While I think refreshing their permanent breedables would be a good change, it looks like one of those is Exo Skeel, who is a current 305GPM monster.
Really hope SP can figure out how to introduce new content without forcefully reducing the value of the old. I bought many Exo Skeel just to produce gold, so if their production gets halved then that investment is severely devalued.
I feel like half of this game is like playing a stock market game, trying to gamble and speculate as to what is going to be valuable based on bits of info and whims.
@karryt If you buy a lightbulb that is said to last 200 hours on average, but burn out in 20 hours, is that purchase gambling?
You buy a PC with one year of factory warranty and last anywhere from 1 to 5 years, is that gambling?
In today's world, most things have a large amount of uncertainty. As with most gambles, only gamble what you can afford to lose. If you cannot afford to lose anything, don't buy anything.
I'm not sure if you're being serious or not...those examples have nothing to do with the game industry wide issue of predatory loot/gacha boxes.
I mean, do your 130 ranked monsters suddenly disappear completely sometimes from their habitats? Is that gambling??
I obviously understand the risk/potential value proposition with gambling, but I don't think having that in games is a good thing. There's many studies out there about how the "potential" to win big affects many people psychologically and the related addictions.
There are a lot of what I would call "anti-human" tactics built in to the game, like needing to log in every 4 hours, or making monsters have a "normal" price of a monster be 1700 gems ($50!), or constantly rotating the sale price of gems. Those practices are used to create a false sense of urgency to buy things now. For me, adding in all this extra gambling kind of shows that SP doesn't really have the right kind of appreciation for their customers.
I think the big question is why is the game littered with chests now. Even reward items (like scrolls) are in chests...really??
I try to avoid them as much as possible as I don't want to encourage even more use of them, but admittedly did buy some, like the golden relic chests, only when on sale. Hard to stay competitive without at least a decent stash of relics.
The rate at which this game is turning in to just a gambling machine is pretty worrying to me, especially in a time when many game companies are under fire for including borderline predatory loot/gacha boxes.
Right now there is very limited regulation at all for this type of tactic so there's no accountability on the game maker's side. They could do as some folks imply and reduce the odds for better rewards to bigger spenders and how would we know?
I'm almost to the point where I think they are trying to cash in on the gambling trend quickly before governments come down hard on the game companies for implementing them.
It would be very unwise to make this change now. Players have made investments based on that earlier change to the meta. They can be justifiably unhappy and angry if the proposed change is implemented at this point.
I think this is the predicament SP is now in. They made the costs to "level up" in this game way too high, which to me, had two major effects:
- Large disparity in individual and team strength (separation between those who spend and those who don't)
- Difficulty to re-balance elements of the game, since as @C0ntr1v3d said, changing the in-game value of something that costed a few bucks is received by the players quite differently than something that costed $20-50, or more!
At this point I'm not really sure what they can do to dig themselves out of that hole, and maybe they've had discussions about it and decided to just milk the game as long as possible. Or perhaps they've not discussed it at all, who knows.
The introduction of relics (which an earlier @Carlos comment seemed to imply that it wasn't going to be another P2W race for power) and especially the distribution method being a gacha I think is just digging deeper.
I really wish that changes were thought through completely and implemented holistically rather than in a scattergun thought-bubble fashion. I grow tired of the continual dissatisfaction seething through the community, much of which could be avoided or reduced by adequate planning and impact analysis.
Absolutely this! I was so disappointed to learn that SP had not really mapped out all monsters in to books with fairly equal representation before the roll out of books, thereby changing the values of monsters all over again. This lack of planning (and testing!) seems to be par for the course right now though, sadly.
On a bright note, at least there are somewhat more patch/change notes in the game...
I don't believe any monster should be nerfed. I believe they should create monsters to counter them, but I have beat Zyla and Voltaik and Demise. It just takes the right monsters and moves.
I'll try to come back to this thread with some of my thoughts on skills, but just wanted to note quickly that when a monster becomes "OP" and dominates play, adjusting what makes them OP is normally a far better way to fix. Introducing new counters just makes folks have to obtain/rank new other specific monsters and is counter to the whole "diversity" thing SP said was a goal.
Ideally we never run in to these situations but even if things were playtested there's always scenarios that come up. Clash of Clans has continual balancing even though the compositions of attacking teams is way more limited than ML.
ML is in a tough spot though as most folks have a very limited pool of resources to obtain/rank monsters so pivoting away from changes is difficult. That's why I think IF they make any of these changes to longstanding monsters it needs to have some kind of compensation/plan for replacement for the players.
Yeah I think it's a sensible change and probably how it should have been from the start. As contrived said, it didn't matter too much since Tim didn't have attack skills, beyond looped damage. But when looking at the trait itself it makes sense that no effect, positive or negative, should stick.
@karryt at level 130 I received 48 coins for each crop of 14 x Black Lotus in the last 2 flip card events. Needless to say I got zero monsters.
Haha, sounds like maybe SP did just decide to make the exchange rate useless for higher level players then. Separate thing from the bug of getting 0, but hopefully they take a look at that and readjust for next event.
I'm not concerned as much with the rate,...
I was lucky to find out about the zero drop rate before activating my temple. When the coins finally dropped, I received 38 coins for 1.4M food. This is almost as bad as zero, so I just didn't bother. I now also don't bother with the maze as I got zero coins for breeding and hatching for almost an entire week.
@Carlos the unhappiness in the forum is stemming from countless bugs and other issues that interfere with gameplay and the lack of any compensation for the loss of time and effort (and some cases money) that players put into the game. Without some serious improvements in regards to SP handling the game, this won't go away in a hurry.... :(
Well, the rate in of itself isn't really a bug, although if you're not getting the right amount of coins still that could be.
What level are you? I was carefully hanging on to my under level 90 status and tipped over at the end of the 72H event. From memory I was getting about 1k coins per boosted full black lotus farms, and when I hit level 90 it was cut down to around 600 I think. I think they did introduce more steps in the last 72H event whereas before I think the cutoff for worst rate was at 90 or 100. Maybe 110+ gets super punitive, which probably should be looked at if so.