The idiocy of Loki green as top-5 reward in Starfall

reckless442

The Devs justified their planned shield nerf by pointing to the very high scores people have been putting up in PVPs and announcing that nerfing shields would level the playing field and bring scores down. Yet at the same time they are making those claims, they have an event like Starfall where only the top-5 scorers in each bracket can get the most desired reward -- a green Loki cover. Despite knowing that many of us don't have that cover yet (because it was the hard to get in the last PVE), or still need additional green covers to max Loki, they made the green cover the hardest to get.

Predictably, scores are crazy in some of the shards. In shard four, one bracket has seven players over 1700, with four through sixth 32 points apart. In another bracket, the players in third through sixth place are currently between 1833 and 1895.

If the Devs want to bring scores down, they should make it so players are not compelled to push to get the only worthwhile reward. Most of us have had purple and black Loki covers maxed for months. If the top-100 (or even top-25) got the green cover, scores would be a lot lower across the board. So how about some consistency, Devs. If you want to keep scores down as you claim, don't turn around and structure events to do the exact opposite.

Unknown

I top 5'd on shard 3 with 1k points.

It's a sad state of affairs, but there you go. If you don't want to be forced to score ridiculously high, be ready to play on awful shards.

Unknown

ark123 wrote:

I top 5'd on shard 3 with 1k points.

It's a sad state of affairs, but there you go. If you don't want to be forced to score ridiculously high, be ready to play on awful shards.

Whats what I am doing. If I need the 1.1K or 1.3K progression rewards join the old ending time shard 4. If I need top 5 join shard 1 or 2. Made top 5 with 950 points for my second green loki cover. So as the next progression reward is green Loki at 1100 I guess I am join shard 4 or 5.

Unknown

I placed 1st with 1022 points .. I got blue fury .. all three loki .. 5k iso n 100 hp .. it all depends on the time you choose I guess .. the 1300 progression was IW so I went for a quite timing group ..

Unknown

Btw if green is the top ability then it should have competition ... isn't that obivious ..

Xiltyn

kalyan0206 wrote:

Btw if green is the top ability then it should have competition ... isn't that obivious ..

Green is not necessarily the top ability, but it is the most desired as it's new and everyone that isn't buying covers wants it in order to max Loki. I understand making it have competition to get it, but making it the top prize is a guaranteed way to drive up scores.

Also, the suggestion to choose an "off-shard" completely defeats the purpose of the multiple end times, which allow us to play when is most convenient for us. Personally, I was in the situation of wanting all three top rewards. My doesn't have all the yellow I want; my isn't at 5 blue yet; and I only have 1 green cover for . So, I was faced with the choice of join a shard where the times are favorable and get a cover for IW, or join a shard that doesn't fit well in my schedule for Loki and possibly Fury with pretty much no chance of getting IW without spending a ton of HP. I chose convenience and IW, since I already have 1 green for Loki from Gauntlet, and 3 star covers are "easier" to get than 4 star (since first is never a guarantee while 1300 in my preferred end time is).

lokiagentofhotness

1106 and #20. decided to buy the cover instead of wasting shields only to fail.

JamieMadrox

reckless442 wrote:

Predictably, scores are crazy in some of the shards. In shard four, one bracket has seven players over 1700, with four through sixth 32 points apart. In another bracket, the players in third through sixth place are currently between 1833 and 1895.

I think you mean time slice five and not four right? Five is where all of the whales were and four is where I was with not very many other players. I came first in my time slice 4 bracket with just over 1200 points and it was not close at all. My top 5 was under 1k I believe and second was not even 1k. I went to bed with over an hour left in the event and enough of a lead that nobody was catching me despite me tanking over 100 points to other players to boost them up in their brackets.

Personally, I don't see the problem with making the most desired cover the top 5 reward. Last time I checked this game was a competition and people don't tend to compete very much of there's nothing they want to win. By now we all know how the tine slices tend to be points-wise and we can chose whichever one we want each event. If you want big scores, go to 5. If you want to place well, go to 1 or 4. If you want to place well with a low score, go to 2 or 3.

Unknown

I agree with reck. I'm getting tired of them throwing us a few scraps in pvp and pve for us to fight over like we're wild dogs. We deserve better.

1% can get the green cover? Really? They expect me to believe if 5% (t25) got the cover it would ruin game economy and competition?

While we are at it, I'm tired of them treating alliance rewards as second class citizens. An alliance works their tails off to make t100 (or top less than 1% of all alliances) and they are rewarded with a toaster oven instead of the Mercedes they have earned. An alliance that makes it into the top 1% of all alliances gets the same reward as players that make it into the top 20% of all players. Yea, that seems fair.

