Game Update Preview - Rune Improvements

124

Comments

  • @Joel @Joveth

    Thanks for the update. Can we get a minor change to the former reroll quests so they say "tune" instead of reroll, because OCD.

    Thanks.
    #NotMyPresident
  • GalakSS wrote: »

    You want a simple fix that does not screw the little guy but still helps the whale .... DB should have done this:
    GREATER RUNES:
    1st re-roll: 5
    2nd re-roll: 15
    3rd re-roll: 35
    4th re-roll: 75
    5th re-roll through 12th re-roll: 85

    That would create the (roughly) same total for 12 re-rolls (tunes) that they currently have for set up WITHOUT completely hammering the non-whale player.

    Nice post @GalakSS, well thought-out and reasonable. Hopefully this will be taken into consideration and provide a needed improvement to the new rune crafting system. I am the same as others and would only reroll 3-4 times before giving up. So, like many others, the cost has actually increased for me with the recent changes. I do like the overall concept of the changes, and believe there are definite improvements there, but the cost is still too much.

    Gems are a precious resource in the game and this is the one aspect of the game where you potentially get absolutely nothing in return for using them. That, in and of itself, has been a problem for me since rune crafting was introduced. At least allow another means of paying for rerolls/tuning. Hammers would seems to be the most obvious choice for this as they have no use once a player reaches level 70. Gold could be another means, but hammers make more sense to me. At any tune/reroll level, one could choose to use either to pay via gems or hammers at the corresponding price.

    Could be something like this:
    1st tune: 50 hammers
    2nd tune: 100 hammers
    3rd tune: 250 hammers
    4th tune: 500 hammers
    5th+ tune: 1000 hammers

    Would anyone agree with these numbers? Too much, too little? Hammers just seem like such a natural fit to be a resource to pay for crafting. I know it is very wishful thinking, but just wanted to get the idea out there.
  • DrocasDrocas Member
    edited November 2016
    Thanks Joveth, now if shade didn't cost 8k in gems to finally show up i would be happy (dam Rng!). That being said you guys have been generous with recent events in addition i personally love how you guys listen to the players :).
    The EMPIRE :: The Aegis of Athena
    KuK1uXt.png
  • @Joveth

    First I want to thank you and @Joel on behalf of all the players for listening to us and letting us know our concerns are heard.

    Change... well, it's scary. And while I may be a newbie to DB, it's a pretty universal sentiment that we get comfortable with consistency and when our routine, such as crafting runes, gets modified, it's our natural response to say the old way was better.

    That said, I think you guys did do a great job of taking steps in the right direction to making rune crafting more reliable.

    I'll echo the sentiments from other posters, however. The biggest concern is the first craft of a rune is almost always an uncommon. It has two stats and a completely unknown third. Until a patch to stats balancing them closer (making +dmg% closer to +atk, removing resist, etc); there will always be a prohibitive feeling towards spending the first few gem rolls at a higher initial investment only to discover the 3rd stat is terrible.

    The overall cost is lower, which is awesome. I can see from a business prospective that by making the gem cost flat, you do encourage more gem usage, which is good for business and sorta good for players. But I think a common ground needs to be found between the two.

    @GalakSS really hits the point - if you can make the first few rolls 1/2 price, and raise the final price of the remaining rolls to compensate, you'll have a balance that I think everyone will be happy with. Or happier. Can't please everyone.



  • While I do appreciate the update to runes, it now seems the better part of last 6-8 months have been devoted to launching and then updating runes/epics while there are quite a number of other important things that really need to be addressed. Hopefully you guys haven't put those items completely on the back burner and have been moving forward with a pvp update, guild update, hero balancing (I'm looking at those dwarves) and other issues and we can expect some info in the near future maybe?
  • Guys it's all about the $$$ no matter what they say that's why they changed the portals and I'm positive that they were perfectly aware that people were no longer going past 4 rerolls...so their thought lets package this in a way that makes people think we are helping them....lowering the cost greater runes through max rolls by about 300 gems and keeping superiors very close to the same...while promising improvements...but you hit it on the head...with the change of one reroll being worth the first 3 previously. Biggest problem with this is hunting runes with specific stats...if I wanted a double attack rune in the past I didn't mind spending 5-15 gems to get it to rare to see thoese stats...but now if I roll an uncommon I have to spend way more gems just to see if I want to roll further or scrap...this adds up over time fast

    I agree, ultimately it is always about the money and DB isn't any different. However, that doesn't mean that they can't also include changes/updates that benefit both their pockets and the player base. I think the rune system change is providing some level of improvement, but it's also clear their goal was to make us spend more gems overall.

