Spartan Assassins 2020 Feedback Thread

[curadh]

Very significant that developers left it to the very end to give a reply ... Community Awards are based on the amount of gold spent .. if it wasn't for some players paying in the hopes of getting the collections then NO targets would ever be met. The announcements of events from the very start give false hope to non gold players that they will by 'luck' get the armour pieces and be able to compete even briefly with gold players .. when in fact you need to spend gold to get even these (dumbed down in comparison to previous versions of this event) rewards. So please explain how the awards are achieved without players spending gold? If these targets were as intended then it has clearly backfired on Innos money grabbing department and players have responded by not spending the over inflated amounts that the event demands .. lets hope that players common sense prevails for the future money making exercises and they restrain from paying unreasonable amounts in future

 

[DeletedUser57138]

After hearing initial feedback from players, we have confirmed the calculation was correct, and was working as expected. The main reason for the Community Goals calculation method change was we intended to make them truly challenging, but not entirely unreachable. Prior to this event, the Community Goals were static boundaries. This meant that in some cases (smaller worlds on smaller markets, newer worlds etc.) it was impossible to reach any of the goals. The calculation was redesigned to work based on participation in the event within the world.

Are they serious?? They can not be serious!?!
I am beyond words..
Make them truly challenging? For what? For our wallets?
Clowns..
We all know you do this for profit.. And its not wrong, its just business.. Stop beating around the bush and using stupid excuses like, we did this to make it challenging..

 

[curadh]

From the initial announcement of the event:

meaning the goals should remain obtainable for all worlds!

So either the Mod posting lied, was lied to or was deliberately misleading ... bearing in mind todays reponse that they were made 'truly challenging' (in other words almost impossible to obtain without massive gold spending by all participants).

 

[Hydna]

Participation is what is important - that is alliance/world participation. It is far more effective if 90% of players use all 10 arrows every day than if 30% use their arrows and then buy them. Yes of course buying arrows helps everyone but the aim is greater participation for all. It is designed to get community involvement. What we saw here is lower participation and that is at the root of the failure to achieve targets. The challenge is to get your whole team to participate fully.

 

[DeletedUser22115]

Participation is what is important - that is alliance/world participation. It is far more effective if 90% of players use all 10 arrows every day than if 30% use their arrows and then buy them.

What we saw here is lower participation and that is at the root of the failure to achieve targets. The challenge is to get your whole team to participate fully.

So active players weren't using the free arrows they were given? I would assume that every active player is using their daily free arrows throughout the event.

 

[curadh]

Participation is what is important - that is alliance/world participation. It is far more effective if 90% of players use all 10 arrows every day than if 30% use their arrows and then buy them. Yes of course buying arrows helps everyone but the aim is greater participation for all. It is designed to get community involvement. What we saw here is lower participation and that is at the root of the failure to achieve targets. The challenge is to get your whole team to participate fully.

Doesn't the FACT that I haven't heard of a single server achieving all the 'Community Awards' (or even close to them) tell you something? And servers with a lot of inactives/VM players, I trust that the wonder brain that set these calculations accounted for and excluded all of them. Maybe you could list (at least 2 servers) that players have received all the Community awards ... and those that have received the 4th and the 3rd .. (I know that players will get these, but those that have received them through 'participation') !!!

 

[Hydna]

Doesn't the FACT that I haven't heard of a single server achieving all the 'Community Awards' (or even close to them) tell you something? And servers with a lot of inactives/VM players, I trust that the wonder brain that set these calculations accounted for and excluded all of them. Maybe you could list (at least 2 servers) that players have received all the Community awards ... and those that have received the 4th and the 3rd .. (I know that players will get these, but those that have received them through 'participation') !!!

Well the developers have said that the rebalancing does need looking at. This is why we are manually making sure all worlds achieve level 4. I am not trying to justify what has happened, I have given you the information from the developers and what they have said they will do. I am simply saying that participation (in terms of all players) was an issue here.

 

[curadh]

I guess the answer to that is that NO servers have achieved anything then as you can't give any that have. We have beta servers to test and correct things don't we, so why aren't they being used?

 

[Fluvisol]

I guess the answer to that is that NO servers have achieved anything then as you can't give any that have. We have beta servers to test and correct things don't we, so why aren't they being used?

