RickOShay said: veny said: Soooo... slighly better PvE tokens (good) PvP tokens (useless for me) and more PvP events (also useless for me).How about making PvP finally playable and actually entertaining. Or how about making roster useful - i mean i have 150+ characters i am barely using. Give us some daily Boss challenge where we could use all our characters (each character once per day) to deal as much damage as possible for some good rewards. PvP is quite playable and entertaining. Try it with some of the characters that you are complaining about that don't get enough action... and you'll see for yourself. Great to hear that the overall 4* draw rates are increasing. Thanks for the improvements! Looking forward to what the 'unusable covers' review could produce as well.
veny said: Soooo... slighly better PvE tokens (good) PvP tokens (useless for me) and more PvP events (also useless for me).How about making PvP finally playable and actually entertaining. Or how about making roster useful - i mean i have 150+ characters i am barely using. Give us some daily Boss challenge where we could use all our characters (each character once per day) to deal as much damage as possible for some good rewards.
OJSP said: Daredevil217 said: Once again we have another huge change and not a single word as to why. Look. Repeating what you’ve said won’t make a difference. If we look at the beginning of the thread, there were some replies from them. If they are avoiding to answer a specific question, the answer is usually simple: it’s an attempt to increase profit. Of course they can’t say that here.
OJSP said:
Daredevil217 said: Once again we have another huge change and not a single word as to why.
Once you cut through the spin put on this announcement it boils down to ”spend more, get more” with regard to increased 4* acquisition.
Dragon_Nexus said: It feels like one of those things whereby if you qualify the change with a lot of excuses, it ends up balancing out.Which makes me wonder why anyone would go through so much time and effort coding and changing a whole bunch of maths just to end up with a system that is neither an improvement nor a detriment in the long term.
BatteryHorse said: Dragon_Nexus said: It feels like one of those things whereby if you qualify the change with a lot of excuses, it ends up balancing out.Which makes me wonder why anyone would go through so much time and effort coding and changing a whole bunch of maths just to end up with a system that is neither an improvement nor a detriment in the long term. Sorry, for a second I thought I had drifted over to the Supports thread...
HoundofShadow said: Even if the goal of these changes is to increase their profit margin, I see nothing wrong with it. They don't even have to mention it. Why? Because they have never declared themselves as a charity organisation. They are running a business. You know it and any reasonable person knows it. They don't have to mention that they want to increase profit or revenue because it's a universal truth that all mega corporation or even small businesses are always looking to increase their profit or revenue. I don't see the point of using "they want to make the players spend more" or "they want to increase their profit margin" arguments to start conspiracy theories because the nature of their business is itself self-explanatory. The point of running a business is to make profit.
HoundofShadow said: I dont see how it's faster to complete 5* than 4*. I understand that there are ~40 4* more than 5*, but the chance of getting 5* is ~15%. You can get specific 4* covers from a lot of places, but you can only get specific 5* in HfH or certain champed 4* rewards.
OJSP said: HoundofShadow said: I don't see the point of using "they want to make the players spend more" or "they want to increase their profit margin" arguments to start conspiracy theories because the nature of their business is itself self-explanatory. I wasn’t trying to start a conspiracy theory. LifeofAgony said:I would like to understand what made the previous 50/50 system of boosted odds on the 12 latest so bad that it needed a full reversal back to full dilution.and being this is still the only authorized, official place to get those answers, people should keep asking them. As many times as they feel. I didn’t say people couldn’t keep asking questions. I’m just saying they might not get the answer that they want and subtly advising them to stop wasting time and energy.
HoundofShadow said: I don't see the point of using "they want to make the players spend more" or "they want to increase their profit margin" arguments to start conspiracy theories because the nature of their business is itself self-explanatory.
LifeofAgony said:I would like to understand what made the previous 50/50 system of boosted odds on the 12 latest so bad that it needed a full reversal back to full dilution.and being this is still the only authorized, official place to get those answers, people should keep asking them. As many times as they feel.
Straycat said: Dragon_Nexus said: It feels like one of those things whereby if you qualify the change with a lot of excuses, it ends up balancing out.Which makes me wonder why anyone would go through so much time and effort coding and changing a whole bunch of maths just to end up with a system that is neither an improvement nor a detriment in the long term. Yeah, thats how balance works.
LifeofAgony said: OJSP said: HoundofShadow said: I don't see the point of using "they want to make the players spend more" or "they want to increase their profit margin" arguments to start conspiracy theories because the nature of their business is itself self-explanatory. I wasn’t trying to start a conspiracy theory. LifeofAgony said:I would like to understand what made the previous 50/50 system of boosted odds on the 12 latest so bad that it needed a full reversal back to full dilution.and being this is still the only authorized, official place to get those answers, people should keep asking them. As many times as they feel. I didn’t say people couldn’t keep asking questions. I’m just saying they might not get the answer that they want and subtly advising them to stop wasting time and energy. It’s not a waste when you consider than the only thing that has gotten respounded in the past is endless, continual banging of the drums to get responses. Call it learned behavior.
Shintok17 said: That is what most people are not talking about here or realizing. This is a very well worded trick to make you think they are giving you more.
HoundofShadow saidLet's take an example. During Valentine's Days, there are sales or promotions going around. The ads would probably go something like "buy flowers or gifts for your loved one during this special day" or some other sweet words. I don't think you expect them to say "Buy something special for your loved one because we want to increase our company profits or sales." Everyone knows that they want to make profits because they are running a business.
LavaManLee said: HoundofShadow saidLet's take an example. During Valentine's Days, there are sales or promotions going around. The ads would probably go something like "buy flowers or gifts for your loved one during this special day" or some other sweet words. I don't think you expect them to say "Buy something special for your loved one because we want to increase our company profits or sales." Everyone knows that they want to make profits because they are running a business. I don't think anyone here begrudges D3 making money. All of us understand a business won't last without making money. I think it's in their spin of any changes into somehow being "good for us" that irks people. In the example above, it would be like telling people there's a flower special for Valentine's Day that is fantastic. You get 9 roses for the price of a dozen and that's actually good for you because 9 roses will fit in a smaller vase then if you actually received a dozen.People naturally are cynical and bad spin comes across as very insincere. Hence the vitriol on many of these changes.