This is great to hear, but doesn’t change the fact that it is now more than 2x more expensive to use gems/money to obtain mythics. Daily shop price scaling for them is way out of proportion to what it should be.
31,500 gems for a mythic or $168 is quite over the top, not to mention that doesn’t even count the 4 mythic relics also needed, just the glyphs price.
The cost of the random epic weapon is doubled, and likely the armor one as well (never seen an random epic accessory offer roll in 0.34).
That’s $20-$25ish in premium currency for that offer. Far too rich for my blood, but I think I see where the devs are trying to go with these changes.
I think you might need some Salty translation services. Allow me to assist here.
Translation: The devs tend to install new game systems in layers. In 0.35, the update brought in the foundations of this new system. The devs are observing how we interact with these foundations and will adjust the system based on what they see. That’s likely going to take weeks of data collection and analysis before any changes are decided upon by the devs.
So, what is happening here in 0.35?
IMO, what players are observing right now is the F2P foundations of the new upgrading system, replacing the one in 0.34. The system is incomplete (obviously), because it is missing the portion that is likely to be monetized. The F2P portion of the system (IMO) is functionally complete, which is why it was released in 0.35.
The F2P portion of the upgrade system:
Relies very heavily on upgrading individual crafters/resource generators to their highest levels to allow access to high-level drops.
Requires multiple playthroughs on different classes to obtain enough Crystal currency to achieve high follower levels.
Will still be subject to the whims of RNG on Eveline to obtain enough Crystal currency to reach maximum levels on followers.
Is highly subject to the whims of RNG and low drop rates for upper-tier gear creation, once at high follower levels.
If a player wants to upgrade their existing equipment (a known thing not subject to RNG), there’s likely going to be a very steep cost (time and/or money wise) to do so to bypass the follower gacha rolls. The systems for how that is going to work (probably the Event system) is probably what 0.36 is going to be about, it seems.
So first, my comment was sarcasm, to be clear. I’m well aware of that systems are often incomplete when they are implemented but (IMO) you are putting an incredibly positive and quite frankly too generous gloss on what has been put forth to date and their thinking behind it.
For starters, the question is what function does gear play in the life cycle of the game. Is it supposed to be an item that you acquire and through long painstaking playtime investment develop into a personalized piece of gear that you keep at its highest rarity? or is gear more akin to a Diablo-style loot fest that you grab, upgrade, and then easily toss aside when a more attractive version of the piece comes along. Given the various Perks (I assume that’s what they are called, perhaps Affects) and Mastery associations that could possibly be on gear and (at least for now) the inability to change those, it’s quite possible that a player might evolve a piece of gear to Epic or beyond and be dissatisfied with the Perks or color and want to attempt to “improve” the gear by finding and evolving another. Under the prior system of requiring additional copies, that was theoretically a possibility but given the rarity of drops, it’s hard to get beyond Epic with any regularity so it would be an arduous process. On top of that the vault limitations made the possibility of hoarding gear in a Diablo like fashion virtually impossible. So what are the devs “telling” us about how they think gear should be interacted with in this current system iteration?
So according to @Cyrup, the previous system was creating difficulties for players in acquiring resources needed for upgrades and evolutions. In the previous system, many of us were able to do evolves from Rare to Epic but it was clear that it would be exponentially difficult to continue further evolves due to the rarity of drops and the limited vault space. Now I don’t know if my Cyrup translation services are working currently, but what I just read was that 0.35 has introduced a system that recognizes those challenges (“the problem is going to get worse”) and made “signficant changes”. So again, as I work on my ability to understand English, what previously existed was a system in which players were able to evolve some gear but with increasing difficulty at further rarities. In it’s place was put a system in which players literally can at the current time and foreseeably for the future have no expectation of evolving A SINGLE PIECE OF GEAR. How can that be? Wasn’t the system that was put into place supposed to be a response to the difficulties that players were facing in the matter of evolving gear? When you acknowledge these difficulties and say, we therefore have replaced that system with something else, is not the implication that you are improving the environment for the players?
