By getting more rewards for FREE the balance is shifted to those who are doing nothing but getting lucky to get things and before you know it there'll be no need to grind but just sit around and keep asking for handouts.
This is a complicated game design topic, but the short answer is that all progressional games like this look for a balance between rewards you play for, rewards you pay for, and rewards you more or less get for nothing. Each of these actually plays an important role in the game. Obviously, if no one paid for anything the game would shut down. So there has to be some incentive to pay. And just as obviously, if there were no rewards for playing the game, no one would. These two types of rewards have to be balanced against each other: all things being equal you want the rewards for gameplay to be as high as possible, and the rewards for cash to be as low as possible, to value gameplay as high as possible relative to simply buying everything in the game. But that value has to be there, or no one would buy anything.
The rewards that come for free also serve an important, if less well acknowledged purpose. Suppose I play for twenty hours a week and you play for two. That means I play ten times longer than you. Should I advance ten times faster in the game? Well, some people would say yes, but that's generally unacceptable in a massively multiplayer game. The spread of playing time in the playerbase is huge, but we can't have an equally gigantic difference in player advancement opportunities. If we did, we'd have a similar problem as we would if we had too much value in cash offers. Too good cash offers make the game pay to play, and people who paid less or played for free wouldn't feel it was worth playing. Too much advantage from large amounts of time playing the game would make all the casual players abandon the game.
We want to reward people who play more, but a direct proportional reward might be too high. So we dilute that with "baseline" rewards - rewards you get for free or for minimal effort. So instead of you getting one 5* crystals every month and me getting six, you get two and I get seven, or you get three and I get eight. I still get more, but instead of getting five times as much I get less than three times as much. That's still a reasonable advantage for more play, but it isn't too much advantage.
There's a baseline, and then there's two ways to get above the baseline: play more or spend more. The ratio of the rewards for playing and the rewards for spending determine how friendly or unfriendly the game is to non-spenders. The ratio of baseline rewards to the higher rewards determines how friendly or unfriendly the game is to casual players.
Thank you for your post, and I get what you're saying.
But my concern is, if you look at the side quest event this month, Kabam had already came up with what they thought was the right level of 5* rewards. However, due to pressures from Youtubers like Seatin, KT1 and the likes (all of whom I really enjoy BTW), Kabam somehow caved in and gave up to x3 the original amount.
That's what I'm referring too here. There's now too much 5* shards being given out in the side quest vs the amount of effort required compared to, say, the Arenas or other months' side quests and event quests.
My concern is if this is a trend, then people are just not going to pay or play, but sit around and whine and ask for more shards using this month's side quest as the baseline.
How is that good for the game?
Again, changing your narrative after realising you can’t argue your point.
Correct, opening crystals is like gambling/playing the lottery...unless you want to believe these “strategies” people seem to think they have mastered.
RNG is pure luck, fair is not a factor...if so, Vegas would look like a row of $20/night motels.
With all the 5* crystals we get this month, does it actually make you worse off?
Why?
Because if you haven't yet pulled a God tier (or beyond God tier) champs, but other people have, you're actually falling behind other people in the race to a better roster.
How can pulling more 5*s make you worse off? If it's a dupe you get 6* shards, if it's not, you get more champs to use in arena....and more possible counters to various nodes
Instead of repeating this a thousand times, argue your point; well pick one and let’s start there.
Many of us have asked you repeatedly to explain your dissatisfaction in more detail, but so far your only defense is to go off on tangents to turn the focus elsewhere or accuse everyone of hurting your feelings.
You came here to make a statement, which we all found very puzzling, so elaborate on it. If you can’t then don’t be surprised that your strong stance, whatever it is, gets met with an equally aggressive rebuttal.
I’ll make it easy for you... Take a room full of adults, each with not a dime to their names, and give everyone $100. Who has the advantage? Go! I’ll give you a hint, the money given to them, since it’s the exact same amount for all, has zero to do with who succeeds and who fails.
By getting more rewards for FREE the balance is shifted to those who are doing nothing but getting lucky to get things and before you know it there'll be no need to grind but just sit around and keep asking for handouts.
