If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball!

[twister]

There's really only two bullet points worth addressing:

-Why or how does it benefit Supercell to leave players in the dark about fixing content that Supercell implemented into the game in a way that takes away from the overall playability, enjoyment, progression, and profitability of the game? I understand why you don't want to "leak" info about new content, but when people are frustrated with the gameplay to the point of the same posts appearing daily in the forum asking for the same problems to be fixed, what good reason could you possibly have not to verbally commit to working on these issues if you actually intend to work on them? I feel this entire attitude is a major contributor to the problem players have with Supercell.

-How is "things can change" an acceptable reason to leave us uninformed if a glaring problem needs fixing...nobody is asking you to pinpoint a date when it will be fixed, but an acknowledgment that you're committing to fixing certain problems would go a long way when all that we see is a constant output of new content (a lot of which is equally flawed). My original thread that I linked to a few posts ago was more geared toward discussions about fixes and improvements in general, but fixes specifically are where the problem lies.

I typed this up from the original (before the sweater analogy) post.

Can you give me examples of what is broken in your opinion that has not been addressed? I know of several "lingering" issues, some have been acknowledged, some they're working on, some they've said it isn't going to get fixed. Which specific issues do you feel have not been addressed?

I wouldn't say the trophy system is broken. They are committed to matching by trophies, and I don't see that ever changing. When players try to win, it ranks them with their peers in very fair matches. It's when players don't try to win, for whatever reason, that trophies start becoming less of a strength indicator. I believe Rauta has mentioned they are looking at ways to make trophies more desirable, or meaningful.

As for the idea forum, they don't reply to most of the ideas, but we read them all. The team (mods/devs/admins/CS) talk daily in one form or another, and we discuss them all, in weekly reports, mega reports (he alluded to in the PM you posted), etc. There are probably 250 ideas or feature requests in the sub-forum. The sticky only has the more commonly asked for things (asked for by dozens of folks usually). Each update has what... 1-2 new things? Obviously not all ideas will make it into the game.

I know of many issues that were resolved almost immediately (Clan Castle/Santa Spell, DE hitpoints) as well as a list of ideas in that idea sticky that were implemented or influenced by user input. They do listen, and decide as a team if it's something they can do in a timely manner.

There are maybe 3 Million CoC-ers, with maybe 10,000 active CoC forumites - one thread with 100 folks asking for something may seem a lot, but if they have game-stats showing 2.5 million instances to the contrary of the forum request, which way do you think they are going to lean?

I'm trying to give you some answers from a Moderator stand-point, but you are leaving a lot to interpret versus asking questions.

[twister]

Already did. Before my first Rauta thread, actually. No reply. Shocker.

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...ight=bsmittyau

I know, but most users WONT do that. If its posted visibly and labeled as such as a separate forum you would be MUCH more likely to have people view and it would answer many of their questions and maybe , just maybe help reduce some unnecessary posts...

I've run several message boards in the past and sticky posts never do what is intended. Add a separate forum titled "Development Tracker" or "Game Development Tracker" and you'll see that it is the most visited forum you have.


Just saying.

I read that post, and thought it was a neat idea. We've discussed, and some of the admins are testing ways to do something similar within our forum software vBulletin. The last time we opened a post for direct questions, it filled up with 32 pages of arguments, and we couldn't really answer direct questions. We are exploring some ways for more direct feedback. Also, if you notice Supercell hired Jared and Steve (they have red names/titles) They have some ideas for some changes both on the forums or off, which should make for a smoother sailing ship.

But none of this stuff gets done overnight. Supercell prides itself on staying in small, tight-nit groups, there are only a handful of folks assigned to each game, and it has helped with it's success.

[bsmittyau]

Here is a very specific example. We will go with trophies.

First of all, claiming that trophies are not "broken" is ridiculous.

They are meant to match people up with "like" opponents, as you say. Yet, you're giving top tier players the ability to determine what "trophy range" they want to play the game under, and basically pick their own "skill level" instead of ranking players based on an accurate gauge of their progress in the game. The current system allows users to manipulate who they are matched against, and up until recently when the loot penalty was added this was a ridiculously glaring issue. The loot penalty is basically just a "band aid", and doesn't fix the current problem.

Here's why communication is important. A thread was posted earlier of a guy who was TH9 but had no storages, and someone commented that he sold his buildings a few months ago before that change was made to stop people from doing that. The guy received no storages or anything in return to "backdate" the fix.

