#Change the current Pay2play model to Pay2fast

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

upbeat gorge
#

1/5 Overworld Stage0: I think the Pay2fast model would work much better than the current one. To start with, I think overworld0 is an error. Overworld 0 illuvials and items will be worth almost nothing on the market quickly, so the free2play player will quickly be trapped in a much worse, very limited game experience from which they will not be able to get out. At best it serves as a tutorial that gives a different and worse image and experience of the game than the original. Different because the experience of taking a trip to overworld with an infinite amount of resources is not similar to the experience of taking trips with limited resources. With infinite resources, the important thing is the speed of the run, mining and capturing things quickly so as not to waste time because you can do it as many times as you want. With finite resources, the important thing is the efficiency of the run, getting the most value possible from the trip, since the number of trips you can make is limited and that causes longer runs where you explore much more looking for rare illuvials, specific resources, looking for rifts and planning how we are going to get them when the map closes... requires more decision making. The experience of 0 with infinite resources seems worse to me, but it is not fun to play with only 5 Illuvials knowing that you barely have a chance of getting any more, then it gives a worse experience than the original without really allowing a Free2play mode.

#

2/5 Being successful is difficult, and even more with a Pay2play model: Getting people to play your game is complicated, there are real great games like The finals that have a hard time obtaining and retaining players. W3b games also have a very bad image and are not popular, many people do not even want to try them and many of those who play them do so only for the rewards. If you also lock your game behind a paywall (where it seems like you are going to have to pay a lot to be able to build good teams), where you have 3 games and in arena mode it seems that you are focusing on the battle royale (you need quite a few active players ), with that economic model you are leading your project to failure. A game like this needs to be F2play to be successful, and I think that implementing a Pay2Fast is simple and will even improve the experience.

#

3/5 Progression for money: Video games that are based on account and character progression, collecting objects, skins, resources, etc. work well in the long term, hooking the player for years. This is the case of MMORPGS like WOW, where people spend years farming, collecting cosmetics, improving their characters... illuvium's current economic model is negative for this type of experience. The main limitation of Illuvium will be money, not time or skill, so a person will spend x amount of money and will be able to advance as far as their money allows. Players will invest a lot at the beginning, eventually they will run out of money, they will stay stagnant and stop playing because they cannot continue advancing and they get bored, or they will not run out of money but they will have already achieved everything, losing part of the incentive, that is the problem of having a progression based only on the money. It is true that there are options to continue progressing beyond your initial investment, such as being able to earn money selling in the market, or having a land from which to obtain resources, but these are specific cases that not everyone can access, and players cannot be asked or expected to be traders, this is supposed to be a video game, not a broker, Cex or similar. Not everyone can make money either, and what these types of projects need most are real players who want to dedicate time and money, not traders who want to earn it.

#

4/5 How to implement P2F: I think it is easy to implement and I think it will improve the experience. Each player has a free land, from which they can obtain resources (solon, crypton and Hyperion). These resources will be like in traditional games, they will be bound to the account and cannot be sold or exchanged. The idea of ​​evolving this non-NFT land can be raised (which is initially tier 1 but we can raise it to another tier), either for free by meeting certain objectives, or by paying real money (fuel, eth, whatever). With this fuel you can travel to a version of the overworld where you can capture Illuvials non-NFTs which are bound to your account and cannot be sold or exchanged. With the resources you get you can create weapons, armor, drone upgrades, etc., wich are bound to your account and cannot be sold or exchanged. The idea is to allow the free2play player to progress in exchange for their time without negatively affecting the economy.

#

The amount of fuel you can store can be made limited to prevent you from being able to store fuel for weeks or months so you can have a great advantage when new illuvials come out, a new expansion, etc. Also to create that progression experience that is so addictive, satisfying and healthy for the health of a video game, so that the player will continue playing almost daily to be able to get as much fuel as possible and to avoid losing it by not being able to store it. If the player wants to progress faster, then they can buy real fuel that allows them to take travels to an Overworld where they can capture NFT illuvials, get resources that allow them to create NFT weapons, armor, drone upgrades, etc., which they can sell or exchange, buy an NFT land that allows you to obtain resources, or buy things from other players directly in the marketplace. If there is an airdrop like the current one or similar, it can make the player who captures Illuvials NFTs, who plays in an NFT land, etc., get many more points than the one who does it in the free version. This model is proven in a multitude of projects and works very well to attract and retain players. Many players who initially would not have tried the game, or would have tried it and quickly abandoned it with the current model, can get hooked and end up spending money or at least become active players. Some F2P players may not want to spend money on Illuvials or trips to the overworld, but they may want to buy skins for their Illuvials, something that with the current system they would not have been able to do because they would not have been able to capture those Illuvials. Players who were planning to spend money, but were not going to have enough to get many things, getting stuck without being able to continue progressing and losing interest in the game, have a way to continue progressing and an incentive to continue playing.