    So yeah, maybe the original system was too generous where 5, 10, 35 gems weren't expensive at all, but 65 each roll only to find out if we have a crappy rune or not definitely IS not friendly to the player base. I think there is a good compromise that someone else posted, where the first couple rolls were reduced, and then ramps up to a flat gem cost.
  • Joveth wrote: »
    Hey everyone, thanks so much for the excitement and welcome reception that our general game update has received. Our goal with these improvements was to make the Rune experience a more rewarding and predictable experience.

    @Joveth ... you did make it more rewarding and predictable but only for the high-end players. So it was a successful hit as a change ... but unfortunately it ended up hitting a fan in the stand and sending him to the emergency room (those common guys take it on the chin so often (and that is what happened here))
    Joveth wrote: »
    We’ve been closely following your feedback and while it is in fact cheaper overall to do the maximum number of attempts to Tune a Rune, the upfront cost of the first few attempts being more expensive has caused frustration for those who relied on the low initial cost for experimentation.

    Can I correct you on this one @Joveth ... its not experimentation. Heck @kpung07 and I are both top 300 power players and we just don't spend more than 130 on each rune. We both see more than that as a waste of resources. So we are not experimenting ... it is how we always play the game for runes. We do up to 4 re-rolls and stop. Take what we get. See the next step was 125 gems ... so that means for the cost of that 5th step ... I could make a new rune and re-roll it 4 times for just 5 gems extra. So it was definitely NOT experimentation. It was the fundamental strategy that we used to play and having that suddenly cost double means a massive blow to the fun elemental of the game. An element we did find rewarding suddenly was not and that was a bummer.
    Joveth wrote: »
    Our intent of a fixed cost that was lower overall with a much greater chance at higher rarity runes via Tuning attempts was meant to demonstrate our genuine desire to lessen frustration in the system.

    And I get that was the goal and it is demonstrated that for your high-end players you finally did a solid by them. Thank you on their behalf. Unfortunately me and my guild mates are not in that group.
    Joveth wrote: »
    We want all types of players to feel good about the new improvements. We’re taking your feedback seriously and consider this an ongoing discussion, and are not calling it “working as intended” and ending the conversation.

    Thank you. I definitely do not feel good. I definitely do not see it as an improvement at all. I don't ever plan on spending 800 gems on one rune so I look forward to what happens now that it is understood that an entire play strategy used by many players was crushed overnight.
    Joveth wrote: »
    Lastly, we hope that our efforts over the last couple of months in improvements and events (including the recent Shade quests with the generous amount of tokens available) demonstrate that we are committed to crafting an entertaining and enjoyable experience for all types of players.

    The Halloween event was awesome. The Shade quests are interesting and make you earn the tokens ... nothing wrong with that and I highly approve. I will ding you for the Greed quest as I think it is actually not possible to earn that much gold without spending real $ or thousands of gems which should never be the case for any quest.