Players are usually playing under the assumption (and by Supercell's posts on the forums) that progress is being worked on and made at all times. You acknowledged yourself that trophies themselves have no meaning, even though they are a central part of the game. Trophies are effected on every battle, every defense, determine who you're paired against, etc, yet there is more of an incentive to lose trophies than gain them if you want to progress in the game quickly. General consensus is that this means they are broken. Posts come up about it every week.

If I play the game under the CURRENT system, it makes the most sense to ignore trophies and farm. Two months down the road, if Supercell magically springs a "fix" on us that makes trophies worthwhile in some way, then I am automatically two months behind on trophies. If the system, which was obviously put in place to encourage people to gain trophies, does not make sense...why not give us some indication on what is being done about it so as to not waste our time/gems on something that may be completely different in two months' time?

The lack of having ANY IDEA what is being worked on effects people's gameplay, and it's just like Supercell does not care one way or the other as long as people are buying gems. It comes off as very inconsiderate and discourteous to your players, who are spending time and money alike trying to progress in a game that may drastically change at any point based on Developer's whims. If we have more of an idea of what is going on, we will feel like we have wasted less time in the long run planning for situations in the game that are ever changing. Fundamental issues like the trophy system are the biggest problems here, but it would also be nice to know what topics we are completely wasting our breath trying to improve, etc. It just seems to me that it should be common sense on Supercell's behalf, but you guys just want to sidestep the issue constantly. Developer feedback is crucial for any game, and you guys have as little feedback as humanly possible and claim that it is because you don't want to "disappoint us". I feel like that is pissing on my leg and telling me it is raining.

[Grendel]

I read that post, and thought it was a neat idea. We've discussed, and some of the admins are testing ways to do something similar within our forum software vBulletin. The last time we opened a post for direct questions, it filled up with 32 pages of arguments, and we couldn't really answer direct questions. We are exploring some ways for more direct feedback. Also, if you notice Supercell hired Jared and Steve (they have red names/titles) They have some ideas for some changes both on the forums or off, which should make for a smoother sailing ship.

But none of this stuff gets done overnight. Supercell prides itself on staying in small, tight-nit groups, there are only a handful of folks assigned to each game, and it has helped with it's success.

That is great. Just to be clear, the Development Tracker should not allow for replies, only to view what the Developers are commenting on and posting. This is an option in vbulletin for any separate forum you setup.

[Ly3rly]

Dude, I think the reply was legit he/ she gave you way more information than I would have imagined.

[twister]

Here is a very specific example. We will go with trophies.

First of all, claiming that trophies are not "broken" is ridiculous.

They are meant to match people up with "like" opponents, as you say. Yet, you're giving top tier players the ability to determine what "trophy range" they want to play the game under, and basically pick their own "skill level" instead of ranking players based on an accurate gauge of their progress in the game. The current system allows users to manipulate who they are matched against, and up until recently when the loot penalty was added this was a ridiculously glaring issue. The loot penalty is basically just a "band aid", and doesn't fix the current problem.

I wouldn't say the trophy system is broken. They are committed to matching by trophies, and I don't see that ever changing. When players try to win, it ranks them with their peers in very fair matches. It's when players don't try to win, for whatever reason, that trophies start becoming less of a strength indicator. I believe Rauta has mentioned they are looking at ways to make trophies more desirable, or meaningful.

Not sure where I said trophies have no meaning. I'll give credit to Dahimi, I think I first read it from him where he said, the whole issue of trophies, matchmaking, etc isn't about trophies and matchmaking, it's about giving incentive to players to play to their potential. I think that's what Rauta is alluding to when he said they're looking at ways to make trophies more desirable.


Here's why communication is important. A thread was posted earlier of a guy who was TH9 but had no storages, and someone commented that he sold his buildings a few months ago before that change was made to stop people from doing that. The guy received no storages or anything in return to "backdate" the fix.

That was me who replied = when they disabled selling, they weren't going to just replace the buldings you've sold (and were paid back for). If the player hadn't quit, he could have re-bought the buildings, not sure why this was even brought up.

Players are usually playing under the assumption (and by Supercell's posts on the forums) that progress is being worked on and made at all times. You acknowledged yourself that trophies themselves have no meaning, even though they are a central part of the game. Trophies are effected on every battle, every defense, determine who you're paired against, etc, yet there is more of an incentive to lose trophies than gain them if you want to progress in the game quickly. General consensus is that this means they are broken. Posts come up about it every week.