#

5/5 Progression by time: Certain incentives or restrictions can be created to keep people playing, even if it is for free, something that, although it does not bring money, brings active players. For example, the illuvials can only be captured during their season. Let's imagine that each season lasts 6 months, and during those 6 months you can capture the water atlas, but once the season is over, it can no longer be captured again and you have to buy it. That will make the F2P player continue playing because he knows that in the future he will not be able to get that illuvial free. From time to time you can create events that give time-limited rewards to keep people playing or bring back players. For example, giving an illuvatar to players who have played ranked arena during a season, which can only be obtained during that season by playing ranked, and is rarer depending on the position you have achieved. Give a board to the players who have gotten all the illuvials in a set. For example, once a month a boss appears in the world that allows you to capture an Illuvial that can only be obtained that way. By playing during an event like Christmas you can get an exclusive skin that can only be created during those dates. That from time to time there will be a special event that allows you to get a non-NFT copy of illuvials like that atlas that can no longer be obtained.

#

Things to keep the player playing constantly because they don't want to miss out on those rewards or events, and keep them coming back constantly. Quite the opposite of what I think is going to happen with the current game model, which is based on having x money, progressing x, achieving x and that's it, and if you like the arena mode and you've had enough money you'll still play, If not, you will probably get bored, frustrated and stop playing. Illuvium right now is like a F2P game where you have to pay a lot for a lot of things, but without the option of being able to get those things for free. If there is no progression by time, if the player cannot get new illuvials, new weapons, improvements, try new illuvial compositions, etc., because everything is locked after a payment, many players will prefer not to enter, and the majority of players They will end up getting bored or frustrated and will leave, not to mention that there will not be this time progression experience that works so well. That there is a free way to progress also allows us to be more flexible with prices. Since the player can get things for free and is not forced to pay, it is not so necessary that the prices of, for example, a trip to overworld be cheap.

bold burrow
#

@upbeat gorge u summarized what ive been saying for the past 2 years. im so glad im not alone. thx u made my day

upbeat gorge
bold burrow
#

i truly believe we should change the economic model from pay-to-play to fully free-to-play. imo S0 is a trial mode, just like the first 20 levels of WoW.
spending should always be optional.
but thats not the case in ILV.
some may argue that you can farm S0, sell some stuff, earn some eth then buy fuel. but thats not F2P, thats play-to-earn

#

once i suggested that we go fully F2P and only sell cosmetics like illuvials skins, accessories, pets and mounts

#

my argument was, the team is targeting to TFT players but TFT players are used to play for free.
voila almost a year later we are getting a TFT mode

upbeat gorge
bold burrow
#

"people shouldn't have to be a trader"
i agreed, this is something that a lot of people still dont understand yet.
plus we are dealing with:

  • fuel price volatility based on supply from IZ
  • eth price volatility
  • crypto cycle
#

yea, based on the testnet, S0 gets old really quickly

#

and ur right, for me rn OW is about who got the money to spend

#

im not saying it's bad, it's actually good because im hoping people will buy my master shards and supreme chips at high prices.
but i just cant see why web2 gamers would want to spend on our games

upbeat gorge
# bold burrow "people shouldn't have to be a trader" i agreed, this is something that a lot of...

Web2 people are not going to pay a lot of money to play illuvium, on the contrary, it will seem like a scam. For this user, things need to be made easier, not more difficult. There are people who don't even want to pay for web2 games and expect them to be F2P, a w3b game where you have to pay for everything is very intimidating. I started with the w3b games on axie because there were a lot of people who were making a lot of money, not for anything else, and unfortunately the only way I think illuvium can be successful right now is that. That there is a bull market, you can earn a lot with illuvium and people decide to take the risk, otherwise I see it as difficult for them to give illuvium a chance with the current economic system, and w3b players are few and very interested.

royal wedge
#

i hope in mainet solon,hyperion and crypton not expensive, because we need play a lot for find material and illuvial,imagine crypton expensive,how we can play if crypton expensive

bold burrow
bold burrow
royal wedge
# bold burrow even now sepolia whales are buying up the illuvidex

I give up on this, the illuvium team don't seem to care about this, judging from their replies, @bold burrowbetter sitt on chair farm eth and wait test end and buy a lot t5 😂 and maybe afk every 14 min and change place just in case there are elig rules based on playing hours**🐳 🤣

bold burrow
royal wedge
royal wedge
bold burrow
#

then click forge every 10 mins from the ores u mined

hushed rivet
# upbeat gorge The problem is that you can't defend that the game is F2P because you can win so...

Tier 0 is the only place where people can get better equipment. F2P players can grind those and sell them to paying players who don't wanna grind there.

There will also be holo and dark holo versions of T0 illuvials. Those will always worth money to collectors and F2P grinders can sell them and buy fuel, then progress up to paying levels.

The same goes for T0 illuvials with perfect or close to perfect stats. Leviathan players will buy those for their team.

They can also participate in Arena and tournaments for real money prizes. You are also forgetting that Gauntlet will be completely free to play but come with real money prizes. Not to mention any future game modes that might be free to play.

Your suggestions have merit but you are omitting important details and those also matter.

Is the current economy model the best that can be? Maybe not, who knows. But a complete economy overhaul based on people having different ideas is probably not the way to go either.

upbeat gorge
# hushed rivet Tier 0 is the only place where people can get better equipment. F2P players can ...

