Season of the Hare feels like Preseason 1

As Hare comes to an end today, thought I would share my thoughts as the next summit approaches.

As a player with my roster power, this season was not engaging at all. It was a straight up grind fest and was tested less than a handful of times. If you take the last 4 seasons you can see an alarming trend on requirement for top 100:

- P6 44k
- P7 46k
- P8 64k
- P9 95k
- Hare projected 105k

This is a huge concern to me, the competition has become more about time versus skill again. With time and resources winning this season. I take nothing away from @Dane @CryptKeeper @Stapedius @pupuer because these guys have proven their abilities beforehand. But it's terrible they feel they have to put in a 100 matches a day, or the equivalent of 4-7 hours of actual PVP gameplay to keep up. They can't be enjoying themselves, and if they are please share your perspective.

There needs to be a middle ground now, we have seen the transition from the million trophy counts P1 to current state where players compete against time and avoid tough matches to keep streaks alive.

Please continue doing the good work, the right work to find the right system. You have changed the game every week and tuned it to the players concerns and suggestions, I feel confident that as a community that our voices are being heard.

Make the next Season, "Season of the Wzang" the best one yet. Thanks
9gJSaHl.gif

Comments

  • Skip_HolmesSkip_Holmes Member
    edited April 19
    I agree with this. Something like 19 out of 20 "hard" matches for me are against teams in improved runes, level 67-69, non ideal PvP heroes (i.e. undead) or some combination of those traits. The match is over before it starts.

    Then, for the occasional match that's against someone of equal footing, if it isn't a team that I know for sure I will beat 100% of the time, I just wait out the hour for opponent refresh because it isn't worth losing the streak. This is a shame because I see new and interesting teams that I'd love to experiment fighting with different lineups, but the streak system makes it soooo costly to try, so I just never do.

    I recognize other player levels might have different experiences, but for top 100, it's simply become a game of "how many auto win matches am I willing to grind out each day, using the same one or two team setups so I don't waste time having to switch around heroes." Just throwing out ideas, but how about something where the first X (30?) raids of each day count towards getting in the top 100, and any matches you do after that are used to determine rank within top 100. That way, there is still incentive for top end players to do tons of matches and vie for first place, but there's also a "cap" on the boring/unchallenging grind of getting to top 100.

  • kpung07kpung07 Member
    I agree that it's way too grindy at the moment and skill is pretty much out the window. I think once you hit the Legend tiers there should be no more easy or medium options.
    6446728
  • Alecat97Alecat97 Member
    edited April 19
    The problem is that a player in legend I tier can find the same defenses he can find in Warlord III tier.In my opinion a middle way between matchmaking before and after the last pvp update would be good.Legend I should be harder then Legend II,Legend II should be harder then Legend III and so on,but without changing the last improvment as the E/M/H choices and trying to keep the diversity that pvp now offer.
  • The top 100 is the problem, the system is creating even more imbalance with each passing season and creating a grind fest for those willing to participate. Needing to earn 15k honor a day to stay in the top 100 is not sustainable long term and will burn players out.

    One solution would be to place a cap on the amount of honor a player can earn in a day or the number of matches they can participate in. Also stop giving the top 100 double runes. They should get the best rune but double adds to the power imbalance experientially and is creating the need to earn 15k plus honor each day.
  • RexobRexob Member
    edited April 19
    It's important to point out that P6 & 7 probably had some of the lowest participation. Meanwhile 9 & Hare are experiencing a large increase in since PvP is more accessible. PS9 I found my Hard options to generally be "hard", with the recent tweaks Hard falls more in line with "Advanced Medium" if that makes any sense - I may actually have to change my lineup, but giving little thought to strategy / skill.

    The real question becomes - what model & balancing generates the most consistent player participation & enjoyment and $$$. Before the overhaul I would easily buy Ella's Honor a few times a week, then I almost quit the game entirely only logging in for daily rewards & maybe a quick auto-run. Since P9, I'm back to buying Ella's Honor and even Gems again b/c the game is fun again, and largely in part b/c I can compete for the Top 100.

