Please change 4* pve reward structure

12346

Comments

  • thbrown81
    thbrown81 Posts: 61 Match Maker
    But they clearly don't, because I constantly end up keeping my money in my wallet.

    I don't have to use HP on PVE because I don't take a terrible amount of damage. I don't use HP in PVP because it is irrelevant. Once I get up over 800 points I can't play more than two matches at a time because I will get annihilated, so I just have to shield. The HP I earn in game is enough to cover my shields, so I end up stockpiling it gradually.

    The only thing makes my HP go down is 1) new roster slots and 2) buying covers for characters.

    But, since I got zero Xaviers from this last PVE, I don't need to buy a new roster slot, and can't buy covers of a character that I don't have. Plus, I'm not going to buy a good cover when it is just going to get nerfed.

    I would happily spend about $20 a month on this game, but it's just not worth it.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    thbrown81 wrote:
    But they clearly don't, because I constantly end up keeping my money in my wallet.

    You know this, but you are one user among many. Just because you are not spending doesn't mean the important people, the whales, aren't.

    I don't spend money either. I don't for a minute think I am the typical customer though.
  • thbrown81
    thbrown81 Posts: 61 Match Maker
    Right, but it seems like the whales are going to spend money no matter what. You're really telling me that lowering the price point on HP/ ISO/ Cover packs and expanding 4* covers from 5% of the player base to 10% would really make the people who spend crazy $$$ on this game suddenly stop? I find this hard to believe. If anything it might make them spend more in order to stay ahead of a stronger player base. It seems like the opportunity cost of discouraging microtransactions for the sake of whales is short sighted and counterproductive.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    I believe that the devs have runs tests and think that this is the best way to make money from the game, yes.

    But I guess we are just guessing. For want of a better word.
  • thbrown81
    thbrown81 Posts: 61 Match Maker
    But they don't even playtest new characters! Perhaps you are right though, we do not have access to the purchase distribution #'s that they have. But rationally, it seems unlikely that releasing more new covers would somehow generate less income.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    thbrown81 wrote:
    But they don't even playtest new characters!

    And therein, my friend, is the issue icon_e_biggrin.gif It is pretty clear the priority is volume of new characters etc over whether the said characters actually work or not. But that can be said of many mobile/online games.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    I will only say this, being outside the top 50th as alliance and getting a Daredevil cover is pure and total tinykitty
    The insult would only be bigger if we got a Bagman
  • thbrown81
    thbrown81 Posts: 61 Match Maker
    It seems like such an obvious fix, too.

    The alliance hopping isn't all bad. Not everyone can grind PVE, and mercing allows PVP alliances to keep good players who hop out at the end of PVEs. Adding cool downs would just create a bunch of different complications. You would have to worry about mercing at just the right time to be able to get back to your PVP alliance without getting your PVP points locked. If you lock alliances then you're going to make the game even more stratified than it already is, because top players will just consolidate into PVP/PVE combo alliances.

    Mercing w/ T100 alliance 4*s gives you:

    1) Flexibility for PVP focused alliances.
    2) Twice as many people buying new roster slots.
    3) Twice as many people potentially buying more covers for their new 4*.
    4) Five more people buying the ridiculously overprice ISO to level up their new 4*.
    5) WHALES!

    The T50 option gives you:
    1) Grumpy alliance leaders and raging customers who finished between #51 and #60.
    2) WHALES!
  • Trisul
    Trisul Posts: 887 Critical Contributor
    Sad to hear that my old alliance finished #51, severely demoralizing everyone there, with several quitting the game entirely.

    Even sadder is that it wouldn't have been that much better if they finished #50 (as we did back in the Star-Lord PvE). MM's OP is completely on the mark, and this PvE is just the latest example of the chaos resulting from this reward structure.
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,486 Chairperson of the Boards
    Jonny1Punch wrote:
    If I could upvote Mischiefmaker's meaningful and important post one million times over it still wouldn't be enough.
    I stalk the forums daily and rarely have anything I feel is worthwhile to say but one phrase in this topic really hit me hard.

    "Even the winners usually don't feel that great".