I don't know if you've played Overworld a lot, but in 2 days I already had all the craftable objects from stage 0. When it comes out, it will take 1 day, and the stage 0 illuvials are only usually played in their first stage because they are played for synergies , are units that don't matter too much. The reality is this, when the game comes out there are going to be people who will farm Stage 0 until those illuvials and items are worthless and not worth doing, and that will probably not take long to happen. Furthermore, justifying that with this you will be able to play when in the testnet I have spent hundreds of dollars only on hyperion and I still don't have even half of the illuvials is ridiculous. Also remember what I said, you shouldn't need to be a trader to play a video game, and only people capable of making money will have a chance to play for free, and they will do so with a lot of effort. I also don't think people are going to play Leviathan mode, there is no free way to get Illuvials and assemble Illuvial teams without taking into account their statistics, it seems like it's going to be expensive, at least for the first few months. Few people will be able to afford it and those who can are whales who buy but then do not play. Furthermore, with the current system the game will probably have a hard time getting players, and those players will probably stay in the mode with normalized statistics because that will be where there are more people. You may prefer the current economic system, but trying to say or justify that you can actually play as F2P is ridiculous. And that is if you are a W3b player who knows how this world works and can win money, if you are a web2 player you are not going to want to touch this game, and if you decide to do so, you will not have any possibility of playing it without spending a lot of money.

hushed rivet
hushed rivet
upbeat gorge
upbeat gorge
# hushed rivet " if you are a web2 player you are not going to want to touch this game, and if ...

It is good that the gauntlet mode is F2P, but most of the experience is not, and the fact that they have done that I think shows that the current model of the video game is poorly planned, so badly that they have thrown everything overboard to make its own version of TFT. The logical thing is that all the parts of the game were well integrated, that you play with the Illuvials that you capture, etc. something that would be easier, possible and feasible if the game were pay2fast. It would also have been possible if they had been able to create a fun 1v1 mode, which they have not achieved and which I believe is perfectly possible. So since everything has gone wrong for them, they are making their version of TFT, which as I already said, I think shows that the game is currently poorly planned, starting with its economy. I have already said many times what the problem is with the 1vs1 mode, and it is that it is a game to study, not to play, and that is because you can choose all the cards in your deck from the beginning. The card games are 1vs1 and work perfectly despite also being strategy games, then you can make a fun 1vs1 mode. I recently tried Sharbound, which is a 1vs1 card game and despite being very early I really liked it.

#

In fact, I don't know if you understand how problematic the gaunlet mode is, I mean, the illuvials that you capture in the overworld mode, which can be very expensive, are not going to be useful in the game mode that may be the main one. .. it's nonsense... what's the point of it being so expensive then? and all because they have not known how to create a good economy and a good game mode.

#

The game has a very good art design, both at a conceptual level and at a modeling level. It has good music. It has well-designed and programmed mechanics: the mobility of your character in overworld is very good, the mechanical design of the Illuvial abilities or their synergies is also very good, good animations... then what is the problem with this game? I would say it is leadership. The project has very talented people, but the people who run it have not known how to create a good economy, nor create good game modes, nor give a clear direction to the project, which seems to be constantly stumbling.

hushed rivet
upbeat gorge
# hushed rivet You are talking about early test version that served as a starting variant to it...

The thing is that I have literally studied video game design. That doesn't make me know more than an entire team, or a specific person, but it does make me know enough to realize that certain things are wrong. When Nintendo made Super Mario 64, they first made Mario's mobility, and once they had that part finished, they saw that it was fun, etc., they created the whole castle around him, the levels, enemies, etc. These people are doing it the opposite, they have made a million illuvials, several maps, models, etc., and they keep changing things continuosly because nothing works for them and the direction is not clear. All of those things should already be tried and tested beforehand, and once you see that they work, that's when you start building on them. These people have built an entire overworld and suddenly they have decided that they are going to change the combat system. They have built an economy and suddenly they have decided that a specific part is going to work with another economic system and is not going to use the illuvials that you capture, which is the basis of the game... I was not in the alpha of Baldurs Gate 3 , but I would say that these people were very clear about what their game was going to be, and they used those 3 years using community feedback to polish and improve that base. These people keep changing the basis of their game, instead of having it clear and dedicating themselves to polishing it, And I think the problem is that, although part of that base is fine (the part that programmers, graphic designers, etc. usually do), the part that game designers, producers, etc. usually do, is not, and one of those parts is the game economy, or the game modes.

proper sedge
#

Thats a very long post 😄

I appreciate your point of view and im totally with you on the fact that the barrier is very high in web3 so we need to put it as low as possible

The game is now free though with gauntlet. Anyone who wants to play can do so for absolutely free, this gets them in our ecosystem and if they want to explore other games or start to earn money in the arena then they can get interested in ascendant, leviathan modes, OW and even Zero

While gauntlet will be 100% free2play we also have a way for people to experience ascendant free, OW free and zero free. Sure those are not the same experience as the full game available when you pay but its still great imo

OW is the "pack opening" world, changing it entirely to free to play would be a complete rework of our economy. As we have the gauntlet 100% free and all the other modes available to try for free im not convinced this change is needed and changing this would also greatly delay the official launch which is already announced

bold burrow
bold burrow
#

the good thing is we finally focus on web3 market with the airdrop campaigns, so im just gonna enjoy the launch hype and hopefully i can print

upbeat gorge
# proper sedge Thats a very long post 😄 I appreciate your point of view and im totally with ...

