Author Topic: Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.  (Read 358 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gawdamnit

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.
« on: August 04, 2017, 04:28:12 PM »
Love the game and have spent quite a bit of time at it, but admit that I'm surprised at how unrewarding most multiplayer matches can end up feeling in terms of account progression.

Each game is a significant time investment. Most games for me are easily an 1:30 or more, and the reality is that your likely reward for that time investment is a single measly star.

The reward disparity between victor and loser is huge in a way I rarely see in other online games. Victors get 4 stars + a likely commendation star in most games. 500% of the losing payout is insane. I've had many nights of fun games, but a seriously demoralizing end when I see a single star payout. It can sometimes ruin the fun and make me want to log out.

I highly recommend re-tuning the star allocation to something more reasonable. Dangle that carrot more invitingly in front of your players. When done right, it serves as a powerful incentive that helps enhance your game. The way it's done now, it will likely discourage large swaths of players.

Phlox

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 255
  • Hey there, I am Phlox(Forums)/Aethalion(Twitch)
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2017, 04:32:00 AM »
Well, I don't see the progression system as a reward. I am a long time Armello player and since I can't play more than one or two games a day due to my professional and personal life I havent reached high peaks in the ranks.
But that doesn't make playing less fun or turn me into an unexperienced player.

I think the mp-progression system is the rest of what was intended as "ranked play" and was primary intended to get players of similar experience to play against each other....but since the player base isn't that big I am quite happy if I find a game, even if it will be against single-digit-star-players (which may mean they are new to the game and lack experience...but it doesn't mean they can't take the strategy and tricks up when they play the game).

The chest/key-loot-system feels much more like a reward, and I will get my reward for just playing and ending a game...which feels kind of right to me.
I've been manipulated by a pychotic rabbit!

Gawdamnit

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2017, 06:32:02 AM »
Those are fair points, but LoG decided to tie various rewards to the MP rank system. I'm currently chasing the Rank 10 Resist amulet myself. While others may be fine with the meager progression, others actively chasing goals (even if it is just to attain the next rank) will likely feel frustrated.

Rank 9-10 requires 16 stars, I believe. In a worst-case scenario, assuming it takes you 90 minutes to finish a match and you lose every match without gaining any bonus stars, it could take you 24 hours to go from level 9 to 10. The fact that this is even possible is really bad. The currently implementation of star progression isn't well-suited to firing off those reward centers in the brain. The system both takes a long time and makes me FEEL like it takes a long time. Tons of progression-based games at least try to address the latter to mask the former.

Proper tuning of the carrot in front of us only increases player participation!

Darcy Smith

  • League of Geeks | Developer
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2017, 04:44:07 PM »
Hey there Gawdamnit, thanks for the feedback. I hear you, there may be room to tweak this in the future but considering players are matched with this ranking we've got to be careful.


Cheers,

<3 Darcy

Kletian999

  • Backer
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2505
    • View Profile
Re: Multiplayer post-game reward pace feels... bad.
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2017, 07:09:51 AM »
I make it a point to never commend the winner, so instead of 5 vs 1, it's 4 vs 2 for someone who did well.  Perhaps that could be hard policy.  Would make it a lot easier to prevent the case where no one gets 2 stars even though everyone had done something worthy of reward.