This is a complicated game design topic, but the short answer is that all progressional games like this look for a balance between rewards you play for, rewards you pay for, and rewards you more or less get for nothing. Each of these actually plays an important role in the game. Obviously, if no one paid for anything the game would shut down. So there has to be some incentive to pay. And just as obviously, if there were no rewards for playing the game, no one would. These two types of rewards have to be balanced against each other: all things being equal you want the rewards for gameplay to be as high as possible, and the rewards for cash to be as low as possible, to value gameplay as high as possible relative to simply buying everything in the game. But that value has to be there, or no one would buy anything.
The rewards that come for free also serve an important, if less well acknowledged purpose. Suppose I play for twenty hours a week and you play for two. That means I play ten times longer than you. Should I advance ten times faster in the game? Well, some people would say yes, but that's generally unacceptable in a massively multiplayer game. The spread of playing time in the playerbase is huge, but we can't have an equally gigantic difference in player advancement opportunities. If we did, we'd have a similar problem as we would if we had too much value in cash offers. Too good cash offers make the game pay to play, and people who paid less or played for free wouldn't feel it was worth playing. Too much advantage from large amounts of time playing the game would make all the casual players abandon the game.
We want to reward people who play more, but a direct proportional reward might be too high. So we dilute that with "baseline" rewards - rewards you get for free or for minimal effort. So instead of you getting one 5* crystals every month and me getting six, you get two and I get seven, or you get three and I get eight. I still get more, but instead of getting five times as much I get less than three times as much. That's still a reasonable advantage for more play, but it isn't too much advantage.
There's a baseline, and then there's two ways to get above the baseline: play more or spend more. The ratio of the rewards for playing and the rewards for spending determine how friendly or unfriendly the game is to non-spenders. The ratio of baseline rewards to the higher rewards determines how friendly or unfriendly the game is to casual players.
Thank you for your post, and I get what you're saying.
But my concern is, if you look at the side quest event this month, Kabam had already came up with what they thought was the right level of 5* rewards. However, due to pressures from Youtubers like Seatin, KT1 and the likes (all of whom I really enjoy BTW), Kabam somehow caved in and gave up to x3 the original amount.
That's what I'm referring too here. There's now too much 5* shards being given out in the side quest vs the amount of effort required compared to, say, the Arenas or other months' side quests and event quests.
My concern is if this is a trend, then people are just not going to pay or play, but sit around and whine and ask for more shards using this month's side quest as the baseline.
How is that good for the game?
Again, changing your narrative after realising you can’t argue your point.
We get it... you can’t think of anything to say...
(Edited)
Nevermind, I won't stoop to personal level convo.
Lol well even if you do, you’ll be the only one stooping, as no one here is being personal. We’re just pointing out holes and inconsistencies in your constantly changing arguments, and you’re coming up blank with what to say.
Considering the same time played, you are basically asking if you had less than average luck with the pulls that would happen to 50% of players. Although you will still get ahead of the pack because some players quit.
The question is about being worse off, not about yor individual progression. Ofc even opening a single crystal helps your own progression. Even if the competitive mcoc is small: AW, prestige for AQ and ranks in Arena..it is still insightful to ask this question.
In any case please consider that statistically on the long term we will be the the same supposing we play the same and have the same skill level
By getting more rewards for FREE the balance is shifted to those who are doing nothing but getting lucky to get things and before you know it there'll be no need to grind but just sit around and keep asking for handouts.
This is a complicated game design topic, but the short answer is that all progressional games like this look for a balance between rewards you play for, rewards you pay for, and rewards you more or less get for nothing. Each of these actually plays an important role in the game. Obviously, if no one paid for anything the game would shut down. So there has to be some incentive to pay. And just as obviously, if there were no rewards for playing the game, no one would. These two types of rewards have to be balanced against each other: all things being equal you want the rewards for gameplay to be as high as possible, and the rewards for cash to be as low as possible, to value gameplay as high as possible relative to simply buying everything in the game. But that value has to be there, or no one would buy anything.
The rewards that come for free also serve an important, if less well acknowledged purpose. Suppose I play for twenty hours a week and you play for two. That means I play ten times longer than you. Should I advance ten times faster in the game? Well, some people would say yes, but that's generally unacceptable in a massively multiplayer game. The spread of playing time in the playerbase is huge, but we can't have an equally gigantic difference in player advancement opportunities. If we did, we'd have a similar problem as we would if we had too much value in cash offers. Too good cash offers make the game pay to play, and people who paid less or played for free wouldn't feel it was worth playing. Too much advantage from large amounts of time playing the game would make all the casual players abandon the game.
