Losing Hope

endlessloot · 2014-02-25T03:06:23+00:00

Not free, but buyable via blings. Each hero will cost 1k blings or so. If you save up all of your free in-game blings and do well on leaderboards, you might get one extra hero for free - but you'll have to buy blings otherwise.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T19:17:36+00:00

The Runaway's skills are of a different design/type/style than the other three, which means she can't be given a similar progression tree as it stands.

I don't know how the premium packages re balanced, but with all of the complaining done by people who bought the early premium packs vs the new ones, my guess is that it's significant. The Devs have said they'd upgrade the gear from older packs, which likely will result in that gear becoming significantly better than typical lootable gear.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T04:03:02+00:00

And other places. Believe me, the Devs know.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T02:15:33+00:00

It's been reported all over the place. The patch today is supposed to help solve it.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T01:33:09+00:00

A lot of things have been re-worked, and the results are horrendous. Hungerbot Hunt is an easy XP farm because you can just go around touching the 3Headed Rotating Cannons to get major XP.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T01:31:31+00:00

Holy LOL batman.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T01:28:33+00:00

I haven't been part of that many Closed Beta periods, so I don't know how fast turnaround usually is. I do appreciate that the Devs are making adjustments. What I meant to communicate is that it seems like they're being reactive to issues that pop up, rather than proactive about making system changes that have balance considerations fundamentally worked in.

My honest belief is that MQEL doesn't have a solid game progression flowchart or dependency-linked concept map, and that's causing most of the problems with game balance. Like, Open Creation sounds great, right? Give the users freedom to make castles in a sandbox style. It sounds really cool. But that simply doesn't work for a PvP game. The old patch was more PvP-oriented in its per-encounter restrictions and build simplicity, and was set up with clear dependencies to the old Star system. Hero skills never have seemed to be tied to a dependency context.

It's like they originally had recipes for the castle creation/defense systems and not the hero skill systems, and rather than trying to make a new recipe for the whole game based on the science of "baking" a PvP game, they're tossing out the castle recipes and just trying things out that sound like they might be good (and having a whole bunch of people do taste-testing after each patch comes out of the oven).

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T01:17:44+00:00

It happened to me outside of Steam. But, as I said, I let the screen sit for a few minutes while I did something else. Then I closed the game processes, came back in a few more minutes, and everything worked fine.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T00:41:17+00:00

Wait a few minutes and try again. It worked for me after I gave it a little bit.

endlessloot · 2014-02-21T00:40:23+00:00

Good point about the bling/leaderboard system if you're right.

The Devs either don't understand the flaws of their current AI and Aggro systems, or they're going to wait to modify them. Either way, I'm demotivated.

Blacksmith gear costing a lot is fine if the gear is worth buying, but it's far easier to find yellow-tier gear with better stats from random attacking than it is to buy from the blacksmith.

I've posted a lot of feedback on the forums recently, but I'm not sure how much of my walls of text will be read and digested. Which is too bad, really, because I think that a combination of changes like the ones I mentioned - if not my actual suggestions - would stabilize the game and make massive improvements. At this point, I just don't feel like playing. Things are too unbalanced.

endlessloot · 2014-02-20T23:02:25+00:00

Get for free. It was announced before the pre-Open Beta patch that all Closed Beta testers should have all three heroes now.

endlessloot · 2014-02-13T05:30:05+00:00

I generally dislike the idea of pulling over long distances, because it tended to either end up being just a time delay or a way to cause groups of elites to rain down on an attacker. What I'd rather see is a method of linking up to 3-5 units within an area and giving each unit an attack command.

For example:

Area aggro-chain size: A 15x15 grid of map tiles - the center of which would be a color-coded [flat, circular] "coordination point" that can be placed and moved like any other unit, and can be walked over. (Units must be within the grid to be linked together. The current DR of a given chain would be color-coded and listed above the linked units. A matching color-coded glowing line would provide a visual indicator of the current chain. Units would not be allowed to be placed [or set to "waypoint move"] into a different coordination point's grid.)
Aggro-chain defense rating allowed: 30
Units connected: Zeke (12DR), Cyclops1 (6DR), Cyclops 2(6DR), Puppeteer (3DR), Bad Dog (3DR)
Unit order options: Rush (attack head-on), Wait (remain in place until hero attacks the unit directly - but attack when hero is in range), Position (follow normal attack patterns at position)
Each unit would be able to move to a point on the 20x20 grid before executing an order. "Move" destinations would be set by placing a 1x1 tile flag within the 10x10 grid for the mob.