I think you don't understand how problematic gaunlet mode is for the game and its economy. Illuvium has been created around 3 games that are interconnected and feed each other. You get fuel at zero, you use that fuel in overworld to create armor, items, capture illuvials, and then you use those items and illuvials to play in arena. If gaunlet is successful, what point will the rest of the games have? because gaunlet is something independent that does not need the other games. The 0 fuel is barely going to have any use or value, overworld is going to be largely a waste of time since what you get there only serves to have a skin, the 1vs1 arena mode is going to die even more (if that that is possible) because people will prefer to play the other mode that is free and better... you say that changing the economy at this point is bad, but that is already being done with the gaunlet mode and the new overworld combat system, important things are being changed that affect the game just before launch, and not only the game, the gaunlet mode affects the economy. If gaunlet is successful, the 3 games and probably their economies will have to be changed so that they revolve around that mode, or make the 3 games independent. And if it is not successful it means that people do not want to play your game even for free, so you cannot continue maintaining an economic Pay2play system because almost no one will want to pay.

#

All of this I would say is the result of poor planning and poor management. You can perfectly create a battle royale mode where you use your own illuviums, just as you can perfectly create a 1vs1 mode that is fun and people want to play, but of course, for that you need to have a team capable of creating a good game mode, and since they have not been able to do it, they throw everything overboard and make a copy of TFT, which destroys one of the main and central mechanics of the game, which is capturing and having ownership of the Illuvials. What's the point of even having made illuvium w3b if you're going to end up making a copy of TFT? This could also have been avoided with better planning of the economic model. If you have a model like the one I have proposed, which is just an idea and not necessarily something infallible, final, or the only option, it is basically a F2P model where you can continue owning, play for free and not negatively affect the economy, A mode like gaunlet would not be so necessary to attract players, since all your modes and your ecosystem would already be able to attract them, and you would not need to create something separate that breaks your entire project.

#

Likewise, I am not going to comment further on this thread, I have already given that feedback/Iidea and I think I have spoken more than enough about that..

wicked jay
#

Ownership in Gauntlet is not only about skins. There is also the Leviathan mode where stats matter and which I suspect will have the higher rewards.

proper sedge
#

@upbeat gorge thats why free gauntlet wont have substancial share from the in-game reward pool

Free gauntlet onboard people and if they are interested in competing they will consider leviathan gauntlet, leviathan 1v1 and ascendant

upbeat gorge
# proper sedge <@768520716680167455> thats why free gauntlet wont have substancial share from t...

Tell me something, are you going to play 1vs1? because the mode is so bad that not even being free and giving rewards people wanted to play it, and after the launch you are going to have to spend quite money to be able to play it. In the realease you are going to have a free mode that is probably better (it is difficult for it to be worse), and it is going to be free, why is anyone going to play the current 1VS1? and these people are making a copy of TFT because they don't know how to fix it. Almost no one is going to want to play Leviathan mode, it's a Pay2win mode. Are you going to play a mode where other players are going to beat you without doing anything, just by having better illuvials? Those types of modes give a very bad experience to players. If they give rewards for people to play leviathan, what will happen is that some players will start playing it to earn money in exchange for having a bad experience, which is not positive either. Leviathan mode may require thousands of dollars of investment.

#

For a leviathan mode to work you need your game to be cheap, and easy to get a lot of Illuvials, which is the complete opposite of the current model, as well as a very large and dedicated player base.

#

I certainly do not plan to play 1v1 or leviathan, and it is possible that I will only play overworld at the beginning. Why, if the good arena mode is going to be free and you're not going to need illuvials to play it, would I play something else?

#

For example, I proposed a change that was easy to implement to try to fix the current arena mode, just as I now proposed a way to make the game more accessible without break the entire game structure that has been worked on for years, But I guess it's okay to throw it all away, you have a community of investors who are going to try to justify everything they do even if it doesn't make sense just to try not to affect their wallets.

proper sedge
#

@upbeat gorge oh of course i plan to play arena 1v1, i think its a great game. I can understand your point of view though because arena has been in a terribly unbalanced state for a very long period of time as they were focused on OW and gauntlet

They built a free multiplayer arena not because ascendant suck but because the barrier to entry in a web3 play to earn model is quite high

The goal is to have a free casual game where people try for free and enter the Illuvium universe

Then if they are interested and want to get better and compete they will go in ascendant, leviathan (if omega whale) or gauntlet leviathan (we dont know if stats would matter there but you would need your illuvials)

soft ridge
#

Overworld is about "pack opening" so it's supposed to emulate going into a store, buying a pack of cards, and seeing what you get (but in this case you get to also choose to go resource heavy).

Gauntlet satisfies your needs and ya, Stage 0 and Free 2 Play Zero are meant to be almost "trial" packs to get you hooked (think if someone gave you a cheap pack at the store to try the card game out.