We want to reward people who play more, but a direct proportional reward might be too high. So we dilute that with "baseline" rewards - rewards you get for free or for minimal effort. So instead of you getting one 5* crystals every month and me getting six, you get two and I get seven, or you get three and I get eight. I still get more, but instead of getting five times as much I get less than three times as much. That's still a reasonable advantage for more play, but it isn't too much advantage.
There's a baseline, and then there's two ways to get above the baseline: play more or spend more. The ratio of the rewards for playing and the rewards for spending determine how friendly or unfriendly the game is to non-spenders. The ratio of baseline rewards to the higher rewards determines how friendly or unfriendly the game is to casual players.
Thank you for your post, and I get what you're saying.
But my concern is, if you look at the side quest event this month, Kabam had already came up with what they thought was the right level of 5* rewards. However, due to pressures from Youtubers like Seatin, KT1 and the likes (all of whom I really enjoy BTW), Kabam somehow caved in and gave up to x3 the original amount.
That's what I'm referring too here. There's now too much 5* shards being given out in the side quest vs the amount of effort required compared to, say, the Arenas or other months' side quests and event quests.
My concern is if this is a trend, then people are just not going to pay or play, but sit around and whine and ask for more shards using this month's side quest as the baseline.
How is that good for the game?
Have you ever thought that they are doing this because with 6.3 out and 6.4 coming out later down the line that the shift is slowly moving to 6 stars you could've made this argument like 3 years ago about 4 stars but it goes full circle, because at first these things are rare but as time flies they become less rare as kabam make these things more achievable and then the next big thing comes out and the cycle repeats
Care to address this point I've made instead of playing the victim card
OP I don't agree with your post and I have no idea why it's still up, as you're taking constructive criticism very personal and have no good rebuttal. RNG is RNG, but people can tilt the odds in their favour by grinding or buying more and having more opportunities to gain crystals. Kabam making more crystals available to the players only helps the player base, not hurt them.
I however commend you for your willingness to dig in and keep coming up with baseless statements and arguments. And I don't think you should stop complaining though. Look at Raffster, one of the biggest whiners on this forum, and he pulled a 6* Warlock, to go with a 6* CapIW he got from a Cavalier crystal some time ago. So your time will come. Keep grinding and keep complaining. I'll keep reading with popcorn in my hand.
Your own progression is just that - your own progression. You don’t really need to compare yourself to others, as other people’s rosters and achievements have no real impact on how well you yourself progress.
Don’t judge yourself against other players all the time, it’ll suck the fun out the game. There is no race unless you make it one in your head.
I only disagree because when it comes to getting into really good alliances, they will want to see your roster and if you don't have any god-tier champs, it'll make it harder for you to get into that alliance. Also having a dud roster makes it harder to beat more difficult content which could really slow down your own progression. Other than that, I agree 100%
Your own progression is just that - your own progression. You don’t really need to compare yourself to others, as other people’s rosters and achievements have no real impact on how well you yourself progress.
Don’t judge yourself against other players all the time, it’ll suck the fun out the game. There is no race unless you make it one in your head.
I only disagree because when it comes to getting into really good alliances, they will want to see your roster and if you don't have any god-tier champs, it'll make it harder for you to get into that alliance. Also having a dud roster makes it harder to beat more difficult content which could really slow down your own progression. Other than that, I agree 100%
I see where you’re coming from, but I was making the point that other people’s progression doesn’t directly impact your own.
Sure, having great top-tier champs will help you progress faster. But other people pulling better champs than you with ‘less effort’ (aka good luck) does not make you yourself progress any slower.
The OP, for some reason, seemed to have a problem with other people pulling great champs this month with the higher-than-average 5* shard availability. Given that other people’s pulls don’t affect the progression of your own account, I can only see jealousy in his argument.
I feel like you guys are missing the whole point of this thread...
Nevermind.
We get the point it's just not a valid one. Your argument is flawed because look, you are saying how come those who don't grind for these crystals open them and get good champions (which is not always the case) but those who grind get shafted (which is not always the case). it doesn't matter how much effort you put into accumulating these because at the end if the day it is all reliant on luck no matter how much effort you put and even then now matter who you pull it's going to increase your roster in some way whether you like the champ or not.
Yes it depends on luck, but if I give you x5 free 5* vs x2 free 5* which options would you choose? The one that has more CHANCE at getting better champs right?
