• E
    Eclair

    @raju4224 You can try Onmyoji RPG (not Onmyoji Arena). It's a very F2P friendly game with Japanese mythology theme (and even if you want to pay, it isn't guaranteed to give you an advantage). The game is accompanied by a story mode, voice acting and cinematics. A slow rate of releasing monsters (about once a month). Most of the monsters are usable, and rarity doesn't dictate quality. In fact, a balanced team is made of all rarities instead of the highest rarities solely. There are also several different battle modes. The PvE and PvP aspects are vastly different too, some monsters excel in PvE and some are PvP-focused. The battle system is much more complex than Monster Legends, and there are endless ways in which you can customise the stats of your monsters.

    posted in Off-Topic read more
  • E
    Eclair

    @david-ml Sorry for the late reply because I do not check this forum frequently anymore. I will send you a pm.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    I started the game at its early days and invested a lot of time and real cash in this game. Over time, I started to play by habits and spent less time in this game. And one day, I decided to quit. I still dropped by the forum now and then to check out how the game is doing. For me, there were many things which make me quit the game.

    1. As a collector like Nynaevelan, the vault is a tipping point for me. In addition, it becomes impossible to get new monsters in events without spending a lot.
    2. Events require a lot of time and real money to complete. To have a chance at new monsters, you have to log in every 8 hours for the progressive island, or 4 hours for mazes, not to mention the races. That is too much time commitment.
    3. There are so many new monsters coming out constantly. Before I get used to one, the new one already comes out. Among the pool of those 600+ monsters, how many are actually used? It gets saturated. In addition, the game becomes chasing after the newest shiny toys, which may be left aside for a new one after a while.
    4. Besides events (which require us to perform monotonous repeating tasks), there is nothing much to do in the game. War doesn't take much time to do. There are nothing for you to do to improve your monsters.

    I have moved on to another game of a similar nature. From this game, I have seen many good features which ML can adopt to improve.

    1. Unlimited number of monsters you can own. They don't have monster walking animation. In fact, what is the use of the monster walking animation which takes more memory in our phone?
    2. Their events can be completed by any player by spending at most one hour a day during event period. They even give players extra days to complete events. All events are doable. It makes me feel that the developers respect my personal time.
    3. Very slow rate of releasing monsters. Each new monster comes with a well written story and many times, an event to welcome it.
    4. There are lot of things to do in the game. You need to fight with the monsters to train them. In addition, there are several game modes. One monster who excels in one game mode may not be good in another. There is a true PvP, in which two players can fight against each other in real time. They also have something similar to ML PvP, but that game mode is considered as PvE since the AI is in control. One of their PvE game modes which I like a lot is the puzzle mode. In this mode, the AI monster's stats are inflated and they are given additional skills. I need to think of which monsters to use to counter their skills.
    5. They have a variety of events, both in games and on social media (art contest, cosplay contest, interview).
    6. Old monsters are revisited by the developers and have their skills adjusted to compete in the meta. On the other hand, OP monsters are nerfed.
    7. Bugs are promptly fixed within the day and all players are given "gems" when bugs occur.
    8. Lot of QoL. You can use/ feed everything in one go, discard everything in one go, lock items/ monsters so you won't accidentally discard them, popup when you are going to use/ discard something of high rarity, full autorun (imagine when you are in a dungeon and use autorun, you auto move to the next node), an item to exchange ranks between two monsters (you can only get one of this item every two weeks), an in-game profile where others can see your list of achievements, in-game report and blacklist system, in-game mail and chat, all gatcha rates are published...