Appreciate your thoughts, but I like to think that the rare "card" (illuvial) that I pulled out of Overworld (pack) actually has value (since I paid for it and own it) unlike the godly other amounts of gotcha games out there.

bold burrow
# proper sedge <@768520716680167455> oh of course i plan to play arena 1v1, i think its a great...

is it just because it's unbalanced or it is a niche of a niche?
we had a collab with the biggest esport team and we didnt have the traction i expected.
cmiiw we only had 200 arena leaderboard prize winners out of 1000. Then we paused the rewards because we had an update in the arena called illuvial ascendant or something. the team said it was a couple of weeks pause.
then the team decided to wait for the gauntlet.
idk arena doesnt look too promising to me

#

meanwhile the demand for our assets come from arena, not gauntlet because its free

#

people who like the gauntlet might not like arena
so where will be demand coming from other than airdrops?

proper sedge
# bold burrow is it just because it's unbalanced or it is a niche of a niche? we had a collab ...

Auto battler is a niche mode yes but i think the 1v1 format has a great potential for the competitive scene and yes tbh it mostly have to do with balance

In its early days PvP was in a decent state, at some point we had a good balance and there truly was 4/5 viable deck options. Rewards just started and not long after the game got totally destroyed by behemoth patch, a patch that from first read many thought would be a disaster. For 1 week 99% played broken frost and when it was hotfix we were in the behemoth meta for weeks on end. Then next patch they experienced nerfing to the ground all augments. What this did is it made us able to almost without consequence build teams that had 2/3 team options within the same team

This forces a single team to rule the whole meta, it was the rhamphyre/revenant/dust meta for even months

This then got worst with dust/inferno huge buffs and no other options than to play both rhamphyre and dust/rev combined

When they introduced ascendant feature they upgraded the team slot to 50 and removed augments, this wasnt a good decision imo because we now not only could play 2/3 decks but easily 3/4. The ability to play multiple teams along with balance being a low priority (team said that) for the past few months made the game what it is now

For the ability to play multiple team i was going to push my idea and write an IIP but the team now tried to make us blind. This indirectly adresses it but i havent test it as im highly incentivized to play OW only

For the balance it simply hasnt been a priority these last few months but im confident that if properly balanced this game is a great competitive environment for our ecosystem

main ravine
# upbeat gorge Things to keep the player playing constantly because they don't want to miss out...

You lost me here:
"Each player has a free land, from which they can obtain resources (solon, crypton and Hyperion)"

I am not going to debate whether your idea is better than what we currently have because land was sold years ago with a promise of being the only way people would be able to get fuel to play. IZ people were sold land as a revenue source and also as an economy game. Your proposal messes with both of those. If we do this the DAO needs to either reimburse landowners or find some other way of giving land similar value in both money and play to what they were told they would get. That would have to be done before anything like you are suggesting was implemented.

hushed rivet
# upbeat gorge Tell me something, are you going to play 1vs1? because the mode is so bad that n...

You project your personal preferences to everyone else. But its not just you and thousands of mini yous. There are people who like arena, whether you like it or not, even in its current state. Not to mention what it can become when it's balanced and has a good payout structure.

Believe it or not, there are many players out there who do play pay2win games. Even if you don't.

You seem to be hang up on how the team did not manage to nail game modes in their first try. While this may be true, if you paid any attention you would notice that they are listening to feedback and they iterate based on it. Kinda why betas exist. Also kinda like every other business out there that understands putting out an MVP and iterate on it until it works.

tired swift
#

I love people complaining about arenas while not planning on playing it.

Anyone who actually plays arena 1v1 loves it and just want a balance state, it is not our fault the focus has been on overworld the past few months.

bold burrow
#

the focus has been arena for the last 2 years. it's about time to focus on overworld which has greater potential imo

bold burrow
wicked jay
bold burrow
proper sedge
tired swift
bold burrow
#

we had 2 years to balance arena

tired swift
#

On that I completely agree

#

There's a slight chance arena is actually balance right now, just not enough people playing it to know

upbeat gorge
# proper sedge Developing ascendant and then gauntlet has been a focus but the balance has neve...

The least of the problems with the current ascendant mode is the balance, it is a poorly planned game mode. Imagine that in TFT people could choose the pieces they want to play all the time, what do you think would happen? Well, you would play all the time against the 2 broken compositions in the meta, and on top of that, those people would play them in the most optimal possible order because they can always choose to play what they want, and they wouldn't even have to think to do it, because they would copy the optimal way to play them on the internet, winning a high % of games without really doing anything. It would be something terrible and boring, right? Well, welcome to illuvium, because that is the current 1vs1 mode, it is normal that it does not work. These people have made several changes to try to make the arena mode more fun and I think they have only made the base worse, and all for nothing because that is the problem with the mode, and I have already said it a million times. The gaunlet mode can work because the base of the game is good, the problem is that the current 1vs1 mode is very bad, the problem is, as I said, the 3 games and their economies are designed to be interconnected and feed each other, and the gaunlet mode breaks this structure that they themselves created. A million things could have been done to avoid breaking the base of the game, but the incompetence of these people who have been unable to create a good game mode for themselves, or a good economic model for themselves that can be attractive to everyone, has led them to copy something that works but doesn't fit their game. You can perfectly make a good battle royale mode without break the base of your game.