    Personally, I don't mind raiding 50-75 a day; it's why I play DB.
    Post edited by Rexob on
    IGN & Line: N00BST4R
    Mauling Ogres Lv70
  • I was thinking about the "grind" issue this morning. I was doing my morning routine and thinking about how I had another top 100 locked in but the after thought was "How long can you keep on doing this". And that's coming from someone on the lower end of the grind time. It's exhausting! But feels necessary in order to "keep up".
  • RexobRexob Member
    edited April 19
    @Skip_Holmes I like the concept of the idea, but when would that begin...? P9 I climbed from Champ 3 to a Top 50 finish and played 550 Raids. The Trophy gains aren't as great in lower Leagues, and if a player is restricted to the first 30 or even 50 Raids they may never actually even get to Legend depending on where they started.

    Maybe Hard needs finer tweaking and/or trophies, but players willing to raid more will have an advantage.
    IGN & Line: N00BST4R
    Mauling Ogres Lv70
  • wzangwzang Member
    i would enjoy the idea of being able to take a break from PVP grind without the consequence of beating demoted/punished. That's what it feels like

    Why should 10 seasons of consistent performance be outweighed by 1 season
    9gJSaHl.gif
  • FoozleFoozle Member
    I think Top 100 will always be a grind no matter what they do, unless they put a cap on # of raids, which I'm sure they will never do. If they make harder, then perhaps you won't see as many raids in total, but the raids will be more painful (like they were in past seasons). I think I like the way it is now, as it opens up Legend 1 to many more players and allows them to at least get the Legend 1 rune, so they won't fall as far behind as they were previously when even Legend 1 was out of reach for many. It also helps in terms of quest completion for events, since previously if you were in Legend 1 it was nearly impossible to beat teams using the limitation put on you by quests.

    No perfect answer, but I think they are heading in the right direction.
  • wzangwzang Member
    Rexob wrote: »
    It's important to point out that P6 & 7 probably had some of the lowest participation. Meanwhile 9 & Hare are experiencing a large increase in since PvP is more accessible. PS9 I found my Hard options to generally be "hard", with the recent tweaks Hard falls more in line with "Advanced Medium" if that makes any sense - I may actually have to change my lineup, but giving little thought to strategy / skill.

    The real question becomes - what model & balancing generates the most consistent player participation & enjoyment and $$$. Before the overhaul I would easily buy Ella's Honor a few times a week, then I almost quit the game entirely only logging in for daily rewards & maybe a quick auto-run. Since P9, I'm back to buying Ella's Honor and even Gems again b/c the game is fun again, and largely in part b/c I can compete for the Top 100.

    Personally, I don't mind raiding 50-75 a day; it's why I play DB.

    This is awesome you are enjoying the game. Your perspective was shared by me once before about 16 months ago, when it felt great to invest and exciting to break into unknown territory.

    My connection is more social nowadays and about maintaining my work.
    9gJSaHl.gif
  • RexobRexob Member
    edited April 19
    Idt the Devs can please everyone...you have players like me that don't quite have perfect rosters or Runes, but I'll Raid endlessly. However, the minute there's a "cap" to how much I can play - why bother. I know I'm not the best, but it also means I've raided a little over 950 times between two weeks to secure a Top 100 spot.

    Most players who've raided that much have placed significantly higher.
    IGN & Line: N00BST4R
    Mauling Ogres Lv70
  • RexobRexob Member
    edited April 19
    @wzang I can appreciate that - I honestly do, but I usually spend 3-4hrs a night playing now bc it's what I enjoy; I don't watch tv, read, or play any other games. Players have to decide their priorities both in game and real life. That said - players who can prioritize more time to the game are going to have that advantage now that the barrier to entry has been lowered.