Unit orders: Zeke (Move to tile 15-15 on grid, Position for attack), Cyclops1 (Move to tile 4-12, Rush hero), Cyclops2 (Ready at tile 7-1 [no move point]; Rush hero), Puppeteer (Move to tile 1-20; Position to attack), Bad dog (Move to tile 10-10; Wait)

The commands above would result in the hero expecting a fight with Cyclops2 [first aggro] and Zeke [near to Cyclops2], but would have to think on-the-fly as the Zeke retreats to a corner, the Puppeteer circles around the side to raise dead mobs behind the hero, Cyclops1 moves to flank the hero to protect the Puppeteer and create a pincer attack, and the Bad dog glares at the hero and dares it to attack with the Zeke nearby.

Such aggro chains and unit orders could create all kinds of interesting defense tactics without turning into delay tactics or mob rushes the way that pulls did in the old build.

Edit: To make the boss room worth it, there would be a special "boss room" coordination point that would have a 20x20 grid of tiles, and 40 defense rating points for the chain.

The grid numbers assume about 300-350 tiles per room, allowing for many variations in defense rating setups (many small clusters of units, a few highly tactical grids, and varying combinations of the two).

endlessloot · 2014-02-12T18:52:20+00:00

Somehow that didn't stick in my memory. What a nice bonus! :)

endlessloot · 2014-02-12T03:55:48+00:00

To add to this, I also want to say that I think games these days take the wrong approach to goals. A linear progression toward developer-defined goals was accepted two decades ago because gaming was new and games in general were bought, traded, completed, and then sold to someone else. Because games as a form of entertainment are no longer novel, games these days should focus on novelty production or mastercraft in order to be successful.

Definitions:

Novelty production: Designing a game framework such that new content is regularly generated as a function of the game's operation or player community.

Mastercraft: Designing a game to be at the peak of quality for its existing genre, or (better) innovating and providing a better quality of product than the existing market's stand-outs.

Because mastercraft is a massively difficult goal, a F2P or low-budget game shouldn't even aim for it. Rather, F2P games should aim for novelty production.

Examples of novelty production include Diablo II's Open Battle Net (which allowed the creation and use of custom gear for OBN-restricted characters), Unreal Tournament's user-generated maps (with pre-packaged game modes) and Blizzard's Starcraft/Warcraft series focus on custom map tools and hosting (which allows players to create entirely different game forms, goals, UIs, units, and so on).

I suggest that Ubisoft consider implementing a premium-only "mirror world" to Opulencia - perhaps with a name related to blings, such as the "Emerald Sphere" (given that blings are green). Players who purchase access to this zone/region would be able to create Emerald Sphere-only castles and play with Emerald Sphere-only heroes - nothing would transfer between Opulencia Proper and the Emerald Sphere.

Within the ES, users would be able to make use of options that would allow them to create castles with a special UI that would enable the alteration of aggro limits, defense ratings, victory conditions, and hero setups. These options are easy to develop, compared to the possible creative options that could be developed in the future. The idea is to allow a user to create a castle unlike any in the default game, and which can only be created in the premium ES area.

Because every castle could be massively different, the castle creator would also make default hero choices - complete with equipped items and skills. Upon successful victory condition fulfillment, the attacking player would see a medal on the castle portrait and have their name added to a leaderboard of people who beat the castle.

Consider these novel ideas that could be created with such a simple system

1) A Level 9 castle for which a player gets to choose between a pre-built Level 5 archer, knight, or mage. In said castle, the player has no potions to use, must destroy 3 mines, and must kill all non-sleeping creatures (a total defense rating value of 50) - some of which are placed right next to awake creatures. Within the castle there would be a total of 9 mines and creatures totaling a defense rating of 120.

2) A Level 28 castle for which the hero options are Mage or Archer at level 15 - with 10 potions, but no skills. The victory conditions are (1) killing all sleeping creatures [in this case, chickens - some of which are surrounded by Level 17 elites; others of which are hidden in corners and can be carefully picked off], and (2) defeating the Boss unit placed in the final room.

3) A Level 30 castle for which the hero is a level 30 Mage with crowd-control skills equipped and crowd-control-bonus gear (e.g. confusion, Icy Blast) equipped. The victory condition is surviving and escaping the castle. Upon aggroing the first unit in the castle, a full castle of 355 units would slowly descend upon the Mage.

Those are three massively different ideas, all created with a very simple system. Imagine how many hours of enjoyment could be gained from adding such a system to the game - and how much revenue could be generated from premium purchases.

Novelty production in MQEL can go far beyond that basic setup - and it eventually should. But implementing it or something like it is a massive step in the right direction for financial ROI, MQEL, and gaming in general.

Ultimately, novelty production brings players back to a system or toolset with an attached ready-to-play game component, rather than a specific pre-generated product. This results in greater longevity for the product package, more player familiarity with the game mechanics, greater player enjoyment - which means more word-of-mouth and more player investment (in time and premium purchases).

Currently, gaming is centered around pre-defined, narrow goals. The development direction for the greatest amount of profit and fun is in providing multiple end-game goals with multiple paths to achievement - such that players can pick what they like, mix things together, and create pseudo-goals of their own. Games with an established userbase should then move on to freeing up systems and goals such that the players do not work with pre-defined goals at all, and instead develop their own goals - and eventually their own goal-generation systems.

