Patch? Testing android purchases?

[Weskingofscots]

Downloaded the patch yesterday, Don't see any changes to farming gold. What exactly did this patch cover? The patch notes on google play just says testing android purchases?

[Hannibal_PJV]

It Also say that version is 1.00, not 1.02 as it should... So don't have a clue...

[chainsawash]

I noticed that too. But previously I couldn't play Quest mode at all, it would just hang while loading. After I installed the patch that mode works, so it does appear to be a valid patch. Not sure why the updates aren't listed on the Play store page.

Edited May 7, 2016 by chainsawash

[Brainwave]

My understanding is it removed the ability to replay normal (and possibly heroic) level story mode scenarios for gold, which was unintended. Behind that I don't think it did much beyond fixing broken quest mode and a couple other major bugs.

 

Regarding gold farming, I get the impression that they think Legendary is too "easy" currently and combine that with the concept that they seem to have intended Legendary as the difficulty to play if you want to get more than one time gold rewards, it may get significantly harder to get gold in the future (Not sure why they would want to put gold behind a difficulty curve as that just benefits the really good players and hurts the more casual players). So if you are looking to buy stuff with gold I'd get that gold now because in another patch or two it may be a problem. I'd love to be proven wrong on this but it's the impression I'm getting over the last few days worth of posts.

[Borissimo]

I can't see the prices for everything since I bought the season pass, but my understanding from these forums is that the gold costs are the following:

 

base set character: 1,500 gold

c-deck character: 2,500 gold (if you save up 10,000 gold and buy all 4 at once)

 

This is what I've gleaned from forum posts in passing, so if this is wrong, please correct me!

 

If the above numbers aren't wrong, then that makes the released game dramatically cheaper than the closed beta, when base set characters cost 2,000 gold and c-deck characters cost a whopping 4,000 each. Given these price reductions, I think we need to give Obsidian some credit for good faith. To me it doesn't seem like they're trying to punish gold farmers or make it harder to get gold; rather, I think they want to channel gold farmers to experience the game in a particular way. Instead of crushing the same scenario with an over-leveled party a bazillion times, they want you to farm gold by either A) creating a new party and replaying Story Mode, or B) playing a ton of Quest Mode. They don't want you to sit around thinking, "What scenario can I beat the fastest for the largest amount of money?", but instead to just play the game.

 

At least, that is my guess.

[Brainwave]

All I'm saying is it should be more about time invested than player skill or difficulty. If X amount of gold per day max is the goal, whether that's less or more than what currently is obtainable, then alter gold rewards to reflect that or put a cap on gold per day. Just because someone is running an easier mission doesn't mean that it doesn't take them time and effort to complete that mission, you still have to encounter the same amount of boons and banes to complete it. Make it worth less to reflect being able to finish it slightly faster but the idea that it has to be hard to get gold just rewards the wrong thing in my opinion as there's always some guy who's going to be amazing at the game and able to complete almost anything on Legendary. Should that guy really be making more in game gold than some other guy who's just not as good at the game? I personally don't think so.

[Parody]

The goal is to get you to pay real money for things.  Programmers have to eat.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Parody

[PinkRose]

But programmers don't need much food.

They just eat bytes.

[Splat Cat AU]

Well, as I have paid for the bundle, and I don't have money falling out of my pockets, they aren't going to trick me into buying those silly chests for ca$h.

They only way I will purchase those chests is by using in-game currency/gold rewards.

The only way they are going to get more money from me is to convert more of the cardboard versions of games in the series to this digital medium.

By fiddling with the "farming" ability, keeping in mind that farming was an intended feature, people may feel that the "moving the goalpost syndrome" is simply a way to fiddle/reduce the rewards they get for playing, which implies a sneaky attempt to make people spend more ca$h (micro/macro transactions) to get something they though they had already paid for.

The sneakier devs appear when they start fiddling with rewards to inspire ca$h-shop purchasing, the less people will trusted future fiddling.

 

I purchased the bundle because I really like the game and like what they have made. They want more money from me then they need to make more game, dont try to make me spend at the ca$h-shop.