    In closing:
    1) Thank you for responding to this issue quickly ... it is very much appreciated. I want to make more runes and have not since the update. Slipped from the #226 player to #263 already ... so please get me back my ability to make runes and compete in this game! ;-)
    2) I sincerely appreciate that you talk to us even if some of us are so angry we are chewing lead and spitting bullets
    3) Thank you for the generous Halloween event and the Shade quests and guaranteed 10x drops... they are steps in the right direction that honestly made me learn to love your game again.
    4) Please consider my post in the Suggestions & Improvements for the Rune tune system. I own a company that makes games. I spend a lot of time writing and designing rules for games. I only say this to add some merit to what is just my opinion. I think I had a suggestion that was a really easy change that accomplishes everything you wanted to do for the hard-core player and would make players like me that game the 4 re-roll system for runes happy as well.
    GalakSS
  • Although I think the generel idea of this update is great, the gemcosts that many others already mentioned are extremely harsh. I used to craft a greater rune (which already needed a hell of resources but it was fine since you got something out of it) and reroll it 3 times afterwards for 50 gems & 3 attempts. Now I can reroll once for a higher amount of gems, which resulted in my 5 new greater runes I crafted today: I rerolled each once for overall 325 gems and got 4 times 3 stars + rare and one time 4 stars + rare. I now have spent a great amount of materials & 300 gems to get something at best mediocre.

    The change is really only good for the few whales who don't care about gems too much but for the average player it's beyond terrible.
    It's great that you said something along the lines of "the discussion isn't done yet" or so but in my opinion that's not enough... Just change the first rerolls to something like 10 - 35 - 65 - 65... or so and everyone would be happy :(
  • Hi everyone. First off. Itchy didnt necessarily have "bad luck"..ive made a few and percentage is actually worse.
    Old system you averaged 70-80% improvement on a uncommon -common 3* or less but with higher stars or rarity percentage dropped. Now at a fixed percentage. Not 50/50.! Percentage is more like 30% and as it increases in rarity that drops in odds%..you cant be serious saying its a better system.
    And at afixed rate of gems. No!

    I knew what was going to happen with percentage of old system. And when to stop or keep going. This is just cross your fingers and hope for better than slot machine odds..3%
  • See my images above, maybe you should make it more clear that stupid bias against getting upgrade on better runes e.g . 5* is still there as I just crafted the 3 above all 10+ rolls on 5* rare no upgrade.

    We all knew in the old system you were pretty stupid to reroll a 5* rare as they didn't upgrade, please remove the false hope.

    This system makes it look like a high chance as the bar is nearly full each time but I bet it's still really low for these.

    I did like the new system but seems very flawed now.
  • @Joveth

    So I laid out what I think is a great compromise between old and new tune systems for the gem costs ... I hope that will be considered. I still have not made an runes since the update and would really love to enjoy that part of the game again.

    As long as you are looking at this issue ... I also wanted to give you a suggestion for the upgrade process as well.

    If I understand correctly a rune only upgrades if you improve if the re-rolled rune has a higher or equal rarity AND higher or equal star rating.

    For the special runes like Vampiric ... this system is actually very flawed. If I have a 4 Star Rare ... I would gladly want to get a 3 Star Heroic as then I get the Vampiric special ability. However with the current system that would never happen. So that is why you have people rolling up 4 or 5 Star Rares and then spending all their re-rolls and not getting it to become Heroic regardless of the new Tune bar. You've set the upgrade bar to high to trigger.

    In order to address this problem ... my suggestion would be that:
    Rarity increases were always considered acceptable if the star rating of the upgrade was within 2 of the current rune. (ie 3 Star Heroic is accepted as an upgrade if I am currently at a 5 star Rare). Similarly if I am at a 4 Star Heroic ... a 2 Star Legendary would be acceptable as an upgrade.

    If you did that ... I think a lot of the issues with the Tune bar would be address for the players doing max re-rolls. The requirement that both components be equal or greater to upgrade is creating a too high barrier to the extra special abilities that the players are trying to get.
    GalakSS
  • You still have a chance (and a very good chance, by the time you got to your last retune) to get that Rare to Legendary/Heroic upgrade, it's just not guaranteed.

    I made about 10 greater runes on friday, and 2 of them got to 5* Legendary, 2 others got to Legendary, all of the others got to Heroic. One of the 5* Legendaries happened with ONE retune, the other with just three. I'm estimating all of that cost me around 20% of the gems it would have cost in the previous system. I'm quite pleased with this new system.
  • I would take a one star Heroic or Legendary over any five star Common, Uncommon, or Rare.