    I'm not even sure how long I plan to maintain my T100 finishes, and I'm fine knowing that if I'm not willing to put forth the same effort as others than I shouldn't be there. Look at the competition for #1...idt it would matter how the system changed when two ppl are willing to play a combined total of over 3k Raids...
    IGN & Line: N00BST4R
    Mauling Ogres Lv70
  • Rexob wrote: »
    @wzang I can appreciate that - I honestly do, but I usually spend 3-4hrs a night playing now bc it's what I enjoy; I don't watch tv, read, or play any other games. Players have to decide their priorities both in game and real life. That said - players who can prioritize more time to the game are going to have that advantage now that the barrier to entry has been lowered.

    I'm not even sure how long I plan to maintain my T100 finishes, and I'm fine knowing that if I'm not willing to put forth the same effort as others than I shouldn't be there. Look at the competition for #1...idt it would matter how the system changed when two ppl are willing to play a combined total of over 3k Raids...

    I agree with these thoughts. @wzang I understand that your perspective of the game has changed to the point where you like the social aspect of it more, and are putting your job/career first (as we all should be right?).

    That being said, does the game need to change to be able to cater to your new perspective of it? If you are now a "casual" player, should you still be deserving of top rewards if you aren't or can't put in the same amount of time? I think that is a general question that is brought up from time to time in any F2P/pay-to-win type game.

    However, that doesn't mean the devs can't change the overall grind for top rewards to make it better for everyone, and maybe that's what you're trying to get at.
  • wzangwzang Member
    Thanks guys for the feedback. The PVP game needs an identity and it just doesn't have one. If it were meant to be grind fest that's fine, however the feedback and adjustments are based on keeping it competitive and this isn't that.

    You have two players slugging it out because they committed and aren't going to allow that effort go out without a fight. However let's be truthful here, if they were playing top 100 defenses we could possibly have a clear winner here and not who can spend more resources than the other and whose keeping their eyes open with spreaders.

    A playoff system would be fun, but that's a whole new thread. Maybe the top 2 get to play against developer defenses and best of seven takes the title. That could turn into a streaming event and draw a lot of interest and insight
    9gJSaHl.gif
  • FoozleFoozle Member
    wzang wrote: »
    Thanks guys for the feedback. The PVP game needs an identity and it just doesn't have one. If it were meant to be grind fest that's fine, however the feedback and adjustments are based on keeping it competitive and this isn't that.

    You have two players slugging it out because they committed and aren't going to allow that effort go out without a fight. However let's be truthful here, if they were playing top 100 defenses we could possibly have a clear winner here and not who can spend more resources than the other and whose keeping their eyes open with spreaders.

    A playoff system would be fun, but that's a whole new thread. Maybe the top 2 get to play against developer defenses and best of seven takes the title. That could turn into a streaming event and draw a lot of interest and insight

    I like the idea of playing set developer defenses. Instead of the just the top 2, though, perhaps if you end up in the Top 10 or Top X you play a set # of matches as you suggest and best record wins.
  • wzangwzang Member
    Foozle wrote: »
    wzang wrote: »
    Thanks guys for the feedback. The PVP game needs an identity and it just doesn't have one. If it were meant to be grind fest that's fine, however the feedback and adjustments are based on keeping it competitive and this isn't that.

    You have two players slugging it out because they committed and aren't going to allow that effort go out without a fight. However let's be truthful here, if they were playing top 100 defenses we could possibly have a clear winner here and not who can spend more resources than the other and whose keeping their eyes open with spreaders.

    A playoff system would be fun, but that's a whole new thread. Maybe the top 2 get to play against developer defenses and best of seven takes the title. That could turn into a streaming event and draw a lot of interest and insight

    I like the idea of playing set developer defenses. Instead of the just the top 2, though, perhaps if you end up in the Top 10 or Top X you play a set # of matches as you suggest and best record wins.