@Lyrian you seem to be a knowledgeable individual and I respect what you post but honestly you are giving them too much credit. We were literally told:
So let’s see, using my English reading skills (regardless of the various translation services that I may or may not possess), the first listed means to acquire relics is by completing Dungeons. The second means is by salvage, which is a “small chance”. Additionally, “another primary way of obtaining Relics” is forthcoming. So! We can infer that completing dungeons is a “primary way” of obtaining relics. It was listed first! It can’t be salvage, that’s just a “small chance”. Clearly the Battle Pass is not a “primary way” of obtaining relics. So now, I, the player, am led to believe that the old system was too difficult, even though evolves were happening at earlier rarities, much less so at higher rarities. The new system is being implemented to address these difficulties. We are told that the new system utilizes Relics and the “primary way” to get Relics is by completing Dungeons. Hmmmm! I guess using my limited vocabulary set and reading comprehension I would infer that relics might have a similar frequency to gear drops that were needed in the old system. Or maybe they might have a similar frequency to scrolls/runes which are also needed in the evolution process and also drop with regularity from chests. But lo! instead, Relics appear to have a drop rate so low that after 5 days, we literally have just a handful of instances of their appearance. Now we know:
“Very Rare”! That’s certainly not what I expected of the drop rate of something that is a “primary way” to acquire something. Does that mean that the other “primary way” of acquiring Relics will also be “Very Rare”? and I think I agree with @Tacet here:
So here we are. I shouldn’t need a @Salty translation service when:
I think it’s fair to say that my ability to read and translate is working just fine. What is absent is the ability to communicate honestly about changes that are being made and how they will affect the player. I’m addressing this seriously because I often use humour to try to deflect from what otherwise would be a contentious response. But let this post be very clear. I’m not amused. And I don’t need a translator. I have 3 decades of experience in both project development, assurance, and as a game player. What I see is disappointing and quite frankly an embarrassment so far in terms of communication. It is early access; systems are going to be subject not just to change but to reimplementation; that is not unexpected. What is expected is that if you make significant changes that restructure entire elements of game play, that you be honest about how that will affect the player. At the end of the day they are trying to make a product that will in theory be financially viable using the mobile gacha model. I have no issue with that. But as a player, I should have some idea what my actions in the game will lead to. In the previous system I understood how to evolve items and what effort that would take. In the new system which was introduced to address “difficulties” I have absolutely no ability to know the level of effort required to evolve an item and from what has been communicated so far, no idea what that will look like in the future. That is not a failure of me to translate, that is a failure of design and communication.
The current system as described was put in place to fix a potentially broken system. With that being said, the broken system worked somewhat at least to epic rarity.
In the current system players cannot evolve past uncommon on equipment and spells. At least followers can be evolved which is a welcome and great change and I applaud that effort.
In the efforts to fix a mistake though, the devs have created an even worse system that is actively frustrating the player base. I have seen more salt in the last week then in the previous 2 months of gameplay.
Previously I at least felt like running a dungeon was making progress because I might get the piece of gear I needed to evolve my rare. Now I just hope for a better drop.
If you say so. Not sure how this is sarcasm, but I will take your word on it being just that .
IMO, it’s both. The investment in a single piece for the long term is going to the costlier option.
Why? Think of it like this from the devs’ side of table … if a player selectively targets and obtains the perfect pieces of armor early on in the game, what incentive is there for the player to chance newer and shinier things? There isn’t one, outside of being forced to create even more perfect versions of those same pieces of armor to incentivize the player to chase these things. The option will still be there, for sure. But, there will surely be a hefty price to pay to do so. The devs have to provide some incentive for players to chase random things instead of simply waiting out the next tier upgrade for those armor pieces in already in the players’ inventories.
Flip side of the coin… what I see is a community manager who is trying to tell us as much information as she can in a roundabout way about a topic where she appears to be currently not allowed to discuss that information publicly by her superiors for any number or reasons.
Don’t take your frustrations out on her. If she is not allowed to talk publicly about a topic in detail, she’s not going to do that, no matter what.
It is posts just like this one on why the devs stopped providing detailed information about game functionality in GoW publicly and often contributes to why Salty sometimes calls in sick to the weekly streams for mental health reasons. Frankly, I don’t blame her for that as I sure as heck would not want to get in front of a camera twice a week for an hour to get chewed out either.
While, yes, it would be nice to have a better explanation regarding what the long-term intentions for the changes in 0.35 are, hardcore venting at Salty is not going to get anyone any answers on the matter. Period, full stop. She’s already said that she wants to do a stream about the design decisions made for the game, and she’ll probably do that when she gets the green light from her superiors to do so.
Quite simply, I did not make this personal. As I noted on several occassions, I interfaced with the communications as a whole, the content of those communications. The communications are clearly lacking and if you think that they are not, then we have to disagree about what constitutes transparency and clarity. Making a joke about gathering data or saying that as a whole this has been a failure of communication and implementation is legitimate feedback. I did not attack anyone personally nor did I make hateful or obscene statements. I quite clearly documented why I thought the communications, again as a whole, were insufficiently substantial based on their own statements about reasons and transparency.
If you can’t see the difference between legitimate criticism in the face of clear community confusion and frustration and “hardcore venting at Salty”, then do me a favor in the future and don’t cherry pick quote me for your cheerleading responses.
EDIT: P.S. @Lyrian if you didn’t pick up on it, most of my “making it personal” was directed at you for your silly “here let me help you understand better with my Salty translation services”.
When the main way that these resources are dropped is introduced we will observe the data further. The best way to get them is tied into a feature that we are hoping releases with 0.36. (I can’t say more at this time, but I hope this sheds some light on the data we will be observing, and that there will be better ways to get Relics and Glyphs.)
For future reference, if I am not discussing something in greater detail it is because I cannot do so at the current time.
I also want to be clear that we are in early access. We are tweaking, changing, and experimenting with our systems to see what works best and suits the needs of the player, developer, and publisher. I cannot tell you with 100% certainty where something is going when we are still in the process of changing it and seeing how it works best. With our recent patch notes we included more information on why we made changes, and also briefly outlined what we would like to look into moving forward.
