This has been my experience, too (in both respects).
6 Likes
TOD event should have the same scoring … random # of dooms / level, random dispersement of luck and heroism scrolls…some may get more or less … average it works out okay.
Sound fun? No?
Why is this acceptable, then?
1 Like
Random scoring was introduced in World Events to prevent multiple players getting a tie for the power orb like it has been in older events. Not speaking for the devs but I am pretty sure this is one of major reasons why.
It has been poorly implemented so far though 
The ‘RNG’ seems to favour the lower to middle possible rewards.
1 Like
I think we did a pretty good job on stream, all things considered. I can’t always respond in detail if I don’t know the full story, am live, and talking to so many people while playing the game. We looked into it after it was brought up so we could answer everyone better, and I think me and Kafka have historically done a good job of this.
It can be hard when people keep bringing something up with me on stream again and again after I have said I can’t comment on it in the moment. This is especially true when I need to go back to the team to find out what’s happening, and have something looked into further.
To clarify, there was a typo made in the post because of the document. The intended rate was lower than it appears in the post. This is why we changed the rate for this event to match the typo made in the post.
What many of us are still are unclear on is this… The event, as released on Monday would not allow us to earn Stage 12 Rewards even if all 30 members of the guild purchased Tier VI and won every match and killed every raven.
After it was adjusted, because of this mysterious “typo”, we could then finish all rewards with Tier IV, as is customary with every other event in the game.
Are there going to be world events in the future that are not going to be completable even with 30 guild members purchasing Tier IV ? Because if this is the case, many guilds will recommend we not spend a single gem on those events.
6 Likes
So what incentive do they have now to confirm if this is the case?
1 Like
I usually buy tier VI to support the guild in most events. I have continued to do so with this event despite its frustrating reward system and that something it has missed from its introduction. Today I have used all my sigils, and i am at 1313 pointerinos or whatever. That means I would need to get 300+ points on the last 2 days to match other people’s calculations. I think many in the guild bought tier 4, and I am not sure they will reach the calculated numbers unless the magic 300 pints over the weekends materializes.
I am sorry. I was hoping that people might be able to get excited and get behind this game mode after the changes last time. I honestly think this team should do like GGG and dump this interesting but failed idea. It is saying something that I would rather be bored playing Invasion for the millionth time than be frustrated with the unsatisfying RNG of this mode. It feels like a pointless exercise.
There is something about the gameplay feedback loop in this event that has felt off from the start. For some the reward has been the issue, for others the seeming unfairness of the randomization from sigil use to sigil use. That feedback loop almost felt better with the second incarnation. However, its failing is that you almost have to stare at the support document to try to appreciate what you are doing in the game. The gameplay itself does not give you the texture that other events have in the game.
1 Like
I believe the 1766 point average was based on the old point values. Once they were corrected, the needed number of points dropped to about 1133 per person. So I think you’re fine with your current total.
2 Likes
So just to be perfectly clear the amount that was intended was the original which was looking like it would require everyone in a guild to do tier 7+ and it was only lowered because of a typo in a post?
I sincerely hope I’m getting that wrong.
1 Like
This is another fail event with ridiculous scoring even after the “fix” went into place. I’m getting 8-10 eyes per fight and I’m doing level 400-500 fights. I’ve purchased the Tier 7 three times now and I have a score of 2,990. Nearly everyone else in my guild is at a score between 800 and 1400, and yet we are still 5500 away from finishing Stage 12.
Let’s say everyone does 8 fights per day with their free 4 sigils (ravens included). 810 eyes = 8030 members = 2400 points on Saturday and Sunday – that’s 4800 points and we need 5500 points to close Stage 12. And keep in mind that I alone have 1625 points more than the next highest person in my guild because I’ve spent so many gems.
All of the stages should have their required points reduced by 10%.
Are you doing the highest level battles or the highest rarity as a priority?
If it is the latter then the RNG really hates you.
Focus on the highest rarity. Levels have absolutely zero effect on how many eyes are dropped. It should, but it doesn’t.
Case in Point: 2 lvl 170 Hydra rooms & 1 lvl 190 hydra room today = 30 eyes.
3 level 10 Hydra rooms on first day = 35 points.