    Instead of runes make it resource based too for best record. The idea of playing developers is a huge win and reward
    9gJSaHl.gif
  • RexobRexob Member
    At this point I think we need at least another Season or two to accurately assess how competitive the T100 will be. I'm not opposed to adjusting matchmaking, rewards, a playoff etc, but I generally feel like players are very excited and coming back to PvP who may have stockpiled RTs thus inflating the necessary trophies for the most recent seasons. To kind of reiterate something Mattcauthron mentioned - how long will players be willing to raiding at this level?
    IGN & Line: N00BST4R
    Mauling Ogres Lv70
  • itirnitiiitirnitii Member
    edited April 19
    I agree the grind is intense. I am having trouble just doing 150k trophies out of sheer boredom, I can't image doing triple that like dane and crypt. I know they are definitely more motivated though.

    I agree this format is probably better overall because it is more accessible to more people. But it's new again, and people are able to gain more trophies now than before, so lots more people are investing more time. Give it a while and it will dwindle.

    I find myself being so bored though that I can't even motivate myself to change teams half the time. I just click zen/rocky/koros/emily every time, even if it's sub-optimal, and hope for the best. It's lazy I know, it's a bad habit, and it's lost me quite a few games.

    It's basically reminiscent of the zen/kozar days where nobody ever changes teams and you just spammed gems.
  • Well to be fair anything above 100th is grinding for prestige as the rewards aren't even close to worth the effort. The only REAL reward is the rune. The only reason I finish higher is because I'm incredibly risk adverse and try to give myself a very wide margin from 100th.

    It would appear the top 100 grind is really 100k trophies. As I'm sitting at 113k, I can say this is still a pretty significant however! (I ended last night with a 25k lead on 100th so that has diminished considerably)
  • oredithoredith Member
    from the other end of the spectrum (ie, casual), i have completely given up on pvp, even with the E/M/H choices.

    I don't know if it's a general stagnation of pvp from people who are not at the very top, but i'm constantly being matched up against lvl 63-64 MK's that are literally blowing through kobal and destroying my entire team while diseased. without the tool in my arsenal of DR emily, i have no counter.

    I am simply doing my 3 pvp matches a day and working on raising the epic level of heroes very very slowly.

    pvp is pretty much dead for me.
    soon™ - it's the answer to everything
  • oredith wrote: »
    from the other end of the spectrum (ie, casual), i have completely given up on pvp, even with the E/M/H choices.

    I don't know if it's a general stagnation of pvp from people who are not at the very top, but i'm constantly being matched up against lvl 63-64 MK's that are literally blowing through kobal and destroying my entire team while diseased. without the tool in my arsenal of DR emily, i have no counter.

    I am simply doing my 3 pvp matches a day and working on raising the epic level of heroes very very slowly.

    pvp is pretty much dead for me.

    MK is perfectly balanced. You simply have not yet figured out how to counter him /s
  • oredithoredith Member
    MK is perfectly balanced. You simply have not yet figured out how to counter him /s
    i understand that there are a lot of slow levelers who have really powerful characters, but really, at lvl 70, seeing a lvl 64 MK with 6 stars is not uncommon, nor the 6k+ power.

    it's just really frustrating seeing a lvl 64 MK kill my epic 12 kobal (with def boost from astrid), and then, while diseased, crit 2x against shade and take him out, take my SB down to ~10%, and kill astrid (+ defense to casters, so op.. -_-). the final insult, my lvl 70 6 star epic 10 SB gets dodged against the lvl 64 MK..
    soon™ - it's the answer to everything
  • wzang wrote: »
    As Hare comes to an end today, thought I would share my thoughts as the next summit approaches.