That's not counting pve and the hose job that is going on with 4* rewards and the 3* reward tiers there. If you have a job, family, or audacity to have a social life, you can kiss any good reward good bye. Sure you may have played 4 hours or more per a day for a week. You're reward, atomic wedgie (the real term would have been replaced with tiny kitty).

Let's not forget my personal fave reward, tokens. Your reward for reaching this progressive or placing well in subs is a device where the odds are stacked against you getting anything good. Moreover, the person on 10th had the same odds at the person at 299 of getting a good covet. So the 299th person may receive a red goddess cover, while 10th gets moonstone. Yes, that is fair.

News flash: rewards should not penalize players for doing well. Rewards should be rewards. (Shocker I know. )

P.S. Actually read what the OP wrote about. They are not writing about time slices; they are writing about the reward structure. The time slice they were in is a moot point. Concerning slices, points are relative. Just because time slice 3 does not hav 1700+ scores for t5, this does not mean those slices are not just as competitive for t5. There was a 7-way fight for t5 in my slice 3 Starfall pvp just for one expample.

Breakking

I was in your bracket Reckless and barely took fifth with 1780-something. That was ugly. Had to stay up way past my bedtime for that damn green Loki.

Unknown

In Shard 1 I got top 1 with 1096.

I didn't notice any higher competition than is normal.

Shard 4 is just crazy.

I only enter shard 4 if I want high points but don't care about my placement.

That is the shard that most of the X-men, ROs and other top alliances reside because of the point potential.

In Shard 1, you're basically maxed out at 1100.

Unknown

Xiltyn wrote:

kalyan0206 wrote:

Btw if green is the top ability then it should have competition ... isn't that obivious ..

Green is not necessarily the top ability, but it is the most desired as it's new and everyone that isn't buying covers wants it in order to max Loki. I understand making it have competition to get it, but making it the top prize is a guaranteed way to drive up scores.

Also, the suggestion to choose an "off-shard" completely defeats the purpose of the multiple end times, which allow us to play when is most convenient for us. Personally, I was in the situation of wanting all three top rewards. My doesn't have all the yellow I want; my isn't at 5 blue yet; and I only have 1 green cover for . So, I was faced with the choice of join a shard where the times are favorable and get a cover for IW, or join a shard that doesn't fit well in my schedule for Loki and possibly Fury with pretty much no chance of getting IW without spending a ton of HP. I chose convenience and IW, since I already have 1 green for Loki from Gauntlet, and 3 star covers are "easier" to get than 4 star (since first is never a guarantee while 1300 in my preferred end time is).

The shard concept has failed.
I think everyone recognizes that except D3.

But there's no real way to make it more convenient because D3 doesn't control which shard the high scorers pick.

If every shard were equal in competition and points available, I'd pick shard 2 or 3 because that would end in the middle of the day for me, thus not making me get up early or stay up late.

But the simple fact of the matter is Shards 4 and 5 are points shard. You can get 1300 relatively easily, but that will only get you top 25, if not top 100.

Shard 1 is placement shard. 1000 points will typically net you top 5, but 1100 is basically the most you can get.

Shards 2 and 3 are the lost shards. In the times I've tested them, once I get past 800, I can't get a match up worth more than 10 points. And I'm shot down very quickly because everyone is so low scoring in those shards.

I stay in 1 or 4, based on my priorities.

bknfoodie

Hmm...new meta for rewards seem to be based around the rewards. It's almost like...end times don't matter at all. It's the reward structure that needs to be changed.

mjh

let's not look past Loki for the final prog reward in the Prodigal Sun PVE. That is straight up bull ****

NorthernPolarity

onimus wrote:

Xiltyn wrote:

kalyan0206 wrote:

Btw if green is the top ability then it should have competition ... isn't that obivious ..

Green is not necessarily the top ability, but it is the most desired as it's new and everyone that isn't buying covers wants it in order to max Loki. I understand making it have competition to get it, but making it the top prize is a guaranteed way to drive up scores.

Also, the suggestion to choose an "off-shard" completely defeats the purpose of the multiple end times, which allow us to play when is most convenient for us. Personally, I was in the situation of wanting all three top rewards. My doesn't have all the yellow I want; my isn't at 5 blue yet; and I only have 1 green cover for . So, I was faced with the choice of join a shard where the times are favorable and get a cover for IW, or join a shard that doesn't fit well in my schedule for Loki and possibly Fury with pretty much no chance of getting IW without spending a ton of HP. I chose convenience and IW, since I already have 1 green for Loki from Gauntlet, and 3 star covers are "easier" to get than 4 star (since first is never a guarantee while 1300 in my preferred end time is).

The shard concept has failed.
I think everyone recognizes that except D3.

But there's no real way to make it more convenient because D3 doesn't control which shard the high scorers pick.

