When can we expect a unified Legend of all the various stats in the game, as well as their revision, so that their displayed values are actually correct (e.g. a Bomb Tower’s Blunt Weakness is 100%, however all Blunt-based Spells do more than 100% of their damage to those towers - for example, Hammerstrike does around ~15k Blunt Damage, which is roughly 1/6th of a Bomb Tower’s health, which is around 90k, but when you actually use said Hammerstrike on said Bomb Tower, visually its Health Bar is depleted by around half, rather than 1/6th of its total health, so the Bomb Tower’s Blunt weakness is displayed incorrectly, as it should be between 200-300%, from what I can tell.)?
Also, when can we expect a proper Attack History Replay system that would include every possible information for us to actually learn from? By this I mean:
- Tell us how long did the Attacker take to finish the run (if it was finished) or until they’ve died.
- Show us the Attacker’s exact position of death on the mini-map of our Castle Defense (e.g. via a heatmap).
- Tell us which Pal and Guardian the Attacker was using and how many times their respective abilities were used and where exactly.
- Show us the Attacker’s exact gear (with forging levels as well as specific forged stats) or, at the very least, their ‘Stats Overview’ window, which includes Leadership, Health, Attack, Adventure, Battle Mastery and Pro Bonus statistics.
- Provide detailed information about our towers, e.g. if we have several towers of the same type, show us which one died first among them and how fast compared to the other towers of the same path.
- Let us know which of our Units (and Waves) died the fastest and how they generally performed (e.g. how many Necromancers managed to spawn how many Skeletons from the moment they spawned at our Castle Gate to the time they encountered the Attacker, or did any single Necromander managed to proc their Lightning Spell off; these are just some examples).
One of the biggest barriers of entry for new players for this game is that it provides nearly zero feedback on your Defense at all. The only way one learns about the game (what is good and what isn’t) is either by their own countless mistakes or if an older player from the Alliance straight up tells them which towers/spells are better etc. Ideally, you want all your players to learn and experience this on their own, and having a detailed Attack History would go a long way in helping people improve their overall gameplay, not only being limited to Castle Defense alone.
I’ve asked for a Replay, but honestly watching each attack would get boring after a quick while. Plus, given how many more players attack you compared to how many you attack along your playtime overall, a detailed heat-based minimap would likely be ideal, in order to unify all the information and make it readily accessible on the fly (as mentioned elsewhere, this game has waaay too many ‘screens’ one has to switch between to get where they need to go).
As per usual I’m asking this with the aim to encourage you, as the developers, to not hide vital information from the player, but rather make it accessible instead. Now that the EU laws have essentially forced everyone to disclose their ‘gachapon’ drop rates, there literally shouldn’t be a more prioritized-hidden information within the game that you, as the devs, ought to be afraid to reveal. And frankly, you really shouldn’t hesitate anymore. The longer a game lives, the more accessible it needs to become, as well as more satisfying for its long-time players, in order to keep on living in a healthy state. Providing us with detailed Attacker History information would be just one of the ways to go about that and improve the game.
Another way to please your long-term players would be giving us 2 more ‘Castle Defense Schemes’ to save our defense builds, in order to be able to quickly switch our entire layouts between War periods, non-war periods and Conquests. You know very well that the longer people play, the more of each Tower type they possess, and changing entire layouts (including the Path) gets very frustrating very quickly. So, add 2 more buttons next to the ‘Path’ button, where we could build a layout and ‘save it’ there, in order to be able to summon it at any moment with a single click. Just 2 more layouts, making a total of 3, should be more than enough for starters.
Conquest Maps - any plans to have a map for when it is a 3-way match up - basically a triangle map. The standard map designed for 4-way seems to give 1 team a significant territory advantage with three teams. I think this would hold true even if the map were more square except, one team would be at more of a disadvantage rather than 1 with an advantage.
In that same vein, perhaps some 5-way, pentagons or 6-way hexagon maps? I would be down for some Octagons This would also give more flexibility in match making.
I want to ask if there are any plans to alter the algorithm of removing perks. If there are no plans for that, I would suggest to add it to the plans and put it high on the priority list.
Here the current situation. I will take my heal ring for example. I am interested in transforming it into a heal ring with skull perk. Skull perk percentage odds are 6%. I remove the ice perk by paying 50 gems and start to roll. I gain a perk I am not interested in. So after cool down I remove the perk I am not interested in an do a reroll. Once again a perk I am not interested in. I do another attempt after the cool down and… I receive a perk that I already removed once again. And this process seems to depend on total randomness. When a player is fortunate, he finds the perk he is interested in within a few attempts while the poor person having bad luck all the time is forced to wait and spend a small fortune of gems and still stays unfortunate. I leave the amount of gems difference out of this discussion.
A few things are wrong here, getting time after time perks that are removed already before by using gems is one of the disturbing ones. It gives me the feeling like: “I already removed that perk for gems. Why I receive that one again?”. It gives an unpleasant and mixed feeling. A player did remove such a perks for a reason, but definitely not with intention to receive it again in a nearby new attempt. Removing them from the list would be a fair option.
I already have received for example any other perk, except skull perk at least multiple times (some even 5+ times), but till now still no skull perk. Another thing that disturbs me is that after we receive a perk we don’t want the item once again is in cool down of almost 8 days. Sure, we can pay a lot of gems to skip that cool down, but very realistically it isn’t. Also during a blacksmith event it’s still 121 gems that need to be paid to skip that cool down. So for a lot of people this is pretty frustrating, they rather wait the 8 days or 12 hours during blacksmith event.
We already suggested to let us pick the perk of our wish for 1k gems, a lot of players would pay that price for sure to skip the risk at disappointment or frustration. I for example stopped trying to get a skull perk on my heal ring, it’s just depressing to see to get a perk you already received multiple times over and over again (some perks I received 5+ times already so far), while the only perk I am interested in (the skull perk) did not even show up once.
I did even suggest another option, when you remove a perk, make the odds zero to receive that removed perk next time and divide the percentage over the other perks. Say there are 11 perks possible and you receive a perk with 10% chance. Then divide the 10% over the remaining other 10 items or in other words every other perk you didn’t get, will get 1% higher odds next time. So in terms of the skull perk, the odds become 7%. Then you spin again and get and item with 30% chance, you remove it and the 30% is divided over the other perks. Skull perk odds would raise by 3% (10%). If you are unfortunate and get a perk with very low percentage (for example the one with 1%), then even all other perks increase next time by 0.1%.
This method has several advantages. Odds to find a perk you already had before, still belongs to reality, but the odds to get an item you didn’t receive before, will increase a lot. It won’t mean you can’t stay unfortunate for a while, but after every retry at least the odds to get it increase to a realistic chance. And then it might still be possible to need 100+ tries, but at least the end would be in sight, since the better odds you gain for the item you want increase.
In my bad luck example, the odds to get that skull perk would already realistically have been increase to 50%+ for sure. So then at least players with bad luck keep the faith and not tend to give up like I do now.
(Off-topic question 1) When will we write February questions?
Huhu, when the answers for January are published.
We are very busy with the new version at the moment. But I hope to have some answers soon!
Why there is no item for the stun spell? It may be good to add its distance and effective time. Wish to see an item soon.