[Hannibal_PJV]

Hmmm in Star wars Galaxy of heroes "Free play" is that you have to pay real money 49€ for four characters. Or collect 50 character chards for that character. As a free to pay mode in 6 month I have managed to find 0-8 shards to spesific characters. So it would take 3-10 years to free to play to get some free characters.

In pathfinder you can get free character in one day of play... So yeah... The price is not in balance.

[Splat Cat AU]

So, you're saying price has to be balanced with a mobile game that EA made and manages?

EA has been screwing gamers ever since I remember, and I'm 48 this year.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Splat Cat AU

[Hannibal_PJV]

No, EA is in the dark side!

But it has to be balanced so that free play is fun and possible, but that those who pay will benefit From it and that the company gets enough income so that They can pay the salarakas and get income.

If there is no income, there will never be more pathfinder games or even this game may be canceled before we have all six adventures or that the game will never get patches to fix bugs because the developer founds out that it is not economically sensible to support this game.

 

At this moment you can easily farm all the gold to unlock everything in no time and that is a Little too fast IMHO. So there has to be better balance to it. If it is too hard to earn anything free to play players will quite as I did with that Starwars game that I refered to, because you don't progress. It is hard thing to do right.

 

Ps. We seems to be about the same age ;-) old players never die! They just get slow...

Edited May 8, 2016 by Hannibal_PJV

[da_mayor]

I don't think they're manipulating anything.  Their intent from the start was to keep people from exploiting the in-game currency system to get gobs of free stuff.  However, it didn't work properly at release.

[Brainwave]

Regardless of limiting the "exploit" of running a normal mode scenario over and over for 100g which I doubt many people were doing anyway, it seems obvious that people would run Legendary scenarios over and over for 200g if that was a legit possibility, which it sounds like it was intended. If you don't want people buying all your free content in a week, you don't let them replay scenarios for 200 each as much as they want, when the most expensive thing is 10k and everything else is a lot cheaper.

 

And if the thought was, Legendary is so hard that players won't be able to get gold from it regularly, A) who did you have testing it? And B) even if it was that hard, that's kind of a lame way to limit gold. If you're super good at the game / lucky you can get as much as you want but if you're average player then you can bang your head against these really hard scenarios if you want but you won't get much out of it?

 

My point is, if limiting gold "farming" is a thing for them beyond what they've already done then they really should have thought it out better before releasing the game. If I'd loaded it up and you could only get 20g a scenario and it cost 10k for some stuff, I would have just accepted that as the way they created the game and wouldn't be posting here about it (I also might not be still playing it but that's my choice).

[da_mayor]

You still CAN play Legendary for 200 a Scenario, as far as I know.

[Brainwave]

Yep and like I said that makes the normal diff nerf pointless which likely leads to some sort of Legendary nerf in the future (also seen Obsidian folks post indicating that if people can win regularly on Legendary then it's too easy). Thus everything I said up above that I'm not going to repeat again. If I'm wrong and they come out and say that everything else is working as intended and they have no problem with people running Legendary missions as is for gold then I stand corrected.

[kdawg91]

anybody know whats wrong with the update or lack of on android?

[PinkRose]

Worked for me just fine.

Sorry. What problem are you having?

[HPL_fan]

Not sure why they would want to put gold behind a difficulty curve as that just benefits the really good players and hurts the more casual players...

 

 

Money.  Devs can't work without pay, and the business model seems to assume you should pay cash to get gold to do the things you want.  It's a disincentive for me, though.  I've bought every expansion and character for Talisman DE to date.  I don't see any reason to do that with Pathfinder Adventures since it will take me at least a month to get through the first adventure expansion.   I bought the daily gold and 400 extra gold, but that was only because I had a credit on Google to use.  

[Brainwave]

I'm not following your argument. What does money have to do with difficulty. If that's all it is then eliminate the gold option period or cap the amount you can get per day. Making it a difficulty contest just benefits more skilled players.

[kdawg91]

it doesn't show a update available for me,  still shows 1.00

[leProgrammer]

This was a mistake on my behalf. When pushing the update, I missed a spot for incrementing the version from 1.0.0 to 1.0.2 as well as leaving an old "what's new" string attached to it. Next patch (1.0.3) will properly show up as 1.0.3 and will properly inform users of what is actually new. d(^_^)b