All Alliances Increasing To 20 Member Slots

Unknown

itstime1234 wrote:

Anyone that recently spent HP (say in the last month) def deserves a refund however everyone else has probably gotten a fantastic return on their investment. The advantage time has worn off and now others are allowed in. Think of all those extra covers, HP and ISO that was received in the past, more than makes up for the initial investment.

How much money did D3P make thanks to Alliances ?

It would be decent to STOP considering that we had a decent return of investment for the Alliance slots.

Alliances were the best money generator for D3P since the creation of the game. So refunding the customers would just be fair.

Thank you.

Unknown

arktos1971 wrote:

Dear Santa,

Could we please enjoy MPQ for a whole month and not be disapointed for 30 days ?

Thank you,

Arktos

The comment posted on the thumb up has to be copied and pasted here :

"Dear Santa Claus,
I'd like to be hired by MPQ as Community manager so that a lot of people would have their opinion far more listened."

Thanks for being funny. We need it.

Lystrata

HailMary wrote:

In terms of general game health with regard to leveling the playing field, this is a very cool move. It's also pointedly anti-monetization and anti-P2W, since they're completely eliminating a revenue stream that provided in-game advantage, no matter how minuscule that revenue stream was.

I find this take on the matter really odd. Having seen a number of people make similar statements now, I thought I'd comment on it. The moment I read this change, all I thought was "Heh, long-term profit and cash-grab from D3P."

Sure, in the immediate future they lose out on a set amount of HP for slots. But in the long term... every alliance is going to think they have a chance at T100 now, due to the capacity for 20 members. Which means extra shielding, extra HP purchases, etc. When you give everyone the illusion that they can reach T100, because they can have the numbers for it now, I'm sure it'll inspire many of the more 'casual' alliances to fight harder. Which in turn will result in T100 alliances fighting harder, which will mean more shield hopping, more HP spent, etc.

By opening up the 'competition' to a level playing field for all, I can see this being far more profitable in HP sales than alliance slots would be, long-term.

Or so is how I instantly perceived this. Mainly because I can't fathom why a company, particularly a 'F2P' company, would give away a revenue stream without assuming the change would in turn provide them with a greater revenue stream.


As for...

"David wrote:

Moore"]Hi,

We understand that players who spent Hero Points to expand their Alliance within the last week may be feeling upset. If you fall into this category, please send Customer Service a ticket and we'll look into Hero Point compensation: https://d3publisherofamerica.zendesk.co ... quests/new

We do feel though, that players who spent Hero Points in the past to expand their Alliances have reaped substantial benefits for doing so (increased Iso, covers, rewards, etc.) that compensate for the Hero Points spent to expand.

Thanks for your understanding as we move forward with the Alliance expansion.

... this? It's pretty weak. What about commanders who've been selling off personal covers to save HP for their next slot? What about alliances who upgraded 8 days ago?

"You didn't upgrade in the last 7 days? Tough." really doesn't take into account the time/sacrifice that goes into preparing for the next slot. As someone else said, they recently sold off one character so that they could continue to save up HP for their alliance, rather than spend it on personal roster space. I know many other commanders who've been doing similar for quite a while now. To suggest they're 'reaping the benefits' of past purchases, while they're currently crippling their own rosters, is something of a slap in the face, tbh.

And for a company that's basically saying they can do without alliance slot HP revenue, to be too tight to give some token compensation (even if just to current commanders), seems somewhat absurd. The forum really didn't need a bunch of your T100 alliances getting... irate.

HailMary

Lystrata wrote:

HailMary wrote:

In terms of general game health with regard to leveling the playing field, this is a very cool move. It's also pointedly anti-monetization and anti-P2W, since they're completely eliminating a revenue stream that provided in-game advantage, no matter how minuscule that revenue stream was.

I find this take on the matter really odd. Having seen a number of people make similar statements now, I thought I'd comment on it. The moment I read this change, all I thought was "Heh, long-term profit and cash-grab from D3P."

Sure, in the immediate future they lose out on a set amount of HP for slots. But in the long term... every alliance is going to think they have a chance at T100 now, due to the capacity for 20 members. Which means extra shielding, extra HP purchases, etc. When you give everyone the illusion that they can reach T100, because they can have the numbers for it now, I'm sure it'll inspire many of the more 'casual' alliances to fight harder. Which in turn will result in T100 alliances fighting harder, which will mean more shield hopping, more HP spent, etc.

By opening up the 'competition' to a level playing field for all, I can see this being far more profitable in HP sales than alliance slots would be, long-term.

Or so is how I instantly perceived this. Mainly because I can't fathom why a company, particularly a 'F2P' company, would give away a revenue stream without assuming the change would in turn provide them with a greater revenue stream.

Interesting point.