If you are trying to form a strategy in order for your guild to complete this debacle, the best you can do is offer a ball park projection in terms of what each member needs to buy (tiers) to be in with a realistic chance. It’s basically the same concept in other events although admittedly, the lines here are blurred. I am afraid you just have to accept it for what is and either invest lightly (weapon tier) and accept which ever rewards you end up with, or go higher and watch your gems dissipate due to unfavourable “eye” returns. If it’s any consolation, our guild is in a similar predicament. Some including myself have gone to tier 5 and beyond but others have stuck with tier 3. The average buy in is just under 4 and as it stands we also are 5k plus short of the final reward. It’s noble to support players with less resources than you may have but you’ve got to draw the line somewhere. Remember it’s them that need the orbs more than you do.
We’re all assuming that “weapon tier” is conservative because we’ll need the weapon and everyone collects weapons which I don’t think is the case. If the weapon is pointless (like the one this week) I think that many players can argue that weapon tier is overspending. If the event was a T1 completion and the weapon was as bad as this month’s I would likely advise spending nothing, maybe T1 if no one in the guild is a weapon collector.
You will need to upgrade 8 weapons to get 20 stars in a kingdom. If you never buy any weapons, you will not be able to catch up.
2 Likes
I think you’re right. I’ve always bought the weapon in every event whether it’s rubbish (usually the case) or not. Some I will never get because they are behind the pay wall and just aren’t worth the cash. They will never be craftable either so I may stall out at some point. But generally if everyone buys the weapon and plays their sigils, fewer have to spend more gems to finish the job and it’s a more even contribution. Not buying when others do higher tier is freeloading in my view. Nobody likes that.
1 Like
Transparency.
Honesty can’t be a card to be played ONLY in desperate times when one needs to save face. Part of the whole issue with these events, as pointed out previously by many, is how these scores are mysterious and undocumented.
Let’s consider the following: If the devs would be upfront during some events with a basic explanation on how the scores work, the players could feel the event is not worth playing in that given week. And as such if everytime the devs deploy an event requiring higher investiments of gems they would get data showing lower participation from the playerbase, and therefore less gem’s sinking, then they would MAYBE have to reconsider their strategies.
Like tweaking the tier V and VI from the shop to offer more stuff for example.
This wouldn’t reduce a lot of the complaints about this model for the event, but at least it would put an end to conspiracy theories about the devs being shaddy or untrustworthy.
Since Salty stated the original scoring for the event WOULD require a higher investiment of gems, players can assume events will be different and it’s in the devs best interest, in my opinion, to confirm this already. Otherwise, players will still assume the devs WERE being shaddy about it EVEN IF THEY FIXED THE SCORES IN OUR FAVOR.
5 Likes
My post with the quote wasn’t meant to respond in general, but rather to that quoted post specifically because it basically said “tell me the this exact thing I’m mad about, or else I’m going to keep being mad.”
So, like…there’s no winning there 
I do agree that I would like devs to be upfront with the truth. I think I’ve made it clear over my posting history that I’m not some sort of apologist—but I am also of the opinion that one of the reasons devs don’t tell us ugly truths is that posts like the one quoted exist, where we the community have already shot ourselves in the foot by saying, “If you tell me the whole truth I’m going to rail against the game, refuse to spend gems/cash, and make others do the same.”
Xerodar - Legendary - Level 460: 20 eyes
Hydra - Legendary - Level 540: 10 eyes
Hydra - Legendary - Level 540: 15 eyes
Hydra - Legendary - Level 540: 20 eyes
Shaman of Set - Epic - Level 650: 8 eyes
Xerodar - Legendary - Level 470: 20 eyes
Hydra - Legendary - Level 570: 10 eyes
Hydra - Legendary - Level 570: 10 eyes
Shaman of Set - Epic - Level 660: 8 eyes
I understand, but there is a clear difference between:
- I’m mad with the design’s direction of this event.
And: - I’m mad with the design’s direction of this event and the fact the devs are not being upfront about it so I won’t trust whatever they say/do.
If the devs would do something like cut in half all the tribute chances from now on, they can make the whole thing worse if they try to hide such change (not that I believe they would try to hide it) and let players figure it out by themselves. Don’t you think?
That’s just what I’m trying to say here, being more transparent, specially regarding things that can be considered prejudicial to the players, can play out to their benefit.
4 Likes