    I am not saying that ML has to adopt all of these things but many of them can make ML become more attractive and retain its players.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    I do not think anyone has actually tested the chance of specials statistically. No, recording the number of specials over the number of turns is not exactly statistics. Statistics tests for dependency too, meaning the chance of one special is independent from the chance of another special. As many have voiced out, specials tend to happen consecutively, indicating that they may be in fact dependent ("dependent" here is a mathematical term).
    I have suspected for a long time that the random number generation algorithm of the game is not working well. Ideally, the random number generation algorithm (which often works based on time) should produce nearly independent odds. However, I observe that specials tend to happen in the same fight. Similarly, if an attack against a monster misses, I observe that the next attack (assume no long waiting time in between) against that same monster often misses too.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    @Ekto-Gamat You brought up a point about "compensation" and I would like to add into this. Yes, the "compensation" in this game is a joke. In other games that I play, a maintenance compensation is sufficient for me to purchase a monster. In Monster Legends, there is very little to show goodwill towards the players. Besides daily rewards (which most games have), what else does this game offer the players for free? All requires the players to invest their time or gems or money. Before anyone wants to counter my point, I am not saying everything should be given for free. I am saying that here and there, the game should shows goodwill and reward the players. That helps to maintain a good relationship with the player base. Don't let me mention about the birthday event in Monster Legend...

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    I used to spend a lot on this game but have become a semi-retired player due to many disappointed changes. I only logged into the game to do team war now. Needless to say, these changes won't affect me because I no longer care. However, there is a point which has caught my attention: "the changes are meant for a healthier game". I question the notion behind this.
    How many changes have we got so far in the game in the name of "healthier and more balanced game play"? Did they actually benefit the players or bring about more frustration and make the players care less about the game?
    One may welcome the changes because you think it is better for the meta battles and slow down power creep. On the other hand, you can view it as opportunities for the developer to release new monsters with other traits or skills which invalidate this current change? How about a skill which stuns and applies nanovirus? How about a war master with area trait which prevents positive status? How about a monster with one AOE stun and one AOE freeze? My point is that, the changes don't promote a healthier game play but just heralds more monsters with better skills/ traits.
    If the developers really want a healthier game, there are many ways to go about it instead of this change. Currently Pvp and war have similar battle system. How about having more battle systems instead. For example, Limited Control Area: a pvp system in which "recently freeze", "recently possessed" changes are implemented. It can be a fixed pvp mode instead of an event. I can even come up with more battle systems: Rune-less Arena, Level-equalising Arena, Boss fight Arena, Rental Monster Arena (a battle system in which you don't need to use your own monsters, you and your enemy can each select a few monsters from a pool of monsters and fight against each other.)
    Wouldn't these changes promote a healthier game without affecting the current monsters? Monsters working well in one pvp battle system may not fare well in another pvp battle system.
    However, instead of creating a more diverse system to lead to more healthy game play, the developers choose to affect the players instead.
    On a separate note, I feel another issue with the game is the influx of so many monsters. This leads to constant and fast power creep. Releasing monsters doesn't mean the game will stagnant. If there are well designed events to occupy the players, then the game can still move forwards. Sadly, most of the events are not well designed and it becomes monster-centric where new monsters are everything to this game.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    @Marianne-van-Es [quote]Do you have proof for this because I have I don't have analyzed it yet so I can only give my subjective answer, yes I spend more on Baroness then on Charmless, but that was because I had more gems to spend, our team wasnt a top 538 because we chose not to want to race that soon again and where happy with the r3 Charmless so no Flamerion for me and our team. I have the numbers tho so I can compare and I will if I have time[\quote]

    0_1535532392601_Untitled.png
    Those marked with * means there are legendary, but for the purpose of counting, I treat legendary breeding as epic breeding. You can see that there is a huge increase in the number of epic monsters required. Thus, I and many users here have echoed the point that SP is greedy. Looking at these numbers, these two races are in the same GP format, but there is a 49% increase in the number of epics. If this is not greedy on SP part, what is it then?

