@msg975 wrote:
OP, ignore the people in this thread that are criticizing you for speaking the truth. I've played quite a few CCGs and this is probably the stingiest one when it comes to awarding players in-game currency (gems). It's humorous that people think that awarding gems for wins will somehow hurt this game, as if it hasn't already been proven by the most successful CCG on the market, Hearthstone, that awarding in-game currency for matchmaking wins is healthy for this type of game. The people that argue against gems per win are just selfish players that have most of the cards already through exploits or actual money, so they want to keep others down so no one can challenge their large collections.What they fail to realize is that in order for the game to survive it needs to be friendly to new players, otherwise everyone will leave this game and they will be forced to wait 10 minutes for a match just to face other players with full collections. That is until the servers shut down as a result of the dwindling playerbase, at which point they won't be able to play the game at all.
Are you writing that based on experience from seeing the behind the scene numbers or is this just speculation written as if it was fact?
For people who are having problems progressing through the game I recommend reading the progression guide found here: http://answers.ea.com/t5/Strategy-Discussion/Progressing-in-PVZ-Heroes/m-p/5726011#U5726011
In regards to the getting more gems. Gems are nice and I'm sure all of us would love more gems, but in my experience most people always perceive that the amount of resources they are receiving are below what they actually need to get the best progression (how enjoyable is the experience of getting more and better cards and being able to compete at a higher level). I think that the game could benefit from a better distribution of gems to make games explicitly and continuously rewarding at all levels, but just blindly giving out more gems could potentially be a bad idea without a thorough analysis of data that we as players don't have. This is my reason for pushing back on this.
Every single online CCG I've played always has someone who is unsatisfied with the rewards given to them by the game so it would be folly for developers to just react every time they see someone complain about it. If people want to give actual useful feedback, I recommend writing the feedback based on their own experience and how they feel and what they want so that the feedback is specifically about you, instead of trying to sound as if they have analyzed the full user base behaviour of this and multiple other games and have irrefutable and mathematical proof of exactly how many gems must be given.
Suggestions are also nice, but once again, don't write them convinced that they would be the one and only solution possible and best for everybody.
For example, I agree that it would be nice to receive something whenever we win a game at the higher levels because other games have spoiled me and those will always give me something when I win. My favourite method is a rotating wheel with prizes inside it, with certain awesome prizes (like a full pack) with very low probabilities and with simple, almost worthless prizes with high probabilities. I'm thinking like a spinning wheel with a 0.5% chance of a pack, 1.5% chance of 20 gems, 3% chance of 5 gems, 5% 2 gems, 10% 1 gem, 35% 3 sparks, 45% 1 spark. To me this keeps things exciting because, while I'm usually just getting a handful of sparks, there is always that small chance of a pack. Perhaps the number of sparks given out by uncommons and rares would have to chance and perhaps the number of gems you get when you rank up in the ladder would also have to be reduced, but I think having something like this would be cool. Also, perhaps this spinning the wheel could be something you only get after you reach a certain rank.
