Leds Last Post

[marcovchb]

I can't help myself to think this is more of a bitter whine than real feedback. The game is not pay to win, streamlining the game and providing quality of life services such as the boosters and reducing the grind does not mean to make the game less hardcore, which isn't.
I love the trials as they are now, and it's an improvement in a good direction.
Yes, game has room for improvement, but this is not EA, BLIZZARD or Bethesda... Not the same budget, nor same ideology.
So we better chill out, enjoy the game if we like it, if not... Well, don't play it.

[ShootBigBucks]

Led complains the game is p2w and it should never have ads. Well, I only play this game since it's free and doesn't need a monthly subscription. What do you think the ads are there for? Ads help to pay some of the server and employee costs. Other purchases help to make this game f2p aswell. Led is also a p2p player as he stated. Not sure how long he had the monthly subscription for, but let's assume 18 months (his total play time), that's 54k gems, 3k monthly more than a f2p player. There are individuals who chose not to, or can't afford to shell out money. If he really wants to be f2p and support the game - send a PayPal transaction instead of purchasing gems. Travis also stated that about 10% of the accounts are chosen to never have ads (chosen by partners) - maybe that's based on the country, as some users need a VPN (this should be changed to make it more fair). I've also talked about the grinding aspect previously, and things happen - the easy mode is also beta, so it's not set in stone.

tl;Dr Some points are irrelevant.

[giecomo]

And if you want to encourage diversity of builds, why is the end all be all of the game trials? And why is it timed? That necessitates a single goal and (at a macro level) build, i.e. DPS. What is the purpose of making trials timed? Why not make them hardcore? Why not make them like gauntlet and spawn increasingly difficult opponents until you die? Why not provide options?

This is actually an extremely good point...at the endgame the only build to go for is DPS. No diversity at all.

[DariusStryke]

As a Veteran I can't agree with you that somebody with high CL without skills will be better than sombody with low CL with skills. Look at leaderboards on top BH,, look at the CLs, look at the second person on the leaderbord, stop for w while and think how its possible. I will also tell you that my skills are far away for this moment from them, I have no idea how to get there with assault.

Another thing is that there is a soft CAP for CL because progression is exponential so the difference between somebody who send 2 year and 1 year will be lower than from sobody between 1 year and half year (of course if they were playing the same amount of time and spend it for gridning XP). I hope they never make hard cap, I don't see any reason for that and now even if the distance between top will be low in CLs levels of CP are showing how much time somebody spend for the game.

Look at the graphs thanks to heyjude1971

Gold post. So spending will only get you so far, sure a p2w player is going to get to ~1900 CL player but at the cost of missing out developing skills & accumulating gear. I guess the only thing I'm peeved about is the lack of build diversity and the only build they seem to push is DPS. I guess bringing pvp will introduce some build diversity, and co-op play if done right would be brill, but I guess we won't be see them any time soon. One style of gameplay does really wear you down.

[Radament]

Wish I was compensated for playing Runescape before it kept getting easier. You need to be playing in excess of 10+ years and 12-16hrs a day to even be on the leaderboards. Led is nowhere a grinder as to me.

The way these guys tell us they're going to quit just because of the changes that did not favor them. Makes me think they just LOVE staying at the top.. Ahead of everyone else looking down.

[ShootBigBucks]

Yeah, some of the "veterans" or "old timers" also want compensation because "they've been playing for so long" they want some kind of reward, Damn, some employees don't event get recognition for working, yet these guys want compensation for PLAYING? SERIOUSLY ... WHAT THE HELL FOR .. I mean who FORCED them to?

Wish I was compensated for playing Runescape before it kept getting easier. You need to be playing in excess of 10+ years and 12-16hrs a day to even be on the leaderboards. Led is nowhere a grinder as to me.

[hades0505]

Face it dude. If you and somone els have the same gear and same cl, even if i have more skill.. he can out trial me eventually because he could potentially buy boosters and gain more cl's faster than me, where skill wouldn't matter. Eventually somone who dumps a lot of money into their character can be at the top, even if they lack skill. It's inevitable. I'm not quiting, but after initially disagreeing with the vets, I have come to understand in the sense I just stated, that I have to agree that the boosters are a bad idea. Somone can just keep buying gems and buy boosters, there is no CL cap, If you have forgotten that. So money spent will determine in the end, the people with the highest cl's.

I have been trying to sneak my mage into the mage top 10 for quite a while (currently 11) with worse gear and jewelry than the others. I now is doable (yesterday the dragon killed me due to a mistapping, with 1.30 mins left and less than a quarter of her HP remaining). So skill does matter.

Face it dude. If you and somone els have the same gear and same cl, even if i have more skill.. he can out trial me eventually because he could potentially buy boosters and gain more cl's faster than me, where skill wouldn't matter. Eventually somone who dumps a lot of money into their character can be at the top, even if they lack skill. It's inevitable. I'm not quiting, but after initially disagreeing with the vets, I have come to understand in the sense I just stated, that I have to agree that the boosters are a bad idea. Somone can just keep buying gems and buy boosters, there is no CL cap, If you have forgotten that. So money spent will determine in the end, the people with the highest cl's.

As a Veteran I can't agree with you that somebody with high CL without skills will be better than sombody with low CL with skills. Look at leaderboards on top BH,, look at the CLs, look at the second person on the leaderbord, stop for w while and think how its possible. I will also tell you that my skills are far away for this moment from them, I have no idea how to get there with assault.