Beta servers have different mindset and playerbase. The latest world there, zz16, has 900 players. The latest world here, en126, has 12k. On top of that it's beta servers, I wouldn't expect people to spend tons of gold on those as the game can be unstable. Those two little tidbits mean that it's hard to test the community rewards on their obtainability rather than their functionality

Yea it sucks that nobody got to 3/4, god forbid 5, but at least they're handing them out after the event now. The intent for changing the calculation seems good, because on older worlds with less active players it used to be impossible to get the higher rewards without someone spending their life savings.
If you shoot every attempt at change in the game down by saying it's just for money, whether that's true or not, nothing will ever change and then you'll complain about that as well

 

[curadh]

My point is that in the event launch announcement it was clearly stated that the calculations had BEEN changed to make the awards more achievable ... and having to hand them out after the event hardly helps does it .. they should be achievable DURING the event as that is the whole objective of it. Saying that players aren't using their free arrows is plainly stupid without even considering that the event isn't available to players that play from mobile app. This is without the fact that some players haven't even completed one armour collection in spite of some spending gold every day ... saying that they get the shop rewards is immaterial as these are so small as to be laughable. To calculate any target for awards all inactives/VM players plus any that play only from app should be removed from the base calculations anyway to give a true base of players that CAN take part. As targets are recalculated after each reward level this shouldn't be rocket science to do? The same INTENT to change calculation was made last time this event ran (with the same results as this time) so it appears that someones maths isn't working!!!
I see that a similar event (with community awards as well as alliance rewards) is now being beta tested as well lol If beta servers have the wrong mindset/playerbase to test events then the point of them is what? If events need to be tested on a true live server then test them on one first .. before opening them on all maybe?

 

[1saaa]

I don't really get what point you are trying to make curadh. Inno is a greedy company? Everyone knows that and everyone has moaned about that.

Inno tried to change the way the community awards were calculated and handed out. They haven't been satisfied with the results from this event (or the feedback from the community). They'll try and fix this issue next time around and maybe then It'll be much better.

So, we can wait until the next event and decide from that how effectively Inno have improved from the mistakes of this event.

These people are just human. We'd be extremely lucky for them to get it right first try so I think its best to give them the benefit of the doubt and see how they improve.

 

[curadh]

Like they learnt from the last time this event was run .. with exactly the same results that have been seen here AFTER the reworking of calculations? How many times does an event need to run ... if it is because beta servers are incapable of testing them then as I suggested they should be tested on ONE live server to get it right before being rolled out to all.

 

[1saaa]

The more live servers they tested it on the better data set they could get.

If they tested it on one sever the chances are the backlash would be just as bad if not worse.

 

[Fluvisol]

Like they learnt from the last time this event was run .. with exactly the same results that have been seen here AFTER the reworking of calculations? How many times does an event need to run ... if it is because beta servers are incapable of testing them then as I suggested they should be tested on ONE live server to get it right before being rolled out to all.

And which server do you suggest bites the bullet and gets an event that either doesn't work or works too fast?
Beta is people who sign up for that. Wouldn't be fair to run it on another market

 

[curadh]

Instead it is inflicted on everyone so is that fair either?

As has been so often pointed out Innos is a commercial company and as such out to make money, do you know of other companies that actually take customers money to test their own money making events? Maybe rotate servers to test and pay those players for the testing per event if they can't improve their own beta servers to make them more viable for testing adequately.

 

[1saaa]

Either way it wouldn't be fair on the servers testing the event. And, having a large data size (which, Inno has gotten) will be very helpful for Inno improving the event.

 

[DeletedUser54339]

I'm actually pretty stoked that lots of second rate players now won't get to pad their stats using the 50 percent BP buff. Anyone crying into their beer about not getting it because Inno doofed their sums should maybe concentrate on getting better at the game.

 

[DeletedUser56427]

better at the game.

--better at spending money

 

[DeletedUser54339]

--better at spending money

Whatever, Mr. All the consonants. Who even are you anyway?

 

[Ranga1]

and then you'll complain about that as well

That is all she does...complain, makes her feel important. Like the little old lady complaining about a lawn mower starting 1 minute before local regulations allow "the rules say it isn't allowed, so that's the way it should be! Why have rules if they don't get enforced" while she shakes her first