Jump to content

Poll: do you agree with Rosso about awakenings?


Observer_X
 Share

< Please read first post before answering >  

73 members have voted

  1. 1. In the recent Q&A with Rosso, when asked if there are any plan to revert the awakenings update, he answered "No. It´s a good feature. It´s making the game experience more enjoyable." Do you agree with what he said in his answer?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Well, yes and no (will detail in post)
    • Won't answer / not interested


Recommended Posts

In the last Q&A Rosso said a thing that personally I got as a punch in the face, so once more I decided to ask for the forum dwellers opinion on the matter, trying to put that in numbers. The hope, as unrealistic as actually that may be, is that the forum feedback one day will gain more importance that it has now.

Important note and personal plea: I would like this poll to be a summary of data and opinions, NOT a debate on those opinions. Anyone willing to participate and post his opinion is welcome, but I would like to ask to keep reasonings and debating elsewhere: I am prone to bet that moderators will be ready to point to an appropriate place for that purposes, even creating one if need arises.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Good

  • It's a step away from "oldest account wins". While older accounts do get a substantial advantage with the new awakening system, it's one that at least allows lower-level players to catch up and overtake them.
  • The power increase means Pandora stage 3 is no longer a problem, and bodes well for Nike and Sake's second and third forms being beatable when we get there.
  • At least for the moment it's helping with champions. By drafting for your high-level girls, you can get some incredibly hard-hitters on the field. I am concerned that in the future as more and more of our harem is obtained post-awakenings and is stuck under level 250 that might become an issue, but right now drafting for the powerhouses is a good strategy.
  • We're seeing more variations in strategies in leagues, leading to diversity in team compositions. It used to be that if there were strong blessings for a girl that most players had access to (for instance, from Seasons, free path PoA, LC, etc) then everyone would use her that week, and this could lead to everyone having pretty much the same team. Now gems serve as a deterrent to this, and we see a lot more diversity in teams as a result as people are locked into long-term strategies.
  • The gem drop rate is high enough that a free player can thrive. If you're starting a new account today you've got a long road ahead of you, but it will take you less time to get level 750 girls than it will to reach player level 500. This is true for everyone who is more than a year away from level 500 right now.

The Bad

  • Retroactively foreclosing the ability to go above level 250 without paying gems was distasteful. In the long-run this won't matter as much because level 500 girls will be very weak in a PVP meta that revolves around level 750 girls (which is where we're going to be this time next year) so having a bunch of grandfathered girls won't be a big deal, but right now it's a huge deal.
  • While it's moved us away from "older account wins", we're still in a situation where the older account has massive advantages. Moreover, since you can get gems from real money purchases it threatens to move us towards pay to win over the coming months.
  • The number of resources is too many; you need a spreadsheet to balance your expenditures of the eight gem types. While some players thrive on spreadsheeting, others do not and given the casual nature of this game I think that went a bit too far. This is especially true given that it seems that they want to add even more resources.
  • Due to the way the costing of the awakenings works, the strategy of just levelling up 7 mythics and creating your "pyramid" entirely out of commons seems to be a bit too strong. Compared to someone who does a 50/50 common/legendary approach, the 7-mythic approach will cost about half as many gems to reach level 750. Players pursuing this strategy already have about a 50 level lead over those pursuing a more balanced approach, and if my spreadsheet estimates are right that will grow to a 100 level lead some time in early January. While it's not my experience so I can only speculate on their positions, high-level whales who are spending money might already be closing in on level 700 as we speak.
  • Most girls are now completely irrelevant for PVP now. Even if they have a strong blessing, investing in awakenings for a 3-star Legendary, Epic, or Rare girl is a terrible deal that is just way too expensive and slows down the progression of the rest of your harem. I have seen some players doing it, but this only works because they were already most of the way there from grandfathered awakenings and the players who are doing this are generally under-levelled so this behavior is hurting their progression.
  • As we approach level 750, my spreadsheeting indicates that books are going to become a critical bottleneck that will restrict gem spending. The XP cost is going to get so high that you will need to purchase around 100 extra shop refreshes per month to actually spend all your gems. Right now that's worth it, we're reaching new and exciting levels of power. In a year when we already have a diverse selection of level 750 girls will it be worth hundreds of shop refreshes every month to spend all your gems? I don't think so. I think gems, in the long-run, are doomed to become a resource that are bottlenecked by another resource (kobons) and we can't actually spend all the ones we earn, making them functionally pointless.
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said yes and no, and now I explain. According to me it's not worse than what we had before. People say they can't upgrade their girls, and that's true. But it was already the case when we were limited by the player's level. Now we are blocked far over the level we were blocked before. To me it's near exactly the same, only cosmetic details changed.

