RE: Surviving the Survival Mode?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
The issue is really that we've been totally swamped with the CA release and the new player experience stuff we want to have ready for our marketing efforts that we haven't yet had much time to work on Survival mode. I think we all agree it needs some work and we never expected it would be perfect right out of the gate.
I suggested hiding the opponent names initially when some of these issues first surfaced and I got pushback from some players and people internally who thought that was all part of the strategy, so we didn't make any changes until we had more time to really gauge community sentiment on that one.
As for the rentals, I guess I don't understand why more people aren't doing that if it's so profitable. Ideally we would see a lot of bots start renting large amounts of cards and competing until the average earnings dropped and/or rental prices increased. That was kind of the idea of survival mode - to add more value to the cards so that rental and purchase volume would increase.
I'm hoping the revival potions will help add more battle liquidity and we're going to try to get those out asap after CA.
Ultimately, though, it will be up to the token holders to decide if they want to provide SPS rewards for the mode going forward and what changes they want to see for that to happen. We hope to be able to start working with the community on that very soon.
I think hiding the names just like we had before, solves a lot of the problems.
Rentals are a different beast. Damn if you block them, damn if you don’t. Vugtis understands this market well and he is against it in survival for sure.
I personally find rentals to be cumbersome. However I have plenty of cards.
I still don't understand why more people aren't doing what tryhard and dratek are doing. I don't know how much they are spending on the rentals, but they must be pulling in a good amount of profit per season if the numbers you're showing are correct. Seems like a big arbitrage opportunity no one is taking advantage of so I must be missing something.
I checked.
They are renting about 35K DEC worth of cards.
Trouble is they can do this because there are still lot of "lazy renters". Aggy is one. He hasn't changed his prices in ages until last week. He was giving away CL max summoners for 10DEC :)
There are more like that. Cheap rental are not universal. They also require automation. Publicly available rent bots disappeared. So many common people can't use them to snipe cheap rentals.
Ahh ok, that makes sense. It's important to understand the underlying issues and address those rather than the symptoms of those issues. Perhaps we could put a time limit on rentals where they have to be re-listed or something like that. I'm open to ideas!
Here's another idea: punish losses.
I.e. consider if rewards were only given at the end of the season. Stack increases with each win, and decreases with each loss. The more wins >50%, the higher the rewards. So it rewards a combination of win rate, as well as quantity of wins. However a player who's <50% with a massive number of battles wouldn't necessarily reap the highest rewards.
It discourages fleeing and discourages de-ranking for liquidity and exploiting weaker opponents.
I like this idea. @yabapmatt what do you think? Any idea how long it will take to code?
This idea has my stamp of approval.
Because normal player can't!! get to this cheap rentals. I spent hours trying to find keyla under 30 DEC, mission impossible. While some have 30 copies of it for 5 DEC. So either there is a rent sniper in play or they hang on rentals 24/7.
This is really affecting the ranked mode's as well.
In addition, once one aquires a cheap rental he can renew for as long as he wants. Until removed from owner. And as Azi sayd, alot of lazy renters.