Poll: what would you like the devs attention on?

I don’t understand this statement. Can you unpack it for me?

My interpretation was that he was disappointed that so many people prioritized new content rather than balancing the existing troops to allow for more viable teams rather than the few meta teams that are currently in rotation.

1 Like

The mini-games can be presented in both ways as Competitive (Arena) and Non-Competitive (Treasure Hunt), but i guess the tricky part is that inventing a mini-game requires much more free time and creativity than inventing a troop or even a kingdom. That’s because the troops follows some certain formulas and rules to be used, they gather mana, casts spells, deal skull damage…

But a mini-game kind of needs to be still related to the “match-3 engine” while presenting something new and entertaining, so it’s a little trickier to creat something like this.

I had an idea some days ago, but it wouldn’t help to share it without an update on the EULA to provide the devs the legal (proof) power for the use of these ideas we present.

I suspect the big reason we don’t see more mini-games is that they require a ton of work for not much return. They make roughly $0 off Treasure Hunt and Arena, and in some ways mini-games actually worsen the bottom line since they circumvent the main spending loop of the game (Arena) or create fewer reasons to spend (proposals for a Traitstone mini-game).

I think what would really get us more mini-games are ideas that would be fun (i.e., not upset players) while also helping the bottom line. But I don’t think I’ve seen any of those ideas, unless I’m mistaken?

1 Like

Partly true. Mini-games keep players playing longer. Bigger games tend to draw bigger crowds. The bare bones of this game are great, but they still have to make this game bigger.

So you could argue that retention rate is highly important to this game. People that are just “passing through” are less likely to spend a lot of money.

So the idea is to make all kind of activities to appeal to all different kinds of interests. Someone that doesn’t like pvp can still enjoy this game because of the mini-game aspect.


i hope this look fun?
Minigame (2 minigames): Alchemy Labolatory & Khaziel Mines

i think you should post it anyway, althought i kinda feel the same in doubt
i am hoping that once they get eula ready i could just add the right quotes to the posts i already made to get it working

1 Like

From what they’ve said previously, I think all indications are that retention is strong and the main issues are (1) getting more players in the game and (2) making more money off players. To some extent, these are mutually reinforcing as well since making more money off of players means they can afford to do efficient advertising that brings more players into the game.

Retention is hugely important overall since keeping players around is the first hurdle to then making money off them and growing the game, but once retention is pretty strong you end up spending a ton of time to make a very marginal impact. It’s thus not really worth it to always focus on retention once it’s “pretty good”.

You also lose a huge portion of potential player base by only offering pvp as well. They have to try and target areas where they think they can offer more to a wider range of players. Right now that’s all this game is based on, pvp and guilds. Which is fine to me, but not to a large portion of players. We who enjoy that, of course they are going to retain us, but it doesn’t offer enough to others. It’s all about a bigger picture.

We get to sit here and enjoy the game, but they have to sit on the other side and consider why they aren’t bringing in more players. It’s a guessing game. Plus we already know they’re working on more mini-games. This is obviously the reason they’re wanting to bring real time pvp as well. It isn’t so much for the people already here, it’s for the people they MIGHT appeal to.

Pick 3? I thought I was supposed to Match 3.


IIRC, they said at one point that they actually DO sell quite a few of the map bundles. So they are making at least a bit on treasure hunt.

1 Like

Top voted is minigames… I was a little disappointed that got top billing over “let’s not release troops until we know they work.” Because Kraken is broken. Gard was broken. Dragon Soul is still broken. Etc.

Not broken as in “way too strong for the game”… broken as in “this troop doesn’t actually work like it’s supposed to.”


“Don’t release something until it has no problems” - is essentially an impossible feat. And it’s pretty inefficient.

Releasing something that needs fixes allows the community to identify those problems much faster than they can be identified internally. It’s a win-win from my perspective. It allows faster development, and allows for more efficient work. The only downside is we have a week or two where a new troop doesn’t do exactly what it should. Seems like a minor issue to me.

But thanks for clarifying! I appreciate it.


I know that not everyone is going to be able to log-in each and every day, but my suggestion was about what’s good for the longevity of the game and I removed my personal consistency from the equation. Having a daily log-in that goes higher than seven has the potential to increase player retention because it gives the community something to work towards that is independent from skill or rosters; an equal opportunity for all participants.


“Everyone has a testing environment… some are just lucky enough to also have another place to deploy to production.”

I realize gaming is a world away from the field in which I work, but I’m used to people losing jobs and companies losing contracts over that.

Yes - being uptight about perceived quality is a big loss factor in many places.

The ability to respond to community feedback allows faster iterations, but requires close contact & communication. This is actually a strength of the technique in my opinion - it means the company is invested in keeping up good communication. It also means the company relies on good communication with players to keep face, as opposed to the company’s ability to never make mistakes.


If I could like this on Facebook for an Arcane of my choice… I would so click that! :wink:
Allow us to add a clickable icon to websites, facebook, twitter, etc. in exchange for some in game return.
1 gem/click or 1 random stone/click

Just a thought, but I would gladly add a GoW button to my homepage. And Im sure there are many others who would as well, that is free advertising, well, aside from in-game currency of course.

These issues are what drive me nuts. I was excited for the first time in a long time about playing the game when Kraken was released. That excitement was dashed when yet again I find out a 3rd trait was changed because it was literally game breaking. This game seriously needs a beta tester program.


This is what disappoints me as well and the fact that old legendaries aren’t getting brought up to speed to be able to compete with the newer ones.


Reason why people want mini games is because we saw all those different and very fun mini games puzzle quest had. And I came here to gow exactly because of puzzle quest.


This is an excellent idea.

  1. Volunteer beta testers, will get an early look at the upcoming troops.
  2. No advancement in beta environment, keeps players from taking advantage of “broken” troops.
  3. This will help with the huge problem how in the world they are going to KEEP up platform parity once we catch up on console.
  4. Give the beta testers something special, like a hat or other cosmetic item they can use in production.