Another thing is that there is a soft CAP for CL because progression is exponential so the difference between somebody who send 2 year and 1 year will be lower than from sobody between 1 year and half year (of course if they were playing the same amount of time and spend it for gridning XP). I hope they never make hard cap, I don't see any reason for that and now even if the distance between top will be low in CLs levels of CP are showing how much time somebody spend for the game.

Look at the graphs thanks to heyjude1971

[Jmac75]

I think that's a gross exaggeration.

First, Trials success is a combination of 3 things: your CL, your gear, and your skill**. The XP packs accelerate the first one only, which in turn can accelerate the second - but not the third.

Second, it's not like you have to "pay" to get the XP packs. You can also enjoy them with the 100+/day gems they provide *for free*. For those (most of us, really) who don't play insane amounts of time, that's a much welcome boost at zero or negligible actual cost. With the standard subscription pack + daily quests you can sustain one 200% XP booster per day. And sustaining 2x 100% boosters becomes rather trivial. That's only 33% down from the 200% booster in terms of XP gained per playing time (yes, that's right).

Third, to actually "out level you", someone needs to put in the same play time than you or more. But that was also the case before, no? If I can only play 1hr/day and some other guy can spend 5hrs/day, he will level up 5x faster than me. Sustaining a 200% XP booster for 5hr/day of playing time would cost 2000gems per day, and still require about 10 days by my reckoning to reach CL1800 (which you'll *also* reach without the booster, just more slowly). That's 20K gems.

Of course, some "big fish" might come along and spend 200$ on the larger gem packs to be able to do that. But then again, in the old system, I'm pretty sure (like 200% sure) I could find someone in this crazy online world who would level my character for 10hours of CoW per day, for 30 days, for 200$...


** -> Mohin would wisely add a fourth factor: the platform you play on.

Face it dude. If you and somone els have the same gear and same cl, even if i have more skill.. he can out trial me eventually because he could potentially buy boosters and gain more cl's faster than me, where skill wouldn't matter. Eventually somone who dumps a lot of money into their character can be at the top, even if they lack skill. It's inevitable. I'm not quiting, but after initially disagreeing with the vets, I have come to understand in the sense I just stated, that I have to agree that the boosters are a bad idea. Somone can just keep buying gems and buy boosters, there is no CL cap, If you have forgotten that. So money spent will determine in the end, the people with the highest cl's.

[Radament]

a) who's that? any specific examples? All I see on top10 right now are what we'd call veteran/experienced players.

b) I respect Led for his playing skills, for his ingenuity in trying new combos, and for his self-discipline in pursuit of his goals. But (no offense to him) I don't respect him for the 500,000 times he started CoW. Sure, it's an investment, but this is still a GAME. If you're not approaching it in a way that you can, at any one time, count your blessings and feel it was 100% time well spent, that's on you.

And I speak as someone who has been passionate about games, poured countless hours onto them, seen them on the brink of greatness, and seen them DIE (and a little part of me with them, as far as these things go).

Yeah, some of the "veterans" or "old timers" also want compensation because "they've been playing for so long" they want some kind of reward, Damn, some employees don't event get recognition for working, yet these guys want compensation for PLAYING? SERIOUSLY ... WHAT THE HELL FOR .. I mean who FORCED them to?

[Arionthe]

If boosters are here to stay. Let's put diminishing return on it as well. 1st booster of the day is gold cost. 2nd booster becomes gem cost, 3rd booster and so on have a 50% premium in cost escalating upward. Costs reset each day or week.

lets make gold useful in something.

Alternatively how about unlimited booster usage until cl 1k, then one per day until cl 1500. After that no booster. If boosters are meant to catch ppl up in the beginning.

As as far as currency booster, to be honest I would like to see a daily cap on how many one can use. When ppl can pay to make their playtime worth 4x as much as the person that don't, I call that accumulating game advantages uncounterable by nonpayers. Definition of p2w.

[SoulGaming2]

Then perhaps defer your judgment until your conjecture becomes reality?

They're becoming reality already. I'm not trying to offend anyone, but I'm sure anyone can see the way it's going.

I'll be happy to say that I was wrong...but I'm sad that this isn't propably gonna to happen.

[Jose Sarmento]

There will be nice bunch of them soon(ish) as the version goes live. Wait few weeks.

Then perhaps defer your judgment until your conjecture becomes reality?

[SoulGaming2]

a) who's that? any specific examples? All I see on top10 right now are what we'd call veteran/experienced players.

There will be nice bunch of them soon(ish) as the version goes live. Wait few weeks.


in addition, I strongly disagree with devs (I'm highly amazed by their work, this game is still a gem between gems) in the way they changed experience gain.
Whatever they do, loosing old community is step to hell.

[Jose Sarmento]

Why would someone who played three to four weeks should be in top 10, when compared to poor Led and many others that invested HOURS into that where they are now.

a) who's that? any specific examples? All I see on top10 right now are what we'd call veteran/experienced players.

b) I respect Led for his playing skills, for his ingenuity in trying new combos, and for his self-discipline in pursuit of his goals. But (no offense to him) I don't respect him for the 500,000 times he started CoW. Sure, it's an investment, but this is still a GAME. If you're not approaching it in a way that you can, at any one time, count your blessings and feel it was 100% time well spent, that's on you.

And I speak as someone who has been passionate about games, poured countless hours onto them, seen them on the brink of greatness, and seen them DIE (and a little part of me with them, as far as these things go).