We have received a lot of feedback in the past from players wanting the game to feel more dynamic. (Please note this isn’t from all players!) By changing the scoring week to week, this keeps things fresher and more interesting, in lieu of playing the same event week in and week out. This won’t be to everyone’s liking, but nothing we put in game ever is! There is no in-game event that players all agree upon, even Guild Wars. For example, during the 4.8 Update Preview stream, some players wanted us to remove Guild Wars altogether, while other players argued fiercely with them against the removal. (Don’t worry, we don’t plan to remove Guild Wars.) Regarding World Events, we will endeavour to let players know how to score, whether it is by collecting skulls, or maximising 4 matches, in the lore portion of the World Event overview. We meant that we would explain what would get you points in my quoted posts, not the way to min/max said points. I apologise for the confusion surrounding this, and will be more careful with how I phrase things in the future to avoid further misunderstandings.
I can’t say much more than what I have above, but we will be tweaking the new World Events week to week until we are happy with where they are at. We will also be reviewing the reward tiers and potentially tweaking them when we see how World Events perform. As always, I collate your feedback and relate it to the devs, and I have already parsed a lot from this thread. Thank you for taking the time to leave it. Feedback with succinct reasoning behind it is always the most useful, and is the feedback I quote to back up points I raise with our developers.
I’ve nothing against a game trying to cover its costs and make a little on top. If I play a F2P and end up enjoying it, I’ll always buy something because that’s how you show support for a game like that.
I would be very happy to just get this one piece of information, though.
I don’t think you guys can continue to tell us these whaling tactics aren’t on porpoise.
Also it isn’t so much as min maxing our score but understand it.
If there are do many p2w people who hate GW for having limited fights and needing strategy, perhaps you should rip the band aid off and remove it so the players that like it can just quit now.
And where exactly did you receive requests from players wanting 600-800% gem price increase for Events, while keeping the same rewards? Unless of course, your publisher plays GoW and it was his feedback.
One last thing before I step back and keep collating feedback from afar…
As many of you have mentioned, the skull drops in this particular event have some variability. It’s not a simple 4 skulls per match proposition, sometimes you get a few extras thrown your way, but on average the further your progress the more things are worth. Please be aware that this is unique to this event, and future events will be different.
Most guilds operate on the premise that they will complete an entire event, not partial events. What is the point in having events that 99% of the players cannot finish? Call it what you want, ‘epic’ or whatever, but even top 50 guilds cannot do this and I don’t know who thought it was a good idea or did the math behind it.
I understand the event is supposed to be dynamic and exciting, a hybrid of delves & explores, a way to not have to push software updates as much because the event handles that with ‘boss traits’ etc.
On top of that, they not only have to spend gems on the “world event” but also the other guild event that weekend (invasion/bossraid/towers of doom) that will be on a 3 day weekend schedule in the future. How will they spend gems on that as well for tier 4 or 6?
Not to mention that we already are being asked to do 3x the gold farming for (not so) ‘epic’ tasks as well.
If this is going to be pay-to-finish events, a lot of ppl are going to leave.
This math is unsustainable for 99.9% players.
I don’t think scoring 1,000 pts less than your guildmate doing the same amount of work is a good use of dynamic and feeling cheated isn’t what I’d consider fun.
At least during Guild Wars, there’s some pointers that can be given to reach a similar result to your guildmate. What is a guildmate supposed to say to reach a similar result for this event? Rub Sol’Zara’s toes and scrub Gargantaur’s back for best results?
I want dynamic. Dynamic gameplay. Not whatever this is.
When I watched the Patch Preview. I understood that Council of Chiefs would act like Explore.
Which surprisingly enough is actually dynamic. Each battle the troops are randomly selected. The mini boss includes a Legendary Troop. And the boss battle includes a Mythic troop. But the 4 others are random.
Reasons why this event is exact opposite of “dynamic”
Facing the same 4 teams from beginning to end
The defense is made up of basically the same troops as we’re forced to use on offense. But their 20% buff matters a lot more since their troops levels to way past 20.