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    @Marianne-van-Es
    I don't think your answer addresses my 4 points (if your answer doesn't mean to address my point, then please ignore it).
    Secondly, what is wrong with us complaining about the time investment? It's true that all games require the players to spend time. However, how many mobile games are there require their players to invest this much amount of time, on top of spending more gems (which either requires purchases or time investment to collect) in order to get one monster? Having been playing many games, I haven't encountered such a game. There is a difference between complaining about spending time and complaining about spending lot of time + spending gems. The latter is a legitimate concern, especially when the reward does not justify the input. Why do we have to keep silent and adopt the attitude "if you don't want then don't do it"? Why can't we complain when we feel this is unreasonable? After all, this is a forum for the game developers to listen to feedback from their players. We are not sheep who get conditioned to accept progressively unfavoured term. We have free speech and we would like to make our points too. Your team may not need to spend lot of time, because your team is at high level and can collect the food or gold easily. How about other teams, who need to log in frequently for multiple collections?
    Thirdly, I don't think anyone says low-to-mid level team wants to get high rank monster. In my post, I mention about a rank 0 new legendary. However, currently, it is a challenge for them to reach 10 laps. They can't even collect enough gold or food to complete tasks, not to mention breeding epics.
    There certainly should be advantages for long term players. However, looking at the frequency of races, should a large portion of the player base be excluded from the frequent races, in which they are unlikely to get even a rank 0 legend? Is this the kind of advantage that the game developers should confer to long term players?
    A lot of people here come from teams with different backgrounds, and we all have presented our views based on our experience with the game. I don't think any of us have made any unreasonable demand (eg. easy rank 3 monster, etc.). All we have done is to present our arguments, our evidence to show that the current race is unfair and becoming more expensive due to SP's greed (point 1 in my previous post, which no one has proved otherwise). If many players are echoing the points, shouldn't this be considered as a common voice from the community? I respect the points of view of the mods. However, the points of view are from Haka-Taka and Marianne-van-Es, meaning two individuals. Should the point of views of a larger community be ignored?

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    I don't think any complaint in this thread has been unreasonable or uncalled for. If the mods want us to accept their arguments, then please dispute the following points.

    1. The GP format (Prince Charmless, Flamerion, The Baroness) has been increasingly expensive. If this is not considered as greedy on SP part, what is the possible explanation you can give?
    2. Race is time demanding and we still need to spend gems on top of that. Shouldn't we be able to get a free legendary monster (rank 0) with the time investment alone.
    3. Race is more expensive for mid-to-low level teams and teams with players of varied levels. They are struggling to even qualify.
    4. Adding to point 3, if you are going to say races are not meant for the teams mentioned in point 3, look at the frequency of races. Is it fine to exclude the large portion of the player base so frequently? (Note: 72hr challenges favour low level players but these events are not frequent).
      Please tell me which of the above points are invalid for us to complain about.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • E
    Eclair

    @Haka-Taka
    You are looking at the cost at a pure gem perspective. How about the time required? And the preparation time before the race? In addition, that 400 gems per person is the cost for a team at high level. How about a mid to low level team which cannot collect enough gold/food? Don't they need to spend more gems to skip more?
    I don't think it is fair to say this is a cheap and fair price. No one is asking for a free monster without any effort. But the time investment is too much, on top of the gem requirement. In addition, the disparity for mid to low level teams.
    Another point, even within the GP format (Prince Charmless, Flamerion, The Baroness) it is progressively more expensive. You defend that it is still cheaper than buying the rank 3 monster directly (which I disagree because you don't consider the time investment and disparity for mid to low level teams, but I digress here). If we don't call out when the GP format gets more expensive, we are conditioned to accept it. After all, we have been conditioned to accept so many changes in the name of balance: higher cost for team shop monsters, lower breeding chance, higher cost of speeding breeding and hatching, higher cost to complete progressive islands/ mazes, recent change in 72hr challenges. Every time these changes happened, there are some people defending SP and asked others to accept it. Because it is still cheaper than buying, we don't have the right to make our point known and we have to accept it? Don't we have the right to complain and have to adopt the attitude "don't like then don't play the event"?

    posted in General Discussion read more

Looks like your connection to Socialpoint Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.