I understand that this might not be enough for everyone. If it isn’t, I apologise. At this time I cannot offer more insight, especially as we are in a state of flux (Flux? Get it? Sorry, bad resource joke) as we are still refining the game, and it isn’t in a finished state.
All that is well and good but the fact is that the notes were written in such a way that the average reader would think that Relics would be reasonably obtainable in the game state because the implication was that of the methods listed to obtain Relics, one of those methods was a “primary” source. The reality is different as you are clearly saying. So I think its a fair critique that the information released was misleading and I don’t think that any judgments that I have made to date are incorrect. Nothing that I have said has been contradicted.
With that said, I appreciate the response. Clearly, the “system” that you have rolled out in 0.35 with regard to evolutions is incomplete and currently disadvantages the player relative to the previous game state. Players will have to decide what their tolerance for these types of changes are as it is early access but even in early access players need an incentive to play, to continue to engage with content, and to provide feedback on that content. The system that was rolled out with regards to evolutions is currently the absence of content, not just in the short term but for as long as it takes for the next thing that you are hoping to release in 0.36. During that time, a core element of the game is functionally non-existent and the community has to keep engaging with that.
I look forward to continue to provide feedback as I have done to date, whether it is on bugs, content, or updates in an effort to help improve the game. As you said, the systems need to suit both the player, the developer, and the publisher. I will continue to be a voice for the player in this regards.
I understand your feedback, but I want to reiterate that this is not the intended primary source of Glyphs and Relics. Once the primary source is in game we can observe how players get these resources, and if it’s not enough we can then tweak either, or even both, the primary source and the chest drop.
I understand the drop is low now, but the drop is not our primary concern at this time, as we want to see how things go with the next update when the main source of these resources is introduced before changing the existing system. (Otherwise, what will likely happen is this… we change the drop rate for make players happy, new primary source of these resources is introduced and then players are getting too many too quickly, and we have to revert the drop rate to what it was, which will understandably upset players even further.)
Not sure if you do. There is a concern that high level chests literally don’t have the new drops in them, as all reports of these new drops are on lower level chests and not max leveled chests. Seems weird that a good bulk of people opening at 100 seems to not get them, but the low amount of people opening on lower leveled chests do. There is likely a glitch or incorrectly input numbers somewhere that is overly skewing it against higher leveled chests.
In the current state of the game, I don’t think a single person would complain to that occurring for the month leading up to 0.36 and then being rolled back once it is out. The game from a progression standpoint is in a nearly unplayable state since 0.35.
We understand that the current drop rate from dungeon may be low since from what you explain, it seems that the main way to obtain relics and glyphs will be introduced in 0.36 and dungeon chests are just secondary way or so (NOT another primary way as mentioned in the patch note)
However what Tacet mentions here is kinda unrelated to the issue above.
The players in the early access notice that from the global chat & this forum, we have some players reporting that they obtain relics from Low level chests (chest Lv. 1-50).
Some of them are not even dungeon chests - but just regular chests. Your patch notes mention that it should be obtained by completing dungeons.
On the other side there are many players who open a lot of Lv. 100 chests (including Ruby and Diamond) never see any Relics, Glyphs, Crystals drop.
Not a single player who open Lv. 100 chests says that they get a relic, glyph or crystal from them.
Not a single drop from the whole community who open Lv. 100 chests.
That is why we have a strong suspicion that maybe there are some errors in the coding which cause relics, crystals, glyphs can drop from low level chests but they do not drop from high lvl or Lv. 100 chests.
We really hope that this issue/suspicion can be conveyed the devs and that this issue can be investigated.
Is it possible that it’s related to this bug? (the introduction of easy lv. dungeons may cause some glitch or shift on the drop percentage or something)
I think we got it now, wait for the next upgrade. This is fair.
I think the biggest issue most of us had was lack of transparence because Patch 0.35 Notes had some very clear Sentences on Relics and how they would be received which are incongruent and misleading given what is really going on - that there will be a new feature.
My suggestion, PLEASE be more transparent.
If there is something that we as players need to wait for in another patch to really appreciate a change rolled out already, then please just say so. The whole searching endlessly, the funk created by the nonexistance, all the drama that ensued the patch could have been avoided by just saying what you (@Salty ) ended up saying anyways - “we rolled out relics, there is an infinitesimal chance in current systems but there will be a new feature” - you could even sell it in a way that we would anticipate the new feature rather than be all kinds of annoyed at searching for something that is written into the patch notes but really at a too low level to make a difference. The discussions on whether the game has become unplayable (no more evolution) would have been ended before it ever started (wait for new feature, this is early access).
So I am asking again - please be a bit mroe transparent.
The current player base on the forum is clearly mostly rooting for this game and willing to sit this all out. Just be clear on what you are doing without of course saying too much. But that relics were part of a new feature was clear to you when you rolled out the update I would hope. So you could have just said so.
What about in the meantime? What if something happens and the feature is delayed?
Would it not make sense to make a patch now buffing the Relic drop rates from dungeons, then nerf it down (to a lower yet still reasonable level) when the primary means of obtaining Relics becomes available?