If I play the game under the CURRENT system, it makes the most sense to ignore trophies and farm. Two months down the road, if Supercell magically springs a "fix" on us that makes trophies worthwhile in some way, then I am automatically two months behind on trophies. If the system, which was obviously put in place to encourage people to gain trophies, does not make sense...why not give us some indication on what is being done about it so as to not waste our time/gems on something that may be completely different in two months' time?

I'll agree that there is very little downside to dropping trophies intentionally, except for dropping too low, and having severe TH penalties. But even that is progress isn't it? Rauta said they're looking at ways to make it more lucrative to not drop on purpose. I'll have to wait and see what comes next just like you.


The lack of having ANY IDEA what is being worked on effects people's gameplay, and it's just like Supercell does not care one way or the other as long as people are buying gems. It comes off as very inconsiderate and discourteous to your players, who are spending time and money alike trying to progress in a game that may drastically change at any point based on Developer's whims. If we have more of an idea of what is going on, we will feel like we have wasted less time in the long run planning for situations in the game that are ever changing. Fundamental issues like the trophy system are the biggest problems here, but it would also be nice to know what topics we are completely wasting our breath trying to improve, etc. It just seems to me that it should be common sense on Supercell's behalf, but you guys just want to sidestep the issue constantly. Developer feedback is crucial for any game, and you guys have as little feedback as humanly possible and claim that it is because you don't want to "disappoint us". I feel like that is pissing on my leg and telling me it is raining.

I've done polls, Facebook has done polls, before the idea sub-forum got busy (just implementing 1/10th of the "good" ideas will take them a year) so it's not like they don't have a to-do list a mile long already.

They give sneak-peaks on Facebook, and now and then some of us give hints on the forums, but we aren't going to tell you what's coming, it's their company policy for the reasons you've quoted Rauta several times for.

If we made a post last Thanksgiving that said something like "We just started working on Heroes, should be out in a few months" what exactly would that achieve other than 500 posts of "where are the heroes"? I don't think you will ever get advanced notice of new features other than Facebook previews. But the things that are broken, that they are looking at, they usually comment on.

[Horus40k]

Twister

Be careful what you say, don't say, imply and don't imply

♥♥ has this down to a fine art, he will rehash it all and just repeat it over and over again. He has 17 years experience of complaining professionally on forums.

But thank you for your honest answers. It cleared up a lot of issues most of us were not worried about

But thank you for your time and effort

You are all appreciated and its good to know you read our posts on ideas etc

Thank you

[bsmittyau]

[QUOTE=twister;193837]

I wouldn't say the trophy system is broken. They are committed to matching by trophies, and I don't see that ever changing. When players try to win, it ranks them with their peers in very fair matches. It's when players don't try to win, for whatever reason, that trophies start becoming less of a strength indicator. I believe Rauta has mentioned they are looking at ways to make trophies more desirable, or meaningful.

Not sure where I said trophies have no meaning. I'll give credit to Dahimi, I think I first read it from him where he said, the whole issue of trophies, matchmaking, etc isn't about trophies and matchmaking, it's about giving incentive to players to play to their potential. I think that's what Rauta is alluding to when he said they're looking at ways to make trophies more desirable.

---The problem is not centered around motivating players to do the right thing, it is about giving them NO reason to do the wrong thing imo. You admitted yourself that its when players don't try to win that the system becomes less of a strength indicator, and the whole mess could have easily been avoided if an "abusable" system hadn't been implemented to begin with. All I'm saying is a little communication about an issue as major as this one would go a long way toward helping make sure people don't waste their time or money trying to improve under the current system, when it is very likely to change later. At that point, as shown by the example of the sold buildings, Supercell will have no recourse for the player who's wasted X amount of time or dollars based on the optimal strategy at the time, which may be rendered moot in the future. Because of this, a little communication would be common courtesy, especially for an issue as glaring as this one.


Here's why communication is important. A thread was posted earlier of a guy who was TH9 but had no storages, and someone commented that he sold his buildings a few months ago before that change was made to stop people from doing that. The guy received no storages or anything in return to "backdate" the fix.

That was me who replied = when they disabled selling, they weren't going to just replace the buldings you've sold (and were paid back for). If the player hadn't quit, he could have re-bought the buildings, not sure why this was even brought up.