Even if everyone was given a 20-slot alliance just for opening a personal account (i.e. even if they remove the Iso cost), though, the vast majority of players wouldn't be anywhere near T100 contention. Alliance T100 in PVP currently requires around 13K points, which is 650 per player for a perfectly active 20-slot alliance. That's beyond the willing capability of most players. Sure, those who are sufficiently motivated to organize such an alliance, yet didn't have the HP resources before, would throw themselves headlong into the fray, but it'd be interesting to see if the typical T100 cutoff ticks up by even 1000 points in the month following this alliance cost change.

That said, if a large number of previously small alliances were indeed motivated enough to shield more, it could very well be a larger revenue stream: 10 players using 1 extra 3hr shield per PVP spend an extra 750 HP per event, and over the course of 20 PVPs (~2 months), their expenditure would just about match the cost of buying the last 10 alliance slots under the current pricing structure.

Unknown

arktos1971 wrote:

The comment posted on the thumb up has to be copied and pasted here :

"Dear Santa Claus,
I'd like to be hired by MPQ as Community manager so that a lot of people would have their opinion far more listened."

Thanks for being funny. We need it.

In fact, I wrote this 50% serious and 50% fun ^^
I think it could really solve a part of the problem, cause it's really strange that the staff takes a decision of that kind.
If a real old player was in the staff, I couldn't imagine that this person would have agreed with this decision without even having thought of the ones who already paid for their alliances. That makes me think there's no player in the staff, which is, in my opinion, a part of the problem

Lystrata

HailMary wrote:

Interesting point.

Even if everyone was given a 20-slot alliance just for opening a personal account (i.e. even if they remove the Iso cost), though, the vast majority of players wouldn't be anywhere near T100 contention. Alliance T100 in PVP currently requires around 13K points, which is 650 per player for a perfectly active 20-slot alliance. That's beyond the willing capability of most players. Sure, those who are sufficiently motivated to organize such an alliance, yet didn't have the HP resources before, would throw themselves headlong into the fray, but it'd be interesting to see if the typical T100 cutoff ticks up by even 1000 points in the month following this alliance cost change.

That said, if a large number of previously small alliances were indeed motivated enough to shield more, it could very well be a larger revenue stream: 10 players using 1 extra 3hr shield per PVP spend an extra 750 HP per event, and over the course of 20 PVPs (~2 months), their expenditure would just about match the cost of buying the last 10 alliance slots under the current pricing structure.

Oh, sure. I'm not saying every alliance is going to think it can contend for T100 overnight. Which is why I think the 'pay for slots' option has suited D3P to this point - there were only a handful of players (metaphorically speaking) that could compete for T100. Making them pay for the privilege of banding together and against each other was a good business model.

But now that more players are joining, and progressing (I can only assume, as would logically be the case a year on) they should be looking towards what the next year will bring. Which will, ultimately, be more players with higher rosters, all competing for higher spots. I don't expect to see an immediate change on the 4th, for instance. But I do think that this change is made with long-term monetary gain in mind. (Least I hope it was. If it was just for lulz...)

simonsez

atomzed wrote:

Your analogy is different. HOV (what does it stands for?) Lanes are limited resources, so if someone else is using it, you may not have access to the lanes.

You're not quite understanding the analogy. In the case of mpq, the top ranks become the limited resource, and now everyone has been given the same access to them that the rest of us paid for.

And HOV = high occupancy vehicles

IamTheDanger

I just did a little math. My alliance finishes in the 50 to 100 range. That gets me an extra 50Hp. With 2 PvP and 1 PvE, thats 150 Hp per week, IF we finish 50 - 100 for every event. Which a few times we didn't. Anyway, that should get a player about 3,500 Hp in 6 months. But, my alliance has only been active for 4 months, which got me, personally about 2,500 Hp so far.

Now, someone please tell me when the Hp prices changed, because apparently, D3 thinks that 2,500 Hp is Now worth $100 USD.
These are the rewards that I have "reaped".

also, not counting iso and covers because solo players get the same thing from facebook sharing and token pulls. I'm only counting that which can be obtained from alliance placement only. and since you don't get to share/gift Hp, or get it from token pulls, that is all I'm counting.

quadiak

There are way to many posts to read everything on this thread, so my point may have already been mentioned. Sorry in advance if that is the case.

Why not simply convert slot sales over to ISO, which is what they should have been from the beginning if you ask me, then people can more easily afford to increase alliance sizes and on the same token, others don't have to feel quite so ripped off?

Unknown

Dear Santa,

Could you please make sure we stop talking CONTINUOUSLY about MONEY in this game ?

Please make sure we stop the hypocrisy. How on earth can we still call this game Free to Play ?

I'm completely sick.