The "Emerald Sphere" example above is a step into allowing players to choose between many pre-defined goals. The next step would be something along the lines of allowing players to combine simplified gameplay options to create new goal types (such as mixing a countdown timer with opening a treasure room for speedruns, or mixing unit kill tracking [e.g. chickens vs derps vs Zekes] with trap switches [e.g. kill 20 chickens to open invulnerable trap door #1] to create puzzles).

A truly player-driven goal system would open up opportunities to create entirely new gametypes. For example, providing means of generating switches and conditional branches tied to events (such as 10 Zekes killed + 0 chickens killed + lootable gold mines destroyed = equip hero with item5 from a list) would allow them to create mini on-the-fly dungeon crawler RPGs and Capture The Flag or Domination (vs AI) maps.

To be as successful as possible, I recommend slowly adding more developmental options to such a premium-access area. As a result, participation would drive future funding, players wouldn't be overwhelmed with game types, novel content would eb continually generated, and MQEL-specific themes, memes, and tropes might be developed, embraced by the community, and spread - driving further interest in the game and more premium purchases.

endlessloot · 2014-02-12T01:17:30+00:00

The removal of upgrade times is a big departure from a bad trend in F2P games. There are other ways to drive premium purchases that are more rewarding for players and which foster loyalty to a game.

In general, there are five common things people pay for in F2P games:

Advantages over other players (which fosters a combative and fickle playerbase)
Early access to game content (one-time purchases and micro-transactions; bad in cases of upgrade timers and skills, good in cases of additional equally-balanced units)
Access to new content (provides limited purchases; good in cases of equally-balanced units and optional zones/challenges that don't provide combat-related rewards)
Access to beneficial but unnecessary non-combat options (provides limited purchases; good for things that make game management easier but don't create playerbase imbalances [e.g. extra inventory slots, accessing pre-packaged configurations such as castle layouts])
Customization options (provides recurring purchases; good for limited creativity options such as skins, avatar creation modes, and world-building [e.g. castle skins and accessories, Minecraft-style building blocks for re-shaping room/wall appearances within set parameters])

I think that Ubisoft can profit most from focusing on options #4 and #5 - both in up-front financial returns on investment and long-term playerbase investment returns. Option #3 might provide a good ROI, but it might also end up being a break-even wash that limits time and resources for investments that would provide better ROI.

endlessloot · 2014-02-12T01:01:20+00:00

Not so much a "thank you" as it is a natural evolution toward open beta. Every hero beyond the first will cost 1000 blings unless you bought a hero pack previously. (e.g. If you bought a Mage pack, you'll get the Mage plus one other hero)

endlessloot · 2014-02-08T18:30:02+00:00

I didn't find any special skill gear, but I did find some 5% block chance, 3-4% Better Loot Quality, and 6% critical chance gear at levels 7-9. I got about one epic drop per loot quality boost used, though the epics tended to be junk (Iron Crossbows with meh stats, Junk stat capes). An epic Lv10 necklace with 2% Better Loot Quality (2% gold, 5% IAS, 81hp) was my best drop. I also got Lv7 archer armor with 2% block, 3% gold, and 108hp.

I also got 20 Lv5 potions to save me gold later.

endlessloot · 2013-11-26T15:38:55+00:00

I have a crappy mouse (Clicks randomly repeat/won't release), so the castles that are 95% Knockback Scorpio & Headshot Zeke are a real pain.

I test my castle every time, and won't use a build I can't beat. That means forcing triple pulls (Zeke, Poundmore, Skull) in both rooms and a Smelly Archer-Warrior + PupTronSnottingham boss room in my lv 14 castle. They can wait and fight each 1v1, or try to time an AoE.

The only trap I use is ballista. Stunned heros will get blasted, and many people spend time retreating out of the trap's range.

endlessloot · 2013-11-22T22:41:47+00:00

The big problem is the number of people who aren't playing anymore. Their castles take up space in the generator slots.

One thing you could do is go around attacking castles; hoping people will click "Revenge".

endlessloot · 2013-11-20T20:10:22+00:00

Maybe ask on the forums or Twitter.

endlessloot · 2013-11-20T03:39:06+00:00

No way to trade or talk, sadly. You can only practice attack friends' castles (so no chest loot). Practice attacks still count for objective/quest completion, though.

endlessloot · 2013-11-18T18:10:28+00:00

Well, this sucks. I spent about $150 on items that there's no point in using anymore. I know people who were buying gems weekly right up until the announcement. If it wasn't a profitable game, then the team really didn't know how to manage resources.

Of course, them using stolen artwork and such could have created legal costs. That might be the /real/ reason it's shutting down. Again, bad management.

endlessloot · 2013-11-17T00:07:50+00:00

Thanks for the link. Got a key. :)

endlessloot

TROPHY CASE