Jwallyr said: It would be nice not to have to choose between knowingly playing suboptimally and engaging with a tedious chore that seems to be unintentional in the game design, but nonetheless confers a minor benefit if you choose to engage in the tedium. It's not by any stretch the biggest problem in the game currently, but would be a QOL benefit for OCD players like myself.
Jwallyr said: I mean, unless you're post-ISO there's an argument that it has hurt you, you just don't care because the amount is minor. That's fine, but for OCD people like me it sticks in my craw a bit, and it seems like a minor bump to 1star-cover sale price would make that headache go away entirely.*shrug* Just my 2 cents.
whitecat31 said: @Dormammu I am going up a shield level on average of at least every 10 days (currently level 164), and because I actively participate in pvp and lightning rounds, I strongly believe that the 1 star ISO is a huge chunk of the gains.
Dormammu said: whitecat31 said: @Dormammu I am going up a shield level on average of at least every 10 days (currently level 164), and because I actively participate in pvp and lightning rounds, I strongly believe that the 1 star ISO is a huge chunk of the gains. It's not. It's 10XP per 1-star farmed. Do the math.
Doesn't bother you? Fine, but that doesn't mean that the disparity between sale price and effective ISO value if trained makes any sense, or that it doesn't create an incentive (no matter how small) to engage in the otherwise 100% pointless activity of one-star farming. Honestly, I wish they would either make it impossible or make it not advantageous to do so, because then there wouldn't be any question of whether to bother with it, but I'm just not sure why it's important enough to argue against my random QOL request... just scroll past?
Jwallyr said: *SNIP* I'm just not sure why it's important enough to argue against my random QOL request... just scroll past?
Jwallyr said: 1a) I'm not sure how changing a single variable (1star cover sale price) from 100 to 130 is significant development time, or that implementing a champing system such as exists at every other tier already, but with reduced (i.e. no) rewards would take a lot of time away from more pressing issues.1b) Are you complaining on every feature request that you don't particularly want, or am just lucky to have attracted your attention? rolls eyes2) If the sale price vs. xp reward => shield rank => ISO is so insignificant (as nearly everybody is complaining), then why would a minor bump require that they refactor all the other ISO costs/rewards and "screw up optimal 2* strats"? Seems like you're complaining that it's "not enough reward" to bother with, but that it's "too much reward" to leave the other tiers alone. So which is it?3) I think there are solid arguments (see the OP) that the incentive, however minor, to 1* farm, is unintentional and shouldn't exist in the game. Trying to make this about me personally is pretty gross, Broll.4) So you're arguing that it's better for players to have to choose between ~130 ISO per cover + a bunch of annoying and unnecessary roster management, or 100 ISO per cover than to just get 130 ISO per cover? So two bad choices are better than one single good option?Whatever, dude. I'm just stunned that you think it's worth your time and energy to complain so hard about this minor pet peeve of mine, but if you're going to bother, you should at least have reasonable arguments.
Jwallyr said: Right. so you guys don't think it's a problem so it's not a problem, and I should just shut up and go away. I guess I missed the part where this forum is explicitly the place for problems of a specified and objectively measurable volume, and everything else is subject to dogpiles from people who happen to disagree with whatever the suggestion is.Sheesh. What a "community".
Sim Mayor said: Jwallyr said: Right. so you guys don't think it's a problem so it's not a problem, and I should just shut up and go away. I guess I missed the part where this forum is explicitly the place for problems of a specified and objectively measurable volume, and everything else is subject to dogpiles from people who happen to disagree with whatever the suggestion is.Sheesh. What a "community". Actually, it seems to me that this is exactly what a community should be doing. You brought up an issue, and the rest of the community is discussing it. I'm sorry you're unhappy that the outcome of that discussion isn't in your favor. That doesn't make it wrong, and it doesn't mean that anybody is dogpiling on you, it just means that literally nobody else agrees with you that this is a problem.