    If the power of the reroll red rune is higher than the original rune, the rune should be upgraded. PERIOD. There is zero reason why a one star Legendary should be rejected just because my original roll was a two star Common.
  • ace_1650cp wrote: »
    See my images above, maybe you should make it more clear that stupid bias against getting upgrade on better runes e.g . 5* is still there as I just crafted the 3 above all 10+ rolls on 5* rare no upgrade.

    We all knew in the old system you were pretty stupid to reroll a 5* rare as they didn't upgrade, please remove the false hope.

    This system makes it look like a high chance as the bar is nearly full each time but I bet it's still really low for these.

    I did like the new system but seems very flawed now.

    We would need more data to confirm, but I suspect you are correct in that the high stars are reducing your chance for rarity upgrades, just like it did before the change.
  • Foozle wrote: »
    ace_1650cp wrote: »
    See my images above, maybe you should make it more clear that stupid bias against getting upgrade on better runes e.g . 5* is still there as I just crafted the 3 above all 10+ rolls on 5* rare no upgrade.

    We all knew in the old system you were pretty stupid to reroll a 5* rare as they didn't upgrade, please remove the false hope.

    This system makes it look like a high chance as the bar is nearly full each time but I bet it's still really low for these.

    I did like the new system but seems very flawed now.

    We would need more data to confirm, but I suspect you are correct in that the high stars are reducing your chance for rarity upgrades, just like it did before the change.

    Which is kinda hidden by the new system, the way it is explained in game and also the way that it has been rexplained on the forum.

    The new system makes it look like you have a good chance, but that chance on s 5* rare must still ve very low, even with 2/3 to 3/4 full bar. I think if it is meant to be fair, they need to understand their own system a little better.
  • JovethJoveth Member, Administrator, Moderator, Boss Fight
    Foozle wrote: »

    We would need more data to confirm, but I suspect you are correct in that the high stars are reducing your chance for rarity upgrades, just like it did before the change.

    Just wanted to clarify here: stars and rarity are independent chances...that is, one does not affect the other in this system. The bonus bar only increases the odds of Tuning a higher Rarity.
  • Joveth wrote: »
    Foozle wrote: »

    We would need more data to confirm, but I suspect you are correct in that the high stars are reducing your chance for rarity upgrades, just like it did before the change.

    Just wanted to clarify here: stars and rarity are independent chances...that is, one does not affect the other in this system. The bonus bar only increases the odds of Tuning a higher Rarity.

    That's great to hear that stars and rarity are supposed to work independently, but it is possible that it isn't functioning correctly at the moment. Ace just could have run into really really bad RNG, but we just need to see more data to confirm that it is or isn't working properly.
  • Its simple. I'm tired of engaging in long-winded well meaning discussions only to find that game decisions are made by bean-counters and the customer service staff is required to try to "soften the blow" to the user community, only to find they, too, are powerless.

    So let me take an approach that is most unusual for me.

    If it's about the money then it's simple.

    Do you want to keep the whales and frustrate the others?

    What's the profit/loss calculation on that?

    Without the ability to experiment inexpensively most of us will only do the minimum of runes and become frustrated enough not only not to spend but eventually go elsewhere. On the other hand, if we can experiment cheaply, it gives us a sense of possibility, participatuon and thereby the likelyhood of us dropping our much smaller, but much larger by volume, $$$.

    And that assumes that this DOES make the whales happy, which in fact turns out also not to be true.

    So if morality, decency, community cohesion and long term viability of the game are not important, just do the $$$ math. I think you'll find the answer obvious.

    Now returning to my world where maximizing profit is not the only single driving force in my life.
  • I feel like there could be an easy compromise that helps everyone.

    Lesser runes are 5 gems each tune - that seems fine.
    Improved runes are 25 gems per tune - change at the minimum, the first 2 tunes to 5 and 10 gems each, respectively. After that, 3rd+ tune can be 25 gems.
    Greater runes are 65 gems per tune - change at the minimum, the first 2 tunes to 20 and 40 gems each, respectively. After that, 3rd+ tune can be 65 gems.
    Superior runes are 95 gems per tune - change at the minimum, the first 2 tunes to 40 and 65 gems each, respectively. After that, 3rd+ tune can be 95 gems.