    At the end of any event we should feel excited and accomplished. Eager to experiment in the simulator with our new hero or use our hard-earned Iso to level up our roster we work so diligently to strengthen. So why after finishing top 5 in the last two new character Pve's do I feel exhausted, drained and almost resentful of my new character for all the sacrifices I made to get a measly and near worthless 3 covers?

    Because it simply is RIDICULOUS to expect this level of commitment, time and dedication to a game that is alienating its own customers. I love this game and am currently on day 500...But a game should be a fun and relatively stress-free way to enjoy a break from whatever real stress we may have in life. Our ideas and suggestions are feeling largely ignored and I wonder why so many of us still carry on this way. I have messaged ICE my ideas on ways to improve the reward structure and make D3 more money and never got a response.

    Almost 200 upvotes now, and no response eh Devs? Let me bump this +36 rep'd post from the bottom of page one.

    Looking around today, it certainly seems like that bolded part has once again proven true. These events cheapen the entire game: the reward structure, the alliance structure, the PVE structure, the timing structure....they need to go.
  • Asmodai-o_O
    Asmodai-o_O Posts: 17 Just Dropped In
    4* expanding beyond top 50 would be nice, doubt it will happen (will 5* be top 1, 5, 25?). Max cover soft capped rosters that avoid scaling ending would be nice, doubt it will happen. People waiting to the very end to join and scoop up 3 covers when we go for max points and end up with 1, or 2 if the alliance makes it, ending would be nice. The day that we can't merc is the day that pvp focused alliances lose people to ones that rank pvp and pve.

    I don't get why people are upset over mercs, people have lives and can't put up big numbers all of the time. Get a good group of 20 and loan out/in as needed and bring them back after the event, how hard was that?

    A possible fix could be to expand to 1/30(50?)/100? and bracket players based on roster strength so scaling affects potential rank evenly.
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,486 Chairperson of the Boards
    And.....March Q&A video (of sorts) came out with no Q's submitted, so this STILL has no response. Can we get this pinned or responded to? It has the most up-votes of any post I can think of.
  • Torturedsole
    Torturedsole Posts: 8 Just Dropped In
    This post deserves some kind of response from the devs!
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Torturedsole wrote:
    This post deserves some kind of response from the devs!
    I thought the GT nerf and the 3* PvP buffs WERE the response... ie "Don't stress it; you don't need 4*s anymore"
  • turul
    turul Posts: 1,622 Chairperson of the Boards
    bumping topic since it is getting actuality again.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm sure anyone with red type will continue to avoid this topic. And at this point, I'm having a hard time caring. The new 4* is going to be a star in PvE, but you can't play high end PvP with a character that requires long countdowns to do serious damage. Do I really need a 17th way to fight goons in PvE? Probably not. Will I ever have ISO to spend on this character, now that we need to max all our 3*s in order to compete in PvP? Probably not. Am I going to lose any sleep grinding for this new 4*? Probably not.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Except he won't require long count downs to do serious damage, because he can pick them up and throw them at you with his cost 6 blackflag.png .

    Also bump. Please make the next 4* release better.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Torturedsole wrote:
    This post deserves some kind of response from the devs!

    The many 4* releases are the answer. Unfortunately.

    Those PvEs must be lucrative in some way. And the sales of covers/packs afterwards.

    There is no other reason.
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,486 Chairperson of the Boards
    Glad this was bumped so I didn't have to dig for it. Do we know for certain it is T50 again? All the hate for that reward structure and the only response is "have another 4*, right away!"???
  • rbdragon
    rbdragon Posts: 479 Mover and Shaker
    Before the next PvE giving away Kingpin.....er...Unknown star.pngstar.pngstar.pngstar.png , this issue must be addressed by someone with a red name.

    What good does it do to continue to piss off a great deal of your players? Especially when a fix would be SO SIMPLE - just double the reward structure to top 100 in both individual and alliance. With this being the 66th character released, would it really destroy the game to allow more covers out there to earn?

    Please stop destroying alliances with this ridiculousness...

    Or better yet - I challenge D3 to find those who think this structure is a good thing.....

Categories