    As a player with my roster power, this season was not engaging at all. It was a straight up grind fest and was tested less than a handful of times. If you take the last 4 seasons you can see an alarming trend on requirement for top 100:

    - P6 44k
    - P7 46k
    - P8 64k
    - P9 95k
    - Hare projected 105k

    This is a huge concern to me, the competition has become more about time versus skill again. With time and resources winning this season. I take nothing away from @Dane @CryptKeeper @Stapedius @pupuer because these guys have proven their abilities beforehand. But it's terrible they feel they have to put in a 100 matches a day, or the equivalent of 4-7 hours of actual PVP gameplay to keep up. They can't be enjoying themselves, and if they are please share your perspective.

    There needs to be a middle ground now, we have seen the transition from the million trophy counts P1 to current state where players compete against time and avoid tough matches to keep streaks alive.

    Please continue doing the good work, the right work to find the right system. You have changed the game every week and tuned it to the players concerns and suggestions, I feel confident that as a community that our voices are being heard.

    Make the next Season, "Season of the Wzang" the best one yet. Thanks

    Well stated and I agree wholeheartedly with all you've mentioned and couldn't have said it better myself. Season of the Hare was just that ... fast paced and a road race. That said, it's not a sustainable model for the Community (self included). Cheers!
  • itirnitii wrote: »

    ...

    I find myself being so bored though that I can't even motivate myself to change teams half the time. I just click zen/rocky/koros/emily every time, even if it's sub-optimal, and hope for the best. It's lazy I know, it's a bad habit, and it's lost me quite a few games.

    ...

    I also did this all season. That team easily made up 95-97% of all my raids. The matches were all so uninspiring that I couldn't be bothered with finding my other heroes on the recently shuffled up hero selection grid (the rabbit addition moved everyone, again..).

    Hopefully a balance can be found soon. Sadly at this point I was having more fun with the challenge of the top 25 players seeing each other over and over and over again. What that system lacked in variety it made up for in challenge.
  • Yah.. I got burned this season thinking being 10k above 100th place with 12 hours to go was enough to not waste wins to stay in top 100.. lost by hundreds because of lack of time (and work, arg).

    I don't mind the grind. Its just so inconsistent to pace - between how much to pvp, to what meta is going to change this season.


    At least with guild crowns... you can pay your dues and be rewarded.


    I got worst case scenario.. grinded for top 100 only to fall short at the end.. I could have saved hundreds of gems to just hit legendary 1 and quit. Oh wellz... lesson learned this season, which will mostly likely change again next season.

  • danacdanac Member
    wzang wrote: »
    Thanks guys for the feedback. The PVP game needs an identity and it just doesn't have one. If it were meant to be grind fest that's fine, however the feedback and adjustments are based on keeping it competitive and this isn't that.

    You have two players slugging it out because they committed and aren't going to allow that effort go out without a fight. However let's be truthful here, if they were playing top 100 defenses we could possibly have a clear winner here and not who can spend more resources than the other and whose keeping their eyes open with spreaders.

    A playoff system would be fun, but that's a whole new thread. Maybe the top 2 get to play against developer defenses and best of seven takes the title. That could turn into a streaming event and draw a lot of interest and insight

    Mostly disagree.
    I think the matchmaking is mostly okay for those who want to finish in legendary 1 each season. Especially if they're going to keep the requirement at 20k a week to do that [minimum].
    you want to face harder teams for that, then make it less than 20k.

    Top 100 is different, but it *should* be different It *should* be more of a grind.
    I can see making that grind more challenging, to reduce the number of matches needed to win, but a.Most of the people in the top 100 will not find it *that* much more difficult, and boring grinding against easy teams will be replaced by thought provoking grinding against some harder teams.
    and b., changing that up will likely just lead to the last few preseasons wherein the top players were complaining that they were facing the same defenses over and over.

    So maybe just a bit more tweaking in matchmaking when people hit the legendary one tier.
    Maybe give a med and 2 hards and instead of e/m/h.


Sign In or Register to comment.

© 2015 Big Fish Games. Inc., Big Fish, the Big Fish logo, and Dungeon Boss are
trademarks of Big Fish Games, Inc., used with permission www.bigfishgames.com