I put 100% of the blame on the devs for this particular situation. They stated that one of the goals of the event system is to create PVP defense diversity. Yet, they don’t incentivize using event troops on defense. It’s madness.
Everyone with even a little game industry experience knows that you can’t rely on player benevolence for a core feature like PVP. Just like life, you’re going to get a mixture of giving people, ignorant people, highly competitive people and plan out spiteful people. A dev should never let the health of the central game mode rely on the kindness of strangers.
Like , you get a special shiny border on a troop card if it defends you kingdom X amount of times…
Or , as suggested time and time again, have a system that makes it that you can’t be offered an opponent if the team has a troop in it that you faced in one of you last 3 match.
I’ll chase these “shinys” as a pureblood greyhound chases the mechanic rabbit in a race, dear gentleman. Would you like some ?
But in all seriousness, even visual rewards coudn’t be enough i believe. As the game took a lot of changes for economic’s sake some people are chasing the most valuable “carrots” lately…
Personally i still think it’s about time to use the “stick” a little and maybe try using some restrictions every week as i suggested in the past.
Hey check out the recent ‘3 New Ideas’ thread just posted,
it addresses these issues but is more workable, because the idea of forcing ‘randomness’ won’t work because there’s little/no chance of synergy in randomness.
People should still be able to ‘tailor-make’ a team, just not be able to use the same cheesy op units over and over.
We’re living in a time of 100s of players online at the same time playing mmos fps’s. I’m assuming you’ll give enough credit to computers nowadays that they would be able to run an ‘actual player’ pvp match in gems, lol…
(All the puzzle quests are available and they all have online pvp, and these are ‘old’ games. and No they don’t have problems on the technical side)
Real person pvp would be great but ultimately it’s the op leet cards that ruin it, real-player pvp or not.
Except all 3 prior Puzzle Quest games (and Puzzle Chronicles, a ‘no-name’ puzzle game by a ‘no-name’ dev, that somehow also managed to have online pvp, lol…) all have online pvp.
There are no technical issues and really, would it be that hard to implement it here?
I would to assume that no, it probably wouldn’t be so hard.
And if a person doesn’t want to make that assumption, at least -don’t- assume that it would be (that hard).
These guys are charging 50 dollars a pop for silly things in-game, let’s try to stop thinking of this as a lone guy in his basement making a game single-handedly.
lol he was trying to make a point to the general players so that they might ‘encourage’ the devs to change the direction of the game.
Ironically, the only ‘silly’ part here is you stating ‘go make a better game’, as if him being a player in a game that’s already ‘mostly made’ doesn’t allow him to have some constructive criticism in the direction it’s heading.
His title was quite fitting because he included the word ‘direction’, meaning it’s a path that is ongoing and will have many updates.
If the players don’t make a point of showing they don’t like that ‘path’, then the devs will continue along it.
Then I hope Sirrian checks out the ‘3 New Ideas’ thread,
strange he thinks like that when he probably had those ideas intended when he made the game…
(ideas specifically regarding having to attack ‘each’ kingdom and by extension each kingdom would have their own units for the most part and possibly buffs/debuffs to attackers based on their kingdom)
I somehow would think he’s too smart to say ‘ridiculously op units are in the game that’s that there’s nothing we can do about it…’
Unfortunately I think what is ultimately almost always settled on is profit, and they use techniques designed to get max profit out of ‘whales’ and new players.
This ‘direction’ we’re seeing shows they are making decisions based on that, vs the long-term viability aspect of the game.
I believe there’s still hope though so I would ask you check out that ‘3 New Ideas’ thread and see what you think.
This game has tons of potential there’s nothing like it, I’m really at a loss to understand why they’re choosing the ‘quick and dirty mobile’ route vs the long term potential of more consistent players.
I don’t think they’re that sophisticated in their designs. They oftentimes seem to not understand how end-gamers will use troops to good or bad effect. I think they just aren’t fully aware/appreciative of what’s going on.
It seems like the game is on the decline and it’s a combination of changes to the game logic from the Unity port (mana/RNG inflation) and a really bad UI overhaul. I don’t think there’s much more to it than that.
Like his post just before yours now, the unit is a technicality, the premise (issue) is that whichever unit is ‘op’ at the time, will be constantly used in pvp…
Anyways, check out the ‘3 New Ideas’ thread if I haven’t replied to you already about that lol…
I’ll chase these “shinys” as a pureblood greyhound chases the mechanic rabbit in a race, dear gentleman. Would you like some 
?