowd, who watches these ads, so I would argue against that only 1% is supporting game - it is also kinda insulting, that VIP levels mean something other than gesture from VCME. For example in M&M: Era of Chaos VIP levels were working for only one server(out of 80 - today that number can be bigger) and they meant something only for a short period of time, just right after gems were bought, so it was true gacha experience...
For all I know, mentality of people is one thing and what they think is another thing and I would trust less on what they say, if there is no replacement for CQ experience. Clearly Ubisoft M&M mobile games are not lasting as long as CQ, so there is something that is working fine with CQ, so why try to fix it?
I also find it slightly amusing, that this type of discussion about necessity of new creatures and quests reached peak exactly then when new creature and quest was added and that the loudest cries were coming from recent players, who started game around the same time as me. The only downside to this is that I start to get really annoyed by this childish behaviour display, as it gets too repetitive.
IMO if there is anything, that has to be done in CQ, then it is - adding something, that would allow to spend all those accumulated resources(specifically - gold) and would not impact newcomers. The best thing I can think of is hiring/summoning new temporarily companions - for specific usage and who would not break the game. Maybe even some new type of enhancement, which could be temporary. Hey, actually that wold be great idea, if someone would be able to use some creature that they lack for some time, before it vanishes, as there are many people complaining, that they can't summon that specific creature, but maybe there could be some rent option to get that creature for a hefty sum of 100 millions of gold for a month or something... hey - I would not mind to hire deevolved Radiant Feilong, just to take a glimpse of how it looked when it was younger.
____________
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 25, 2020 01:03 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 01:05, 25 Jul 2020.
|
Yeah, be in a guild where you get swag bag lvl 5 within literally 2mns and we talk again.  30 bucks a month? These people spend thousands a month. 
I'm not saying CQ needs fixing or is badly designed or anything of the sort, just that I've seen most of the biggest players drift away over time and know for a fact lack of new content was part of it. Come on, we're not even on one new card a year, and the grand wish quest was the only PvE addition in the span of two years... It's impressive the game is still alive in my opinion.
You don't mind, ok, but try to understand why others would.
____________
|
|
Kipshasz
Undefeatable Hero
Elvin's Darkside
|
|
posted August 07, 2020 08:47 AM |
|
|
yes, axe alliances and resume of pumping out new creatures on a regular basis.
and yes, people like cucks arcana spend money in the 4 digit sums at least on a monthly, if not weekly basis.
____________
"Kip is the Gavin McInnes of HC" - Salamandre
"Ashan to the Trashcan", "I got PTSD from H7. " - LizardWarrior
|
|
NimoStar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Modding the Unmoddable
|
|
posted September 12, 2020 03:13 AM |
|
|
Quote:
an lack of new creatures. My goals for CQ are clear to me - when I will gather all creatures, I will stop playing this game and do something else
seems like you just answered yourself why from a business perspective CQ does need new creatures
____________
|
| |
|
|