tired swift
upbeat gorge
#

Balancing illuvium 1vs1 well is almost impossible. In TFT the RNG factor and the players sharing the pieces helps in balancing. The players cannot play all the games with the broken composition because they cannot choose the pieces that they get, they have to adapt, which means that a greater variety of compositions have to be played. If there is a very broken composition and several people try to play it at the same time the difficulty in getting the pieces is much greater, then the composition gets worse... and yet people still think it's poorly balanced, and as soon as a composition is overpower there are several players trying to force it, winning the lobby despite having to fight with several players for the pieces. Now imagine yourself in a game like illuvium where you can choose the pieces you can play, and on top of that you have them all available from minute 1... you have the current 1vs1 which is completely unbearable. They try to compensate with the "counters", using the system of hypers, units that counteract others, etc., and although the counters can help, but this is not pokemon, and the illuvium base is not the pokemon base, its base is the one of an autobattler, and something that helps avoid that, and allows the experience to be more fun, is that there is an RNG that prevents you from always being able to play the piece you want. It works perfectly in autobattlers, it has been working in card games for hundreds of years, I don't understand why they don't change it when the main problem with 1vs1, and with arena mode in general, is clearly that.

upbeat gorge
# tired swift That is your opinion. For myself I like the 1v1 mode

Every video game or system always has people who like it. The thing is that I see a lot of people say that they like the 1v1 mode, but almost no one plays it. And whether you like it or not, among other things, it will continue to be very difficult to balance. By the way, you talk about opinions and you give your opinion, I'm not giving an opinion, I'm talking about video game design, which is something different.

bold burrow
soft ridge
bold burrow
#

at the end of the day, we are investing in a business.
would you double down on developinf something that does not work, or you seek an alternative

soft ridge
#

Did you see kieran's tweets? He breaks down the TAM for each genre of game

tired swift
tired swift
upbeat gorge
# tired swift There were a lot of people playing before they stopped doing balancing stuff.

That's a lie, there were very long waiting times, and normally you had to play against the same player all the time because there was almost no one playing. In fact, they gave rewards to the players that are on the top, and the only thing you had to do to get the rewards was play your weekly games because almost no one played them. And that's in a free version where you had everything. I say these things because I want the project to improve, I want the team to realize all these problems and solve them. Most of you say are things that allow you to be right or allow you to give a good image of the game. I don't know what I'm doing wasting my time writing here, honestly. In fact I'm going to do what I said and I'm not going to write any more.

tired swift
tired swift
bold burrow
upbeat gorge
proper sedge
# bold burrow how it is possible to balance arena and gauntlet by the 25th when they are curre...

It wont be balanced, like orace say theres a chance its better now but we cant know because its not been tested yet

What we will need is a team focused, or atleast mainly focused on balancing and hot fixing a lot at the start. The problem always has been that we have very few devs and most are spread thin across different modes and games

In epoch8 we wanted to have the GSC help them test, Ben thought it wouldve been great but the plan ended up being put down for security concern

proper sedge
bitter crown
#

hire this guy

clear lantern
# upbeat gorge The least of the problems with the current ascendant mode is the balance, it is ...

I have to agree that the 1v1 mode isn't good atm. The game is as you said a copy & paste flowchart. Just copy the deck and play 5-6 rounds with the same placement. Maybe, you have to learn 2-3 different setups depending on the deck of your opponent. With that you are already at the peak of the game. That won't change through balancing the game because you will just add more paths on your flowchart but won't remove the flowchart feeling.
BUT! That doesn't mean that the base isn't adjustable to get really good. I believe the team knows about this and shifted focus for know until the reiteration of the design team for arena is finished.

Also OW as a collection game can attract a lot of players even with the sole purpose of "catching them all". Skins for a successful gauntlet mode will have a big impact as well (People really spend a lot on skins if they like game and lore).
At this point the team could easily say that Zero and OW work together with arena being a little lackluster for the time being but that they work on improving the arena game mode in the future. Remember even after next month we are still in an open beta. People will hunt Illuvials for the reasons "catch them all", skins (don't underestimate this) and future modes (arena being the first).

Arena has two big problems:

  1. Hard to learn everything about Illuvials, affinities, classes, hyper and so on.
    -> This will be solved with gauntlet because people can just start playing and don't have to build a team first
#
  1. flowchart style / copy paste is too easy / no variation
    I agree that this for now is a design problem, but as I said it is one that can be solved. Obv. I don't have the exact answer to that but I can't stress enough that arena is a good base and it is good that they indent to improve on that.
    Still some thoughts on underlying problems and possible ways to improve arena:

  • An auto-battler without randomness /pick ban will always be a rather simple flowchart. That is even true for games with objectives like mechabelum. Every real advantage is based on developing a better deck which gets again copied by everybody within a day.

    -> The real game happens outside of the actual game in the area of deck creation (Very few like that).

  • The game has only 9 real positioning options ((left, mid, right) x (front, mid, back))

    -> With that every round as hole is basically comparable to one chess move which means we only make around 8 moves (including augment picks) per game. That isn't enough to decide who is the better player.