It’s literally the only event that restricts weapon choices. In guild wars the player should match the color day but isn’t forced to.
The only thing that is actually “dynamic” is the scoring system. As Salty just confirmed “extra skulls” are RNG based. Which most of the community absolutely hates RNG determing their rewards (outside of chests).
If I remember right. You introduced Raids and Invasions at a lower points threshold to get the rewards from portals. Here it’s been the opposite. If you want people to give World Events a chance then you should lower the portal points immediately. Not wait until next month. Because the introduction is EVERYTHING.
Y’all just spent a tremendous amount of time and money on this new event. And are throwing it out to us dead in the water.
For the love of Joe Pesci… Please stop including “players wanted this” in your excuses for poor design choices.
You have no idea what players want. And what you think we want is continually showing us how much you don’t know.
Like a divorced dad that only sees his kids on Christmas. Stop trying to give us shiny things that you think will appease us. Instead take a break from design and implementation. And actually get to know your player base. That way when you try to give us stuff… You’ll only upset a minority… instead of the majority like you’ve been habitually doing as of late.
I spent thousands on this game because I+2 was a company that was willing to spend their time on players. It made your company great. Now all your time is spent trying to fix Frank ups and keeping 505 off your backs. You’ve lost your direction and y’all don’t even know how lost you are.
Come back Dad, your company needs your vision… Now more than ever. 505 is the man, damn the man.
Here is a piece of feedback from one of the “whales”.
With new scoring requirements there is no point for me buying past tier IV of the store. While before i bought tier 7 almost every single time in every guild event. New score requirements is a very dishonest move. And it will be answered with lower spending.
Looking over the data myself and others have collected I believe it is +1 per rarity (1, 2, or 3) and +1 every 50 levels for a base at the moment but there is a random/unknown component that is going to be virtually impossible to track down. So for the moment it is going to be tough to calculate more than the absolute minimum or perhaps an average with enough data.
It also appears as though higher rarity fights level faster to stay ahead of epics to continuously reward more skulls. (this keeps players from running up epic fights to pass mythic and get rewards more quickly)
I also calculated that Tier 4 guild wide would be borderline for Stage 11 Rewards and Tier 6 guild wide is borderline for completing Stage 12.
These were calculated by multiplying sigils (28 free + sigils bought) * 2.25 for valravens which appears generally accurate at the moment. and then looking at the leaderboard to see what players currently at those numbers have averaged.
My recollection is different. I think the original reward tiers for Invasions were the cumulative (so 1, 3, 6, 10, 15) rather than the individual (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) point values. Making it impossible for guilds to come anywhere close to reaching the major orb.
(Which is probably why many of us immediately tried looking at the difference between reward tiers, to see if perhaps that was the “intended” number.)
Despite support saying the scores are “working as intended”.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the event is supposed to a base amount of points per level.
Like level 200 battles giving 200 points and then the skulls all being a bonus aspect. Since it literally says battles and bosses. Not “only battles or only bosses”.
Right now if I win a battle at level 200. I’m ONLY getting the points from skulls. Please @Kafka double check to see that the points we get are supposed to be only from skulls and not anything else. And if that’s correct…“softly” smack the forehead of the designer that tells you that. They definitely deserve the smack for such an ignorant decision.
For anybody keeping track here’s what I got from my tier 4 on day 1. 1330 points.
Method I used:
Do highest lv mythic room, if there is none then
Do highest lv legendary room, if there is none then
Do highest lv epic room.
Is this the best method? Who knows?
Ahem, sorry to bother, but what is intended? Numerically speaking if you please. You might wish to remain cryptic but I do not think it is a good idea.
Just like we don’t explain guild war scoring exactly, we’re not planning on explaining the World Event scoring to the tee. However, much like Guild Wars we suspect you’ll all get a feel for how the scoring works and intuitively learn how to min/max your scores. I can see some of you are already working on tracking the data
For some people that’s part of the fun, others just want to play. I can tell you one thing, you play Council of Chiefs battles - you’ll earn points - like the lore section in the game says the tougher your enemies the more points you’ll earn.
