I’m picking up what you’re putting down. 
I’m just merely stating my opinion. I’m a pretty open person. When I feel something, I say it eventually.
That is all. None of this matters.
If I were Htismaqe, I wouldn’t even give a shit what I say.
2 Likes
I in no way said anything like this. At least be honest.[quote=“HKdirewolf, post:45, topic:19400, full:true”]
“I know you’re enjoying the game and see a future in it, but I don’t so FK off.”[/quote]
Never said this.
Never said this either.
As for the “this game give me a prize” comment, **** yes. I’ve spent almost $200 on this game. I can ask for anything I want.
Spending $200 on a game that you KNOW is based around RNG+ Screaming about RNG=Insanity.
You’re only wanting them to implement ways around RNG. You’re not owed anything other than a stable game to be played. Let’s get that straight. Your money goes straight to supporting the Devs and the foundation of the game. You don’t own their plans or ideas. Nor do you even really own the troops. They can be nerfed and changed as they see fit. You’re paying for play time only.
You knew that when you started playing this game.
1 Like
And FTR the only reason you see so much “negative” feedback is because that seems to be the only way to get results.
People CONSTRUCTIVELY informed the Devs Maw was broken. They didn’t listen. Finally when every thread became a bitch fest about Maw, they changed it.
People CONSTRUCTIVELY informed the Devs Manticore was a problem. Once again, the only way to get them to do something about it was to bitch incessantly until they changed it.
I get it, it’s annoying. I also understand that, despite what you might think, I actually DO care about the long-term viability of this game and if bitching is the only way to get the Devs to listen, that’s on them, not on me.
Actually no. The whole “gimme a way to get Mythics” is a byproduct of the REAL problem. What I REALLY want is better balance, less Bone Dragons, and a decrease in the rapidly increasing power curve. The reason I’m asking for mythics and other alternatives is because I realize the things I actually want aren’t likely to happen. Kiddies love their nukes and their 99% win rates.
Welcome to the way the world works.
If I see a problem before me, I take the fastest and easiest route possible.
People like to win. Who is that a surprise to? Who likes to lose? Winning increases playtime and spending. I’m much more likely to spend money when i’m having a positive experience. Happy customer=happy business.
1 Like
And finally @HKdirewolf, I’m cognizant of the fact my posts annoy you. I’m going to try to be more positive going forward, out of respect.
Ever played Dark Souls? “Easy” doesn’t always equate to fun. Some people enjoy a challenge. Last words on this from me. Like I said, I’m going to make an honest effort to be less negative. Plus, I got the new Mythic after about 600 gem keys this morning, so there’s that.
Is this game Dark Souls?
Also if you’re familiar with the Devs of that game, they started the DS series with their own money and didn’t care if that game made money at all. They just wanted to put the game out there. Which earns them huge respect, but most companies can’t afford to take that chance.
DS is in a league of it’s own, and it misses out on getting money from everywhere. It’s a niche.
But to your other post, you owe me nothing. This is your forum as much as it is mine. I have the freedom to skip over your posts, as we all do.
I don’t owe you anything, you’re right. I’m not doing it for any other reason than it’s the right thing to do.
Well now I feel like I was an A#$%#@! to you. I apologize. I went and did the same thing that I have a problem with.
5 Likes
both the ideas are great
I still think getting a troop to mythic and 4x should remove them from the pool of possible cards (similar to the Guardian mechanic) but I can understand why Devs don’t want to do that; it would pretty much guarantee high-level players only get the few cards they’re missing and would never have any incentive to spend money on anything card related. So maybe instead of completely removing a card once you have it to 4x Mythic, it changes the cards rarity (just for RNG purposes, not actual gameplay) by dropping it one rarity. That would increase your chances of getting the cards you want and also reward you with more higher level cards (that you already have to 4x Mythic) while not guaranteeing that you just get the cards you don’t have.
So, for example, if you had every uncommon card in the game, they would all essentially be considered commons for RNG purposes and would no longer show up in the Glory chests. So you’d get that much more of the epics, legendaries, and mythics.
To me, that sounds like a win-win. Thoughts (and sorry for the hijack @efh313)?
Edit: If the devs want to make it even harder to achieve (but still give players a carrot), then maybe cards are only removed once you have all of the cards from a kingdom to mythic 4x. That’d take even longer and remove less cards from the pool, sort of speak, while still giving players an incentive and reward.
1 Like
That’s… an interesting suggestion, but I thought one of the biggest complaints at the end-game, aside from base Mythics, was the difficulty of getting new commons to Mythic. Shifting more troops into gold chests would not be helpful, in that respect.
All the troops in a kingdom would be an interesting condition, but what happens when they add a new troop to that kingdom? Do the rest go back in the pool, or just the new one? That would make it much easier to get the new troop, aside from the 4 week delay before they enter chests.
2 Likes
No, you misunderstand. A new common wouldn’t be at Mythic and therefore would be modified in any way and would appear in far greater number from gold chests. So that would actually solve that issue (maybe too efficiently, actually).
In regard to your second question, I’d say new troops would kick all the troops from its kingdom back to default until you got that new troop up to Mythic, too. That would incentivize the Devs to keep releasing troops and high-end players to continue to level new cards up.
1 Like
The new common would obviously be a common for all purposes – it’s not like it could go any lower. I’m not understanding what part of your suggestion would cause them to appear more frequently in gold chests, unless you do actually mean removing a particular common from gold chests once you mythicX4 them. Every common or rare added to the game dilutes gold chests, making it that much harder to get any particular troop. Although treating rares as commons for drop purposes once you mythicX4 them would improve drop rates for valuable troops in glory chests, without affecting gold chest rates, treating ultra-rares as rares would dilute the gold chest pool, making new commons harder to acquire and ascend.
1 Like
I don’t know that the devs would go for it but yes, in my example Commons that were 4x Mythic’d (either with or without their kingdoms depending on which example we’re discussing) would essentially be removed from gold chests similar to how the guardians are removed from the Guild chests once you have all of them to 4x Mythic. So you’d only get the commons that hadn’t met that criteria yet and thus, a lot more of them.
2 Likes
I 100% agree with this.
Also it’s unfair to say whether the race pack was successful or not due to the fact that they threw in gems and that made the price higher.
If the pack had been like $5 and just been the race I would have purchased one of them.
Let’s also not forget the fact that the hero is still underwhelming and only is useful in very few end game teams (the biggest one being mechanist)
4 Likes