Thank you,

Arktos

Unknown

kitkiller8732 wrote:

In fact, I wrote this 50% serious and 50% fun ^^
I think it could really solve a part of the problem, cause it's really strange that the staff takes a decision of that kind.
If a real old player was in the staff, I couldn't imagine that this person would have agreed with this decision without even having thought of the ones who already paid for their alliances. That makes me think there's no player in the staff, which is, in my opinion, a part of the problem

So I could perceive. But it was refined sense of humour, and it made me laugh.

Unknown

Damn this game is just getting more lame with time. I've been grinding for a year already and it's lame but now this!? I want my hp back so I can buy covers for x-force. I'm a faithful player and I just keep getting screwed, Where is my anniversary gift!!!!!?

HailMary

arktos1971 wrote:

How on earth can we still call this game Free to Play?

Ahem.

Unknown

arktos1971 wrote:

Dear Santa,

Could we please enjoy MPQ for a whole month and not be disapointed for 30 days ?

Thank you,

Arktos

We must be on the naughty list *snicker*

Dragon_Nexus

This is good news, sure. I like that I no longer have to dread saving up 1300 HP for the next slot in my alliance, but...obviously I feel a little screwed out of the HP I got.
Hell, I got 2900HP from the anniversary and thought "Score! Two new members for my alliance!" and spent them there. Now it feels like I squandered that prize =S

I'm not sure how cheated I should feel since I don't think I spent much money on the alliance, I've mostly saved up HP I've won. I have spent some cash though, not sure how much it was.
Still it's a little annoying, I guess, to have wasted all the HP I scraped together over time.

Unknown

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

How on earth can we still call this game Free to Play?

Ahem.

I know. It's so ironical.

But I know I am an exception. So I tend to "sometimes" think as if I was the player next door.

Unknown

Dragon_Nexus wrote:

This is good news, sure. I like that I no longer have to dread saving up 1300 HP for the next slot in my alliance, but...obviously I feel a little screwed out of the HP I got.
Hell, I got 2900HP from the anniversary and thought "Score! Two new members for my alliance!" and spent them there. Now it feels like I squandered that prize =S

I'm not sure how cheated I should feel since I don't think I spent much money on the alliance, I've mostly saved up HP I've won. I have spent some cash though, not sure how much it was.
Still it's a little annoying, I guess, to have wasted all the HP I scraped together over time.

It doesn't matter if you spent money or not. Money = Time. You can use money to get resources, or use time to get resources. You used the resources you earned with your time, resources that could have been used for quite a few high tier covers.

atomzed

arktos1971 wrote:

atomzed wrote:

Your analogy is different. HOV (what does it stands for?) Lanes are limited resources, so if someone else is using it, you may not have access to the lanes.

In the alliance slots case, if you have bought 20 slots, you still have retain access to 20 slots. There's no change in the slots at all.

In any case the analogy was meant primary to show the absurdity of asking for refunds ALL the way back in time. We have people asking refunds for EVERYONE since start of game, and others asking for 150% worth of HP.

In case people misrepresent my stand again, I understand why people are unhappy with the change, why some people would ask for refunds. I agree that refunds should.be given up till a certain extent.... It cannot and should not go all the way back.

I am not sure I understand why there should be a difference between earlier and later slot buyers.

Late joiners of the game already have access to numerous 1* and 2* covers (you can build a full covered 1* & 2* roster in less than a month now), discounted Iso (78K vs 52K before for the same price) better scaling in PvEs, now they could be refunded for alliance slots ?

So as veterans we should just be happy to have paid more for everything ?

I don't get the logics.

The logic is that of limited liability.

If D3 does give FULL REFUND way back in time, it will set a precedence. Any change that they made in the future, they will have to give full compensation.

So in the hypothetical future that they decided to do away with character slots (unlikely yes), they probably won't do so. Simply because they have to give "full refunds" to everyone.
____

Arktos, I don't know why you are so... bitter against newcomers and constantly put out the perspective that the veterans are screwed by d3.

I am happy that they are making changes that will benefit everyone, even though the veterans have "less advantage".

atomzed

simonsez wrote:

atomzed wrote:

Your analogy is different. HOV (what does it stands for?) Lanes are limited resources, so if someone else is using it, you may not have access to the lanes.

You're not quite understanding the analogy. In the case of mpq, the top ranks become the limited resource, and now everyone has been given the same access to them that the rest of us paid for.

And HOV = high occupancy vehicles

Umm, you really think that just giving every alliance 20 slots will make them T100 worthy?

I highly doubt it.

I think the crux of the issue is the perception of "lost investment" (however much I disagree with this concept for a game).

atomzed

arktos1971 wrote:

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

How on earth can we still call this game Free to Play?

Ahem.

I know. It's so ironical.

But I know I am an exception. So I tend to "sometimes" think as if I was the player next door.

Cough cough... f2p has never been just about playing the game for free.

In all F2P games, you are free to play the game but some aspects of the game are locked behind the pay-wall...

Erm, I realize you may be just asking a rhetorical question... So I shouldn't go on.