With the old system, when I loose my fights, it was versus olders accounts. Now it's versus players who invest more resources than I do. But it's detail, defeat is defeat, and victory is victory. And I don't saw any increasing or decreasing of my victories (more important, I still earn the girls I like, because I don't play because of the experience system and I'm pretty sure neither are the other players), so I have no reason to refuse the new system.

And I perfectly understand the need for money (that implies to be very nicer to those who really pay than with the others), KK is not a charity. If I just not answered "yes" in the poll, it's because "not worse" does'nt mean "good", and because I think KK would use their time and money better in fixing the bugs and developing something else than overcomplex systems.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kaitana said:

I said yes and no, and now I explain. According to me it's not worse than what we had before. People say they can't upgrade their girls, and that's true. But it was already the case when we were limited by the player's level. Now we are blocked far over the level we were blocked before. To me it's near exactly the same, only cosmetic details changed.

With the old system, when I loose my fights, it was versus olders accounts. Now it's versus players who invest more resources than I do. But it's detail, defeat is defeat, and victory is victory. And I don't saw any increasing or decreasing of my victories (more important, I still earn the girls I like, because I don't play because of the experience system and I'm pretty sure neither are the other players), so I have no reason to refuse the new system.

And I perfectly understand the need for money (that implies to be very nicer to those who really pay than with the others), KK is not a charity. If I just not answered "yes" in the poll, it's because "not worse" does'nt mean "good", and because I think KK would use their time and money better in fixing the bugs and developing something else than overcomplex systems.

I was not going to vote because I found it hard to articulate how I felt, but this is almost exactly how I feel so I've also voted "yes and no" with that in mind.

I did want to add that while I don't feel any difference in HH, I do heavily in CH where I went from winning 80-90% to maybe 25% of the time.  That feels super bad.  I started looking and everyone I am fighting and losing to has girls leveled 200 levels higher than my character (not girl) level.  So they put the effort in (broke above the free ceiling).  But I'm not super motivated to, so the combination of those two things has me considering quitting CH altogether (or at least until such time as I can muster the time/effort to strategize).  It is possible I am alone but as has been said elsewhere (including by me) it went from a casual to complex game "overnight".  So anyone unprepared or mis-prepared are probably equally suffering (or will to Attrim's point - maybe that will even be me:P).  As is quoted "KK is not a charity" so if they are willing to lose people over this, that is simply a business decision (good or bad).  It could be my experiences but I suspect the middle group suffers the most.  I think I was high enough (and prepared enough from the forum) to escape this pain on HH (thank you).  I also suspect super new folks will not be able to tell much (the game just starts "complex" for them, so they will feel minimal pain or just not continue playing), but not willing to create another account to find out ;)

PS: I'm not saying people who voted "no" are middle, I just suspect that people who are losing more than winning now probably are, were unprepared or just in a "bad spot" when the transitioned happened.  Anyone could vote "no" for their own reasons, plenty of threads on that 😜  

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say No.

 

It is so that the matchmaker as i know, works only with the player level. But a Player Level 400 with Level 400 Girls has no chance against a Player Level 400 with Level 500 Girls.

So the PVP is complete out of balance. Therefore some players have no fair chance in legendary Events where you need to win against other palyer to get girls poinst, like the actual event where you need to win in pvp and season the get girl points.

 

For me for example in the leage I have now Player Level 500 with Level 600 Girls. So I have now chance to get good points to get the girl points for the leage girl.