If every shard were equal in competition and points available, I'd pick shard 2 or 3 because that would end in the middle of the day for me, thus not making me get up early or stay up late.

But the simple fact of the matter is Shards 4 and 5 are points shard. You can get 1300 relatively easily, but that will only get you top 25, if not top 100.

Shard 1 is placement shard. 1000 points will typically net you top 5, but 1100 is basically the most you can get.

Shards 2 and 3 are the lost shards. In the times I've tested them, once I get past 800, I can't get a match up worth more than 10 points. And I'm shot down very quickly because everyone is so low scoring in those shards.

I stay in 1 or 4, based on my priorities.

Shards failed at providing a balanced environment for players to play across all shards. However, the whole point of sharding in the first place was to allow non USA players to have non-**** end times, and I'm guessing that it did pretty well there for the general populace that isn't as crazy as the forum folk.

HawkeyeSucks wrote:

let's not look past Loki for the final prog reward in the Prodigal Sun PVE. That is straight up bull tinykitty

Seems like everyone is completely forgetting about the free Loki green that we got off of Gauntlet. I don't know what you were expecting, but I wasn't expecting 5 green Loki covers to be handed to me on a silver platter. Seems par for the course.

Anyways, The way that the sharding metagame has evolved is pretty simple. If you want placement awards, go into the non-death bracket shard. If you want progression / season points, go into the death bracket shard. It sucks that this is how it has to be, but I'm guessing that allowing the European players to not be completely screwed over is worth it, since the growth of the game in those countries and allowing players to actually play the game is probably more important than us complaining about death brackets.

reckless442

People are missing the main point of my post -- the contradictions between what the Devs say they want and what they do. If they legitimately want scores to come down, they should not structure events in a way that drives scores up.

Those contradictions are not limited to keeping scoring down. The Devs professed that they did not want PVES to be grinds and even used that as justification for True Healing change. Remember how that was supposed to force us to play less? But then they turned around and gave us 2.5-hr refreshes, which has made PVE even more of a grind.

Unknown

I don't think putting Loki on top 5 has anything to do with the upcoming shields though. It was just a bad move no matter what future changes there may be. It's not like if they take back the shield changes everyone will think it's totally awesome to need high 1000s score for top 5 for a coveted cover?

I don't think they want to make it easy to get 5 green covers right away, so not putting it on top 100 is reasonable because that'd mean 2 covers for anyone in a top 100 alliance, but why not top 25? That seems like a reasonable requirement for people want to stay on top of their game. Though you'll get one of them in God of Lies presumably, which would be far less certain (or at least far more expensive) had the shield changes gone in. Though the timing of the original changes to shield look awfully convenient too, which is probably why they moved it further out.

fmftint

reckless442 wrote:

People are missing the main point of my post -- the contradictions between what the Devs say they want and what they do. If they legitimately want scores to come down, they should not structure events in a way that drives scores up.

Those contradictions are not limited to keeping scoring down. The Devs professed that they did not want PVES to be grinds and even used that as justification for True Healing change. Remember how that was supposed to force us to play less? But then they turned around and gave us 2.5-hr refreshes, which has made PVE even more of a grind.

These are the same devs that say no to more progression rewards in PVE "because everyone should be able to hit all the check marks"
But say no to roster improvements "because you shouldn't have a complete roster"

Unknown

There's no consistent theme of the top 5 cover being the 'best'. It's at best random, and in the case of Loki, since this is a character that should have had 3 abilities all along it's not unreasonable to ask for the transition being somewhat easier. Had Loki had all 3 of his ability in the game from start, most people would surely have 5 green by now since it'd be something you plan for, but you can't plan for something that didn't even exist in the past. It'd be say next patch they swapped Surgical Strike with Recovery, Dormammu's Aid with whatever you have 3 in for The Hood, and Smite with Striking Distance. Obviously now all your best characters are built in the wrong way for factors completely outside your control, and let's say you accept there was a reason to do this change, you should at least be able to ask 'well can we have Surgical Strike/Smite/Dormamu's Aid being easier to get in the short term since we can't possibly have anticipated these changes?'

scottee

Gauntlet progression, top-5 Starfall, 1100 God of Lies. Three opportunities to gain a brand new cover right after it was released. I don't think they've ever done that before.

Unknown

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Seems like everyone is completely forgetting about the free Loki green that we got off of Gauntlet

Free Loki? That explains why everyone got one right? Don't be silly.

scottee wrote:

Gauntlet progression, top-5 Starfall, 1100 God of Lies. Three opportunities to gain a brand new cover right after it was released. I don't think they've ever done that before.

So basically, the top < 1% of players have opportunities to get the cover. I think you are missing the point of reckless' post. I believe her point is that the devs are saying one thing but pushing for another. Not necessarily that more people should be entitled to the cover.