  • Combine the randomness of survival with arena. If both players get the same random deck it will be really difficult to find the perfect way of playing that deck within the short time given. Mode is only accessible if you caught every Illuvial (at this point I agree with nitrodragon in another channel that Illuvials shouldn't be too rare)

  • Add several ban phases to force the opponent to think on the spot

  • Add random board effects

  • Add more drawing phases for augments

  • **Illuvials don't have access to their omega until the player gives them 1-2 affinity-stones based on their affinity. The stones are handed out during the rounds on a random bases and by killing an opponent Illuvial with a dominated affinity. (I really like this one) **
    -> maybe it is necessary to include a negative interest with this to avoid players not playing anything the first three rounds

#
  • Stage 3 evolutions' can only be drawn during the game based on a random mechanism (A line can only be played if you have all stages of that line)
  • The more I think about the more I think a random system just like tft but for a 1on1 would work perfectly. It would give every player a lot of choices to show deep understand of the game. The game mode could as well just be accessible if the user captured every Illuvial. That would give value to t0 Illuvials as well. As I said completing the hole Illuvidex should be difficult but far from impossible. Holo/perfect IVs are still a lot for a OW-player to farm for.

Maybe a game like clash royal in which you can drop Illuvials to defend objectives would have been the easier/better choice for a 1on1 game but arena can get there as well. Also, maybe we get something like clash royal in the future.

upbeat gorge
#

Sadly it seems that I was right. This game has a good idea and good programmers, animators, graphic designers, etc., but tremendous problems in the direction of the project. To make it worse, you let the community make important decisions... How many video games have been ruined by greedy shareholders who made decisions based solely on economic interest? Countless. Paradoxically, the community is doing exactly the same thing, making decisions based solely on short-termism and greed that harm the project, and when you do that things usually go wrong for you, and you usually deserve them to go wrong.

#

Stage 0 does not realistically allow the F2P player to join the game. WEB3 games need to make things as easy as possible for the player in order to be successful, and there are ways to do this without breaking the economy like the one I have proposed.

#

For the economy and the game to work, an arena mode that is fun and that people actually want to play is essential. This game and its economy revolves around the illuvials, weapons and similar, that arena mode is what gives them a utility and a purpose, which generates a real demand, people have to really want to have them and be willing to spend money on them, and That requires an arena mode that people really want to play and spend money on. I played the first versions of survival mode and I liked it a lot, I played it recently and I still like it, so I understand that the problem is not with the game itself, but with the fact that it has not been able to create a good mode of game. The gaunlet mode seems absurd to me, it breaks the game's economy. There are not many reasons to play it either, it is the same as TFT but worse, and it will probably always be worse because TFT has many years of work behind it and a large team dedicated to the project, while for you it is just another mode and you will surely never be able to dedicate to it so many resources. I have tried it and it shows that the base of the game is not designed for a mode like that, I understand that it is a very early version but there are millions of games that are exactly the same but better. To make it worse, it will surely be a huge pool of resources for the team, and if you design yet another mode, adapt the entire game to the mode, look for uses for the Illuvial, balance also for that mode... on top of that you are further fragmenting a small community with a mode that needs many players to work.

#

On the other hand, the current 1vs1 arena mode is clearly a failure. Someone has told me that this is just my opinion, that I actually want them to change it because I don't like it. It is not my opinion, it is reality, almost no one wants to play the mode and the proof is that almost no one plays it, and that is not an opinion, it is a fact. Those of you who have this problem are the few who defend the mode, and since you like it, you believe that it is actually good even though reality has proven otherwise. The 1vs1 mode is a failure, whether you want to accept it or not, the reality will remain the same. For example, I gave a possible solution, this one: #1212157084116844584 message which is not particularly difficult to implement. It is not the only possible one, but fixing the arena mode is essential, and a battle royale mode can be created from 1vs1 that is not a clone, that is good and original if a good 1vs1 mode is created.

#

On the other hand, it could be a good idea for airdrops in the future to focus more on NFTS and not so much on tokens. For example, instead of selling the remaining lands, they could be given as rewards for future airdrops. The reason is simple: distributing tokens usually has a negative impact on the price that usually does not only harm the token, but the entire project. Furthermore, a token is something that does not generate any type of link or relationship between the player and the project. If you give the player a token, they will most likely sell it, but if you give them something like a land, it still has an economic value, But the player will be excited to have that land, he will want to be able to use it and it will cost him more to sell it, creating a greter link with the project, so it is more likely that the player will decide to keep it and continue being part of the project instead of simply selling it. This can be done with many NFTS: exclusive Illuvials from airdrops, boards, skins... since they can be sold, they still provide an economic incentive, but the player will often not want to sell it because they will be excited to have that object. These NFTS also generate a benefit for the team through commissions.

#

This is going to be the last message I write in this discord, it is useless and the only thing I do is waste time, fight with people and end up attracting hate, all because I say things that people don't want to hear.

south tusk
#

I think you raise good points; i regret not having taken a look at this channel during testnet. I have similar feelings.