 

By the way: Is there now a max. Level for Girls or are the Girl level open end?

 

MfG
MDuss

 

The next Event is Kinky Cumpetition. So this Event is only Win against other players in leage and season. But how could someone have a chance to win in such a system. The matchmaker need to compare not only the player level, it need to compare the girl level too. Or how can a player with level 400 and level 400 Girls win against a level 400 Player with level 500 or higher girls?

Edited by MDuss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

In leagues you have no matchmaking that's based on lvl - it's only based on you performance in the league the week before in which league you end and than all players which are "worthy" to participate in (for example) D2 will be mixed in X brackets with 100+ player.

In Season your lvl is relevant, but you will be matched with three opponents who not only near your lvl, the amount of mojo is a requirement too.

In Contest you're matched only by your lvl, but there ar no direct interactions, they are always in other parts where you didn't match only on your own lvl.

No girl can be awaken past lvl 750.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Yes: It made the meta less stale and it shook up the previously immovable high player level advantage imbalance. It also gives a lot more opportunities for careful planning and good, steady strategies to shine, in many areas (primarily resource management and PvP) and, for the first time basically ever, several different strategies may be equally valid and successful depending on a given player's situation and preferred approach. It also removed the depressingly bleak "well, my account didn't start 4-5 years ago, so I'm screwed for at least a few years" status quo, which feels good even if it's not replaced by a fair and square balance.

&

No: It introduced a P2W path to high performances in the game that had never been there on its own before. That's a completely different kind of imbalance, and its introduction didn't outright replace the previous one either. P2W is the dark side of F2P games, so this isn't a good thing HH embraced it, albeit not completely and not exclusively.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
58 minutes ago, DvDivXXX said:

Yes: It made the meta less stale and it shook up the previously immovable high player level advantage imbalance. It also gives a lot more opportunities for careful planning and good, steady strategies to shine, in many areas (primarily resource management and PvP) and, for the first time basically ever, several different strategies may be equally valid and successful depending on a given player's situation and preferred approach. It also removed the depressingly bleak "well, my account didn't start 4-5 years ago, so I'm screwed for at least a few years" status quo, which feels good even if it's not replaced by a fair and square balance.

&

No: It introduced a P2W path to high performances in the game that had never been there on its own before. That's a completely different kind of imbalance, and its introduction didn't outright replace the previous one either. P2W is the dark side of F2P games, so this isn't a good thing HH embraced it, albeit not completely and not exclusively.

That would be my summary too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted Yes. I simply like to care for the games I'm in. Is like early Super Robot Wars (deploy mechs and win) and new systems (boosting stats, buy skills, craft weapons)... it give me more sense of ownership. About 'power levels' I don't care much, I don't like endless competitions so I focus more on personal goals. What the max Level I can reach? In such sense , gems are more fun to manage than simply spend books & gifts in order for every girls to max out the entire harem - those were two very very very boring months. Being selective is more fun to me.

So, to be clear: I don't care a thing if the thing mathematically make me weaker, I never won money for this game nor anyone come compliment with my results (nor I can share it around...). I like the game practice itself, and gems added a bit more of that for me.

The system have some mechanical flaw, but nothing killer.

So... yes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
On 12/23/2021 at 3:30 PM, Kenrae said:

That would be my summary too.

 

On 12/23/2021 at 2:31 PM, DvDivXXX said:

Yes: It made the meta less stale and it shook up the previously immovable high player level advantage imbalance. It also gives a lot more opportunities for careful planning and good, steady strategies to shine, in many areas (primarily resource management and PvP) and, for the first time basically ever, several different strategies may be equally valid and successful depending on a given player's situation and preferred approach. It also removed the depressingly bleak "well, my account didn't start 4-5 years ago, so I'm screwed for at least a few years" status quo, which feels good even if it's not replaced by a fair and square balance.

&

No: It introduced a P2W path to high performances in the game that had never been there on its own before. That's a completely different kind of imbalance, and its introduction didn't outright replace the previous one either. P2W is the dark side of F2P games, so this isn't a good thing HH embraced it, albeit not completely and not exclusively.

+1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...