I used to like the tasks because they were a cool way to make me do different things in the game and provided short-term goals to attain, with a small sense of progression. This was specially true for the “win a game with a specific type of team” tasks.
The system was giving too much rewards and the developers needed it to change in order to push players towards making more purchases. I understand the reason behind the change, you do need compensation for your hard work and the game is worth it.
However, the new tasks system is just not fun and might as well not exist anymore. I will never even attempt to play 20 matches in a row with an all grosh-nak team!
In order to really make the tasks fun again, they should be bite-sized, so we can go through them frequently.
I propose making stacks of 3 victories with the same team and then roll out to a new set of “winning condition”
To this; add a 30 wins counter before payout and that could make for a much better system.
That way, you’ll have to fight a few matches with your new teams but, not enough to make it seem like a drag and it’s on to the next challenge. The payout in gems will still be low enough that it will satisfy the developers but, the tasks will be a good way to gives players some incentives to try new teams and not feel like it’s a marathon if the team they ended up with feel underwhelming.
All that would need to be added is a separate counter that goes to 30 to track your overall progress before getting the reward. The counter should remain if you started and didn’t finish in a day but, there could be a payout limit of once per day, although 30 fights doesn’t seem like it would be open to too much abuse.
I am sure that something along those lines could be a good way to keep the lower rewards and have fast-changing tasks that could satisfy both parties.
I like this idea. But it’s a big change to the endgame task system, and isn’t something we could implement quickly.
Let me ask you this question - let’s assume that a current task is of the form:
20 wins with a specific type of team : 10 gems
Which would you rather see:
10 wins with a specific type of team : 10 gems
20 wins with a specific type of team : 20 gems
These both alter the value proposition in an identical way. But the first one makes tasks faster, and the second one makes them more lucrative for hardcore players. (Who can do 40-60 specific team fights each day.)
If I had to pick one, I’d prefer 10 for 10 though both are an improvement as I currently have a 20 wins for 5 gems and 50 trophies for 10 (of which the best I can hope for on that is after the weekly reset where I get 20 matches at 2 trophies and the last 10 at 1 so 30 matches at the absolute best. 40 Arena matches, or 50 normal PvP matches.)
The 50 trophies one would also be one where 100 Glory (or a little more) would be more worth it.
Ah, but remember that my hypothetical “starting” task was 20 for 10. So both changes were meant to represent a doubling of value. You can’t read into it that I’ve suggested a quadrupling of value!
This is all hypothetical, obviously. And the central question is whether people want smaller rewards faster, or larger rewards later? Because both of those are economically equivalent.
For me, as long as the tasks change quickly and bring new challenges often, I would be happy.
The reward in itself is not that important, it’s mostly about getting away from using the same old PVP staples and having a specific restriction to spice things up. That is why I made that proposition in my original post, but I understand that it would be difficult to implement.
To answer your question directly, in this scenario, I would pick 10 fights for 10 gems over 20 for 20.
I would even prefer 10 for 10 over 20 for 25 just for the fun factor, but that’s probably just me.
Another thing I thought about it to have split-teams restriction by banner combinations.
Something like: “using the Adana banner, win a fight with 2 unique red and 2 unique yellow troops.”
Well obviously it’s a bit tricky, because low level players can still do dozens of tasks a day. But looking at players over level 300, on any given day the players who log in are finishing between 1 and 2, on average. But the new system is still quite new - so I wouldn’t put a lot of weight into this yet.
Assuming that the 1 or 2 completed tasks does not include the A task then that is actually pretty good interaction with the new system.
Edit: the tasks change from level 150 onwards, don’t they? That would be a good point to analyse the data from. I’d also be curious to see the loss of players between level 150 and 300.
I want this mor than [quote=“Mr.Strange, post:3, topic:9238”]
10 wins with a specific type of team : 10 gems
[/quote]
this. my reasoning is that if you can only do 4 task a day at some point and there for after level 150 you get more for your work in a day. I prefer larger rewards later as that means if i am able to do those 20 battles in 1 day then i get those 20 gems that day so in theory it would feel mentally like a daily task instead of a task that would take along time to complete.
What do you think about halving the tasks and rewards but allowing each task to change once a day so you can do 8. Same effort and rewards but more people interacting with them
If those are the only options, personally I’d choose 10 wins for 10 gems. The problem here though, IMO, is the “specific type of team” being part of the task, at least with the current task requirements.
Examples of bad “specific types of team” tasks: 3 from Broken Spire, all Yellow mana
Examples of good “specific types of team” tasks: 3 from the same kingdom, all of the same type of mana
I still don’t want to play 10 matches with a team of 3 troops from Broken Spire, but if the requirements were simply “the same kingdom” that opens up my options quite a bit and I can use use my go-to PvP team. Likewise, I can use my green mana team for the “same type of mana” task instead of trying to come up with some working yellow mana team. The flexibility the old tasks had was one of the major downgrades of the new system IMO. Part of the reason I think 10 tasks for 10 gems would be better than 20 for 20 is also due to the fact that if I get something bad like “10 matches with broken spire troops” that’s 10 less matches I will have to play with a team that isn’t fun. If you address that issue by changing it to “the same kingdom”, etc., option B becomes more viable.
Wouldn’t it be better under those circumstances to have:
10 wins 10 gems, repeatable twice
rather than
20 wins 20 gems, once
It’s the same gems and fights but, you get two different team formations to use and less boredom, specially if you don’t like the team combinations under one restriction.
Another thing is the time we have to play every day is not always the same. On some days I can play enough to knock out many tasks while, many others I can only fight a few rounds before calling it a day. It is probably similar for most players.
This would be nice if they let us have the ability to get new tasks as we complete them. Imagine that if the roll was good that you get the task twice in your slots one day as say task b and task c. Would it be better to complete them for 20 gems for 10 games or 40 gems for 20 games. I do not know if anyone has gotten a task more than once in a day. Currently it looks like the devs have turned the task system into a tutorial system to train players how to play the game all the way up to level 150. Then they are left to their own devices after words. The problem with the task system is rewards past level 150. That is why i advocate 20 battles for 20 gems as it would be the difference between a gem key and an event key.
I’m very happy that you are considering modifying the Tasks.
Obviously this is for players over 150:
Task A is perfect as is, (including having balanced rewards). NICE JOB!
Task B,C,D. I would prefer 10 for 10, bite size is preferable to a marathon with a hodgepodge team of x.
One more thing: you could consider making tasks B,C, and D repeatable. And make the rewards 10 wins for 5 Gems to compensate.
This surprises me a bit. I’ve been talking about the task changes for more than a month, so obviously I’m interested in further tuning it and getting feedback. Otherwise I’d just make the changes and not spend time talking about it!
I agree, you’ve always been open to improve Tasks and have said all along that this current setup is a baseline for future changes.
To answer your above question, “10 for 10 or 20 for 20?”, I vote 10 for 10. However, to get a true answer I have 2 questions:
Are Level 150+ Tasks going to be one-a-day, repeatable or undecided?
Are Level 150+ Tasks going to have Reward variety, be Gems-only or undecided?
Basically undecided means more options for change. I believe changing either the frequency of Tasks OR adding variety will be a good enough adjustment. Making Tasks one-a-day AND limiting Rewards to Gems only was too harsh.