--See Above

Players are usually playing under the assumption (and by Supercell's posts on the forums) that progress is being worked on and made at all times. You acknowledged yourself that trophies themselves have no meaning, even though they are a central part of the game. Trophies are effected on every battle, every defense, determine who you're paired against, etc, yet there is more of an incentive to lose trophies than gain them if you want to progress in the game quickly. General consensus is that this means they are broken. Posts come up about it every week.

If I play the game under the CURRENT system, it makes the most sense to ignore trophies and farm. Two months down the road, if Supercell magically springs a "fix" on us that makes trophies worthwhile in some way, then I am automatically two months behind on trophies. If the system, which was obviously put in place to encourage people to gain trophies, does not make sense...why not give us some indication on what is being done about it so as to not waste our time/gems on something that may be completely different in two months' time?

I'll agree that there is very little downside to dropping trophies intentionally, except for dropping too low, and having severe TH penalties. But even that is progress isn't it? Rauta said they're looking at ways to make it more lucrative to not drop on purpose. I'll have to wait and see what comes next just like you.

--Since they already know what they are planning to do to fix it, and telling us would cost them nothing (in current resources or in future profits), then why keep it a secret other than not wanting to be "tied down" to fixing the problem eventually?


The lack of having ANY IDEA what is being worked on effects people's gameplay, and it's just like Supercell does not care one way or the other as long as people are buying gems. It comes off as very inconsiderate and discourteous to your players, who are spending time and money alike trying to progress in a game that may drastically change at any point based on Developer's whims. If we have more of an idea of what is going on, we will feel like we have wasted less time in the long run planning for situations in the game that are ever changing. Fundamental issues like the trophy system are the biggest problems here, but it would also be nice to know what topics we are completely wasting our breath trying to improve, etc. It just seems to me that it should be common sense on Supercell's behalf, but you guys just want to sidestep the issue constantly. Developer feedback is crucial for any game, and you guys have as little feedback as humanly possible and claim that it is because you don't want to "disappoint us". I feel like that is pissing on my leg and telling me it is raining.

I've done polls, Facebook has done polls, before the idea sub-forum got busy (just implementing 1/10th of the "good" ideas will take them a year) so it's not like they don't have a to-do list a mile long already.

They give sneak-peaks on Facebook, and now and then some of us give hints on the forums, but we aren't going to tell you what's coming, it's their company policy for the reasons you've quoted Rauta several times for.

If we made a post last Thanksgiving that said something like "We just started working on Heroes, should be out in a few months" what exactly would that achieve other than 500 posts of "where are the heroes"? I don't think you will ever get advanced notice of new features other than Facebook previews. But the things that are broken, that they are looking at, they usually comment on.

--I have never viewed their facebook page, as I assumed this would be the primary means of communication. Heroes were new content, not a solution to a specific problem in the game. I've already pointed out that the two may be handled differently and understand the reasons why. Fixes to broken content should have primary priority, and should be communicated to players to SOME extent.

If we have to agree to disagree then I guess we can, but the current method of relaying information is not going to do anything to help the longevity of the game or company whatsoever.

[Hannibal]

I don't mean to jump in the middle of this thing, but one thought:

I'm not sure I'd say that trophies are a question of playing to potential. Right now there are two ways to play the game. You can play for trophies or you can play to build your base. It encourages diversity in both base designs and attack loadouts including armies, spells and even army deployment. That's a good thing. It makes the game interesting and gives people more things to do.

In my opinion the problem isn't that there are two ways to play the game, but rather that there is almost no intersection between them. If I drew venn diagrams of the incentives and tools to chase trophies with the incentives and tools to farm there would be essentially no overlap.

All we need is a tweak to incentivize farmers to care more about trophies.

[bsmittyau]

Agreed Hannibal. Another benefit to staff feedback is shown here, in that a lot of times the staff who are commenting (which in itself is rare) here may not have a complete grasp of the problem or really understand what is being recommended, and the "we will all just have to wait and see what comes" comment shows a clear disconnect between the people who are making the changes and the people who are doing the communicating. Bridging these gaps would go a long way.

Completely agree about the "two ways to play" comment, and IMO if the game functioned properly and had a true reward for all of the time and money people pour into it, there would be one true path to progressing and finishing the game instead of random "objectives" that offer you more of a challenge with less of a reward when the game is already unbearably slow at later stages. If trophies were not in the game whatsoever it would be no different and pretty much just as playable, except everyone would be on a level playing field with the same motivations and even leader boards might "matter", assuming they are based on criteria that actually ranks someone's progress.