A successful F2P game relies on top notch free mode where you can enjoy the full experience, grinding as much as you want for free, while being tempted to pay for progression and cosmetics. I hope your thoughts will be considered. ✨

vapid spindle
#

I'm right there with you. You need to be able to play the game. And as much as people hate to admit it, saying the overworld is like "a pack opening", it IS the game. It can be the biggest draw we get, and have those players then filter to other areas. Why are we gating the best part of illuvium ??
Arena and tft stuff is far too niche to draw the mainstream crowds, and like you said web2 won't even look at this game in its current state of pay for everything.
Let the people play the best part of what was built

long valley
#

How is WOW free to play?
The same as ESO?

  • buy the game
  • buy the DLCs or pay a monthly account fee
  • can grind yet still need a monthly subscription to play online

Am I missing something here?
Is WOW completely different?

vapid spindle
#

I had suggested a monthly fee similar to mmorpg style. But the issue is the rest of the economy wasn't really built with this in mind. Not sure if it's doable at this point

long valley
# south tusk I think you raise good points; i regret not having taken a look at this channel ...

It's still coming, what we see now is a tiny slice of what is to come. Let the economy work.
If like you say, people will spend on skins cosmetics ext. Wouldn't they also spend on a t1- t2-t3 occasionally?
Possibly catch something or mine something to sell?
Illuvials will also be used for skins.
I can't remember what use T0s have in blueprints, or even if they do.
Yet a T1 run isn't very much.
I played league of legends, not TFT, briefly with friends and spent $20 on a skin In a game, I didn't really like and wasn't going to play much.
It was just fun while it was happening.

long valley
pulsar dune
#

I enjoyed the game a lot more in testnet when it was all free. I'll give it some time though, I wanna see fuel come down. I can't justify tier 3 runs.

opal grove
#

Profit should be built mainly from NFTs minting and premium features (like region scan or battle pass) while give f2p experience for everyone to enjoy.
Right now nearly everything that is collected from stage will be minted and developers put and energy limit for single run because of it. As a result quite high price of the run kills all the fun of OW as player now need to calculate what is more profitable to catch/gather instead of just playing the way he would like to. Alternative approach would be to allow player to collect everything that he wants but as digital non-NFT assets, than player will need to put fuel on top to mint or craft with that digital assets. Currently we can see this already being implemented with ore which only converts to NTF when you put fuel to create an ingot. I do not see any reason why this should not be the same with other resources AND illuvials. This will also allow to make stage run price significantly lower or even free as extra fuel will be spent on NFTs. So in the end each player can play the game the way he wants + price is more accessible for more players to join + no market speculation is possible as there is minimal fuel price inside each NFT. And this will also make less load on Immutable infrastructure, so less issues with failed orders.

clear lantern
# long valley I saw someone ask Aaron about the possibility of battle passes and he replied it...

yeah, that sounds good. Something that is straightforward instead of these complicated hidden costs. Keep the detect all Illuvials as an additional paying option. Landowners get x% of overall battle pass revenue based on the amount of fuel they burnt instead of a fuel selling mechanism. Web2 players can understand that. Parents can pay x$ and kids can play as much as they want. DH/holos/strong IVs will still be rare enough because the amount of grind that is needed to get them.
I strongly believe that seeing OW as a pack opening is the biggest mistake of this project.
Whales who want advantages through paying are used to get the rewards just handed to them without playing at all. OW is a game not a pack opening, so, we should focus on players. OW could carry the project even without arena (comparable with palworld).

clear lantern
#

In general I have never seen a normal web3 game. Not in the way it should be. In my opinion web3 should have been just a web2 game + ownership, instead we got the hole casino madness.

  • A normal game would have been like dota2 (f2p) + selling skins which are nfts + battle passes.
  • A normal game would have been wow in which you grind the best items based on time and skill with nfts you could sell because you are the first to get them or because you cleared harder content and could actually sell these items. Others could compensate for their lack of skill by paying a little extra.

In these examples nfts would be awarded by skill/playtime or as a skin based on money but in web3 nfts with ingame utility are bought for hundreds of dollars with the hope to be the lucky person who gets the legendary item.
Instead of going with a game and adding ownership, web3 sold nfts with real ingame impact and therefore destroyed every aspect of a true game which can attract web2 players.
Illuvium with a battlepass model could be different and combine the best of two worlds which don't understand each other up until now.

long valley
clear lantern
long valley
long valley
#

Roblox is planning on moving on chain.

#

I think it's like packets of Robucks. X for y amount

#

Maybe you can continuously subscribe as well. Then there is the game section, where you can make games. With their assets maybe?

#

It's been a while, my kids don't play it that often anymore.

long valley
worldly shale
# upbeat gorge The amount of fuel you can store can be made limited to prevent you from being a...

I was thinking of something similar to this, and I think we need it.

If nobody plays the game, the assets will be worth nothing. People need to realize this (and understand that the airdrop won't last forever).

There are only two changes that I would make here:

1- I would change Non-Nfts to “consumable illuviums” for free players: you catch them and in order to use them you need to consume a shard, so you Will need to keep catching it.

2- include arena rewards for every win (at a certain rank) like Axie does with SLP for example (this way you would have an incentive to keep playing) and it is based on quantity of NFTs in your team.

I will make a post on my own with those 2 ideas and mention yours to keep it resonating.