    Those are just rough ranges of gem costs, but it helps to see if a rune is worth putting in more gems instead of sinking in 130 (for greater) to find out it has resist or something you don't need.
  • You still have a chance (and a very good chance, by the time you got to your last retune) to get that Rare to Legendary/Heroic upgrade, it's just not guaranteed.

    I made about 10 greater runes on friday, and 2 of them got to 5* Legendary, 2 others got to Legendary, all of the others got to Heroic. One of the 5* Legendaries happened with ONE retune, the other with just three. I'm estimating all of that cost me around 20% of the gems it would have cost in the previous system. I'm quite pleased with this new system.

    Very fortunate/lucky RNG for you then. I think if you keep doing that, it'll average out that you'll tune more just to get the same results. Give it time, it'll happen.
  • I liked being able to get over 100 shade tokens. Well played.

    I dont think i like the new Rune system...I did at first when i thought you could essentially guarantee a great rune if you tuned it all the way up but in light of how the system actually works, no thanks. I could live with spending sub 100 runes and finding out you have a dud rune...but spending 200+ to find out the same all the way up to 780 or so...pass...
  • shiggity80 wrote: »
    Greater runes are 65 gems per tune - change at the minimum, the first 2 tunes to 20 and 40 gems each, respectively. After that, 3rd+ tune can be 65 gems.
    @shiggity80 Still too expensive to me. I really think you set the first 3 at a minimum to what it was in the old system (I think first 4 is the optimal) and then go fixed.

    GalakSS
  • Joveth wrote: »
    Just wanted to clarify here: stars and rarity are independent chances...that is, one does not affect the other in this system. The bonus bar only increases the odds of Tuning a higher Rarity.
    @Joveth ... please have someone check as there is a bug in the rune system which if fixed would save a lot of issues. A rune never goes up in rarity if it is not an improvement also in stars. IE ... I've NEVER seen a 3 star Rare go to a 2 star Heroic. So if that is supposed to be able to happen (which it should be able to happen) ... it does not and is a bug that really needs fixed.

    GalakSS
  • Re: Rune Improvement on 11/17/16...

    Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the new "Green Icon" for Rune crafting -->Nature--->Life/Health is not showing up (for me anyways)...
  • JovethJoveth Member, Administrator, Moderator, Boss Fight
    GalakSS wrote: »
    @Joveth ... please have someone check as there is a bug in the rune system which if fixed would save a lot of issues. A rune never goes up in rarity if it is not an improvement also in stars. IE ... I've NEVER seen a 3 star Rare go to a 2 star Heroic. So if that is supposed to be able to happen (which it should be able to happen) ... it does not and is a bug that really needs fixed.

    A few things here. First, you can't re-tune and get a lower star than you already have, so your scenario will not happen. Second, again, Star and Rarity are two independent "rolls". That is, you can improve Rarity, improve Star, improve both, or have nothing improved in a roll.
  • GalakSS wrote: »
    shiggity80 wrote: »
    Greater runes are 65 gems per tune - change at the minimum, the first 2 tunes to 20 and 40 gems each, respectively. After that, 3rd+ tune can be 65 gems.
    @shiggity80 Still too expensive to me. I really think you set the first 3 at a minimum to what it was in the old system (I think first 4 is the optimal) and then go fixed.

    Yeah, that's why i said those ranges for gems were just estimates, and I also said at the minimum make first 2 tunes cheaper. But I'm totally with you that first 3 or 4 tune at significantly lower costs would make more sense and fair to everyone.

    The idea should be: "Do you want a rune that's decent with a small possibility of it being really good? Then do 1-4 tunes at a minimum to low gem cost. Or do you want a really good chance a powerful rune? Then go all the way with 12 tunes and spend 500+ gems."
Sign In or Register to comment.

© 2015 Boss Fight Entertainment, Inc. ; Boss Fight, the Boss Fight logo, and Dungeon Boss are
trademarks of Boss Fight Entertainment, Inc., used with permission www.bossfight.com