Discussion Beta & live new events / features start

[Atosha]

I see that we'll have (again) start of events same week here and on live.
Meaning we'll also have rivals the same weeks and days.

With all the other changes happening, I do think it wouldn't be that bad to have a gap (1 week?) and avoid game peak activity on both worlds at the same time.
That would also allow more players having enough time to test beta correctly!

 

[planetofthehumans2]

I agree but the rivals all start on tuesdays so it's not going to stop the double rivals. It's terrible, hard to do both at the same time without sacraficing one or both or your mental health.

 

[The Lady Redneck]

For me, there is no rivalry between rivals. I could quite easily forget about both of them without feeling I have sacrificed anything. But if one of the quests works in with my daily collection then i might make something out of it.

 

[Atosha]

I agree but the rivals all start on tuesdays so it's not going to stop the double rivals. It's terrible, hard to do both at the same time without sacraficing one or both or your mental health.

True, but only once per event with a 1 week gap between events start (and then with a first rival clearance in one world). Would need a 2 weeks gap to avoid that completely.

 

[CrashBoom]

on beta things start when they are ready

and for me that is better than have to wait 2 more weeks just to avoid having 2 rivals in the same 48 hour timeframe

 

[planetofthehumans2]

on beta things start when they are ready

and for me that is better than have to wait 2 more weeks just to avoid having 2 rivals in the same 48 hour timeframe

They wouldn't be able to test all the events on time if they pushed them even further. We actually nearly had two halloween events cocurrent last year.

 

[Catness]

I think one rival per month would be enough! If you only have one world, this may not be a problem, but players with 3, 4 or 5 worlds will eventually start spinning the wheel when they have to serve the rival in addition to the game, the event, the quantum.
In addition, the rival's demands are now far too high for smaller players. These do not yet have enough potions to always accelerate. And that at the end of the game there are countless fights (without losing),
After you have already completed the GEX at level 5 according to the tasks and the guild battle has not yet started, it causes problems even for a big player. Finally stop doing that and go back to “normal” and doable tasks. The rival should be able to be played alongside, just like in the beginning.

 

[Atosha]

on beta things start when they are ready

and for me that is better than have to wait 2 more weeks just to avoid having 2 rivals in the same 48 hour timeframe

Is it really the case? I'm more inclined to think that starts the same week are planned that way.
It could be made to have 1 week more without event on live once, to give more flexibility to us players to manage live and beta activity peaks.
I do think there's enough on currently (lot of news / settlements / QI) since a few months and that a lot of players won't mind less things (on live, there are so many announcements that I know a lot of guildmates missing at least 50% of the information given).

Oh and I can understand that you don't need it, fine for you . But don't forget not everyone has the same availability for the game, and I don't see what you would loose. And on the opposite side, having involved players leaving beta because of that would hurt more imo.

@planetofthehumans2 of course, when delivery is late, it's not the same music. That doesn't seem a reason not to orchestrate beta and live activity peaks better in a casual mode.
And even in such cases, sometimes, reassess instead of rushing / botching things may be a positive thing.
That could even allow more beta issues and improvements proposal to be heard and avoid things such as "unfortunately, it introduced several bugs that weren't detected on our Beta server. We're as surprised as you were and are actively working to resolve these issues.". I'm probably dreaming for that last part but that's not the topic here anyway ^^

 

[planetofthehumans2]

@planetofthehumans2 of course, when delivery is late, it's not the same music. That doesn't seem a reason not to orchestrate beta and live activity peaks better in a casual mode.
And even in such cases, sometimes, reassess instead of rushing / botching things may be a positive thing.
That could even allow more beta issues and improvements proposal to be heard and avoid things such as "unfortunately, it introduced several bugs that weren't detected on our Beta server. We're as surprised as you were and are actively working to resolve these issues.". I'm probably dreaming for that last part but that's not the topic here anyway ^^

In the ideal world, yes I would love that we dont get slammed every tuesday with events and rivals, but in the real world of software development that doesn't always happen especially when it's a new "type" of event. We've already seen launches of events get pushed back so badly that they almost collided with the live release. Unfortunately they didn't take most of our suggestions on that one but they did make some changes and then made some more changes into it's second evolution the history event. I don't recall any major/game breaking bugs making it to live.

It's just par for the course on beta that we can't always or maybe even rarely get this kind of grace. If you want to just experience the game as its intended, then stick to live servers.

 

[Atosha]

In the ideal world, yes I would love that we dont get slammed every tuesday with events and rivals, but in the real world of software development that doesn't always happen especially when it's a new "type" of event. We've already seen launches of events get pushed back so badly that they almost collided with the live release. Unfortunately they didn't take most of our suggestions on that one but they did make some changes and then made some more changes into it's second evolution the history event. I don't recall any major/game breaking bugs making it to live.

It's just par for the course on beta that we can't always or maybe even rarely get this kind of grace. If you want to just experience the game as its intended, then stick to live servers.

I may have wrongly expressed myself but by "when delivery is late, it's not the same music", I wanted to say I was agreeing with you and that in such cases, of course, you deal with it when it's served.
(Small digression: tbh, even in the Halloween exemple, I'm pretty sure Inno could have delayed more the launch on live without creating a ruckus - annoucement being made very short time before start. It seems sometimes Inno's pressuring itself to launch as is and the fastest possible for no specific reason for us players (not saying there's no reason at all, with management pressure and so on)).

So, if that can clarify things, I didn't create this topic to say "I propose there cannot be a single case where beta can overlap live servers peak activity".
I wanted to debate of the "why not orchestrate peak activities of beta and live as a whole, and not plan things like it's completely separate".
I am quite new on beta but have already seen players quit, not because it's too much or because beta was not what they seek, but because it's too much on certain days (and that's generally when testing and giving feedback is most required and interesting).
I've also seen Inno asking why we didn't do a specific rival (there are other reasons of course but that's one of them imo) or complaint here and there that there's too much on the plate.

 

[Fury the Avenger]

In the ideal world, yes I would love that we dont get slammed every tuesday with events and rivals, but in the real world of software development that doesn't always happen especially when it's a new "type" of event. We've already seen launches of events get pushed back so badly that they almost collided with the live release. Unfortunately they didn't take most of our suggestions on that one but they did make some changes and then made some more changes into it's second evolution the history event. I don't recall any major/game breaking bugs making it to live.

It's just par for the course on beta that we can't always or maybe even rarely get this kind of grace. If you want to just experience the game as its intended, then stick to live servers.

There were a lot of bugs in the mobile version. Maybe because they didn't actually gave us any time to actually test it.
Bugs do include text that were outright lies. But since no one that play only mobile had the option to see the bug happen on beta (went to live before even one incursion was completed on the mobile version) and player that use both didn't have any reason to check the informative screen on mobile, since we already read them before.

The irony is that Inno wrote that they are "surprised" that player on beta didn't cutch those bugs. But they forgot that we WROTE that it was untested and too soon to release on live. They must have missed that part.

In low Rival participation we already noted, on the feedback Inno requested, that making Rival in beta on the same day and week of live does harm testing participation. That was ignored too, or at least no actual action to address the issue was taken.

The last announcement contain the statement that Inno listen to us and so they changed the QI free chest to 50 and 100 progress. I must have missed that feedback, never saw it. Personally I don't think that has any impact on the feature enjoyment.