has anyone mentioned that cl 10 subs didn't nerf HP quite so hard?

Vhailorx

Top 50 still gets 95 HP, rather than 0 as was stated in the first announcent.

That's good, and makes more sense, as totally shiv'ing top 50 finishers in particular, rather than a smaller, across-all-tiers cut, matches the general pattern we have seen.

So that 1 crisis was definitely averted.  Now back to the regularly scheduled debate about whether fixed 5* rewards and longer clear times make up for less CP.

Tony_Foot

What? Sub two used to give 200HP for T100 in cl8. It now gives 80. What does it give in 10?

Honestly they have **** the lower players to give to those that already have it. It’s not a shard tax it’s a whale tax. Bow your head when one comes past and throw him some rewards for keeping your game going.

bluewolf

Tony_Foot said:

What? Sub two used to give 200HP for T100 in cl8. It now gives 80. What does it give in 10?

Honestly they have tinykitty the lower players to give to those that already have it. It’s not a shard tax it’s a whale tax. Bow your head when one comes past and throw him some rewards for keeping your game going.

As you see (105 HP lost in a 48, even in 10), everyone got hit on stuff.  A lot of people can play in 10, not just whales.  Each player will have to decide to play up in 10 (more time etc) or play down and get worse rewards than before (other than those shards).

It IS a shard tax, I realize you feel like only whales are playing in 10 and they got all the goodies but they definitely are trying to make a tradeoff in the place where you'll feel the most spending pressure (HP) for everyone.  As I've pointed out a lot before, the game's overall playerbase isn't getting bigger so they need to find a way to make players spend more.  For a while they tried with "optional" things like Supports and Costumes, now they are hitting us where it hurts.

Even in 10 they nerfed HP everywhere compared to 9, in PVE.  They put a little more in PVP.  I'm not sure if the overall balance of earnable HP is still down even if you got all the HP you could get from both places. (but it seems likely the answer is yes)

Vhailorx

Remember that sub 2 in this event is a 48 hour sub.  So it gives 190 HP for top 50 (cl10), and 95 for top 100. 

So we got a a smaller ~5-10% nerf across the board, rather than a 100% nerf for top 11-50. . .

DAZ0273

I guess it depends on how you define " a lot of people". The gateway for SCL10 is 120+ compared to just 65+ for SCL9, that is a massive jump. I'm pretty sure I only qualify due to length of time playing this game at 4 years +, certainly not by roster strength.

Vhailorx

OJSP,

I think it is possible that HP will be about neutral, because actual HP rewards have been nerfed, bit we may be churning through champ rewards at a faster rate with the extra covers/shards.  Still to early to tell, but that is possible.

In the end, I would feel a lot better about this if Demi/d3 came out a said something like "we felt that people had more HP than they could easily use in the 4*/5* transition period, but not enough covers.  So we have adjusted those rates and will be looking to see if we get the intended effect."

But maybe that would violate the Comms handbook for some reason, so they we a little less direct in the end.

DAZ0273

The reality of it is that if over a 2 week period we cannot generate enough excess HP to cover a new roster slot for a character that the Devs will insist we need to progress in future events then this is a "HP Tax" and designed purely to drive HP sales in my opinion. Shields may be important for very high level play but not vital otherwise and if you reach 725 in SCL10 then you are covered for a 3 or 8 hour shield. Special vaults are a luxury.

Roster slots are 100% required in a game that expands it's character base on a monthly basis.

bluewolf

DAZ0273 said:

I guess it depends on how you define " a lot of people". The gateway for SCL10 is 120+ compared to just 65+ for SCL9, that is a massive jump. I'm pretty sure I only qualify due to length of time playing this game at 4 years +, certainly not by roster strength.

Well, true.  But: based on the current counts there are about 7300 ish people who have joined SCL10 so far.  That number is far, far bigger than the number of true whales, as in the people who spend hundreds of dollars + a month.

I have no idea what level of spending makes the devs happy but there are a LOT of longtime vets in this game, which is mostly the minimum requirement to be in 10, unless you are  have joined more recently and spent like a madman/woman.

I guess most people still playing after a few years have spent some money, especially if they qualify for SCL10.  But I assume the vast majority in 10 wouldn't be called "whales" as their spending is probably more like VIP and/or occasional bundles or HP offers (like me).  Or, even a FTP person could get to SCL 10 if they started long enough ago and played hard enough.

DAZ0273

I suspect the drop-off for PvE may end up being quite a lot and it will be a much more elite bracket than these initial numbers show.

Will certainly be interesting to see - I know I wont be there!

Jormagund

bluewolf said:

DAZ0273 said:

I guess it depends on how you define " a lot of people". The gateway for SCL10 is 120+ compared to just 65+ for SCL9, that is a massive jump. I'm pretty sure I only qualify due to length of time playing this game at 4 years +, certainly not by roster strength.

Well, true.  But: based on the current counts there are about 7300 ish people who have joined SCL10 so far.  That number is far, far bigger than the number of true whales, as in the people who spend hundreds of dollars + a month.

I have no idea what level of spending makes the devs happy but there are a LOT of longtime vets in this game, which is mostly the minimum requirement to be in 10, unless you are  have joined more recently and spent like a madman/woman.

I guess most people still playing after a few years have spent some money, especially if they qualify for SCL10.  But I assume the vast majority in 10 wouldn't be called "whales" as their spending is probably more like VIP and/or occasional bundles or HP offers (like me).  Or, even a FTP person could get to SCL 10 if they started long enough ago and played hard enough.

I think you may be over estimating the time to get to 120.  I'm a week under 600 days and while not entirely FtP I have only bought a handful of Bugle Pittance's for intercept rewards after learning about Google opinion surveys giving Play points.

Shield Level wise I'm 126 with all four stars rostered and a third of them champed.  Albeit I probably play more than average doing PVE to full progression* and usually PVE to 40 wins.

Easy to see newer players who are prepared to spend more on VIP or HP hitting 120 a lot faster than me.

* full progression... normally...  Made the schoolboy error of following DAZ0273 into SCL10 and will be nowhere near full progression.

bluewolf

I don't know how long it would take to be at 120; I am at 5 years and at 197.  So maybe you could get there pretty fast, like maybe within a year or 18 months?  I looked back and saw that after about 3 months of playing hard I started spending at the rate of about one Logan a month for a few months and eventually picked up VIP.

In my defense the average person probably plays this game for a month and stops.  So even someone playing hard for a full year is far outside the norm.

Also, of course, playing for a long time but just casually wouldn't get you very far.

Regardless of how long you need to play, I still say that you don't need to be a whale or a big spender to be playing in SCL10.  YMMV of course.

Warbringa

I also think part of the reward changes were to encourage players to play more PvP.  I know I am going to do so since the first 650 points in SCL 10 PvP is easy to obtain and pretty valuable.  It will help me offset the CP loss from PvE and doesn't really take that much time now compared to PvE.