GT's 5th

[洛雨]

图片 2025-7-4 2115.png

9.01MB

图片 2025-7-4 2122.png

7.98MB

■ Specific items that need to be adjusted:
- Relief of development pressure: The VP system directly sends materials and optimizes the training room function, which reflects the idea of ​​"lowering the threshold with benefits rather than raising the payment", which is consistent with your criticism of "mindless stacking of numbers to force krypton". However, it is necessary to point out neutrally: Will the numerical setting of "sending half a set/full set of flowering resources" affect the rhythm of resource delivery in subsequent versions? If the value is too high, it is equivalent to "resource depreciation", which may indirectly weaken the attractiveness of paid gift packages. This is a balance detail that needs to be verified later.

■ Potential controversial points: There are still "gray areas" that need to be refined in the balance logic
- Does the stratification of the card drawing system increase cognitive burden: Although the positioning of the three types of pagers, black/purple/dream, is clear, for new players or casual players, the multi-track pool mechanism may increase the complexity of "cultivation path selection". For example, is the priority guidance of "general old five-star flowering" and "version UP pool" clear? If players misjudge the direction of resource investment, it may cause complaints that "free players cannot keep up with the version", which is potentially in conflict with the goal of "not abandoning individual players". It is necessary to strengthen the layered logic in the UI guidance or novice tutorial (guide and explain clearly, add dubbing when necessary) ps: The new is to increase the benefits of all players on the basis of the current card pool (limited) "New heroes will be added after the flowering version (not the latest version of the up flowering hero)" flowering card pool.

- Whether the difficulty gradient of the challenge book splits the player ecology: If the rewards of the exclusive challenge book are too generous (such as physical strength and awakening stones), it may lead to "players without specific heroes cannot obtain core resources", forming a new "hidden threshold" in disguise. Neutral assessment is required: Do the entry threshold of the challenge book (such as hero training requirements) and the reward output match the long-term development rhythm of free players? If the difficulty is too high, "benefits" may become "paid exclusive privileges", deviating from the original intention of "balance".
Therefore, the training challenge gives non-core precious cultivation resources, and gives general resources with low to medium preciousness

Neutral conclusion: 80% of the plan meets the self-eval‎uation of "balance art", and the details need to use data to verify the balance threshold

Your design shows mature systematic thinking in "layered experience framework, resource closed-loop logic, and commercial restraint", especially taking "plot free" as an unshakable foundation and achieving commercial extension through "challenge benefits", which is more sustainable than the traditional mobile game "numerical forced krypton". But it should be noted that any "balance" needs to be dynamically adjusted through player behavior data (such as whether the annual distribution of fantasy pagers leads to the loss of paying players, and whether the proportion of challenge rewards affects the resource ecology). From the logical framework, you have achieved the core goal of "using hierarchical design to solve the contradiction between business and experience", but if you want to become a real "balance model", you still need to supplement quantitative verification in the three details of "user cognitive cost, difficulty gradient, and resource value" - this is exactly the only way from "idea" to "implementation". (It's only been half a year, how come the development and operation logic is sick again?)

thank you~
［8~10hour...Finish］

[당돌한 기사]

안녕하세요.

기사님의 의견을 관련 부서에 전달드릴 수 있도록 하겠습니다.
다른 건의 사항이 있으시면 말씀해 주세요.

감사합니다.