28% - bad pulls 46% - so so pulls 25% - great pulls
So effectively, on average, 74% of people have not improved their roster, but 25% have greatly improved theirs.
That's the fallacy here.
Only 25% of people are better off after these INCREASED rewards.
Again - don't think that INCREASED rewards leads to INCREASED enjoyment.
In a relative sense, 75% have actually fallen behind the 25% who improved their roster.
It is all RNG and the champs someone gets should not be a basis of comparison to your own progress.
Yeah but the more shards you get the more 5* crystals you get, the more 5* crystals you get the more chances you have for pulling God Tier champs.
Alright so you’ve said the answer yourself. If you give me 7.5k shards, I can open one basic since I already had like 3k. So did LITERALLY EVERY OTHER UNCOLLECTED AND CAVALIER PLAYER IN THE WHOLE GAME. I’ll try to explain using math. X=my chances at a good 5*, and Y= your chances at a good 5*. If X=Y, then X+1=Y+1 Both sides are still equal. Giving everyone the same chance is the exact same as giving no one the same chance. Think of the incredible a quote: “And when everyone’s super...*evil chuckle*...no one will be.” The compensation merely
Kabam did absolutely fine on this compensation and you know it 🤨
Edit: consider this: the larger sample size, the more predictable the results will be. Like, if I flip a coin 5 times and a friend flips a coin 5 times and heads are good and tails are bad, and I get 4 heads and he gets 2, there is a great imbalance right? Right. If we both flip it 2000 times, we would probably have something like 1000+/- 20 for both of us. That is MUCH more even.
Now apply that logic to crystal openings. The more openings you do, the more even the lucky to unlucky ratios will be.
By getting more rewards for FREE the balance is shifted to those who are doing nothing but getting lucky to get things and before you know it there'll be no need to grind but just sit around and keep asking for handouts.
This is a complicated game design topic, but the short answer is that all progressional games like this look for a balance between rewards you play for, rewards you pay for, and rewards you more or less get for nothing. Each of these actually plays an important role in the game. Obviously, if no one paid for anything the game would shut down. So there has to be some incentive to pay. And just as obviously, if there were no rewards for playing the game, no one would. These two types of rewards have to be balanced against each other: all things being equal you want the rewards for gameplay to be as high as possible, and the rewards for cash to be as low as possible, to value gameplay as high as possible relative to simply buying everything in the game. But that value has to be there, or no one would buy anything.
The rewards that come for free also serve an important, if less well acknowledged purpose. Suppose I play for twenty hours a week and you play for two. That means I play ten times longer than you. Should I advance ten times faster in the game? Well, some people would say yes, but that's generally unacceptable in a massively multiplayer game. The spread of playing time in the playerbase is huge, but we can't have an equally gigantic difference in player advancement opportunities. If we did, we'd have a similar problem as we would if we had too much value in cash offers. Too good cash offers make the game pay to play, and people who paid less or played for free wouldn't feel it was worth playing. Too much advantage from large amounts of time playing the game would make all the casual players abandon the game.
We want to reward people who play more, but a direct proportional reward might be too high. So we dilute that with "baseline" rewards - rewards you get for free or for minimal effort. So instead of you getting one 5* crystals every month and me getting six, you get two and I get seven, or you get three and I get eight. I still get more, but instead of getting five times as much I get less than three times as much. That's still a reasonable advantage for more play, but it isn't too much advantage.
There's a baseline, and then there's two ways to get above the baseline: play more or spend more. The ratio of the rewards for playing and the rewards for spending determine how friendly or unfriendly the game is to non-spenders. The ratio of baseline rewards to the higher rewards determines how friendly or unfriendly the game is to casual players.
Thank you for your post, and I get what you're saying.
But my concern is, if you look at the side quest event this month, Kabam had already came up with what they thought was the right level of 5* rewards. However, due to pressures from Youtubers like Seatin, KT1 and the likes (all of whom I really enjoy BTW), Kabam somehow caved in and gave up to x3 the original amount.
That's what I'm referring too here. There's now too much 5* shards being given out in the side quest vs the amount of effort required compared to, say, the Arenas or other months' side quests and event quests.
My concern is if this is a trend, then people are just not going to pay or play, but sit around and whine and ask for more shards using this month's side quest as the baseline.
How is that good for the game?
Moderation. It seems a lot of people either think feedback is completely ignored or Kabam completely bends over backwards every time players complain (or the right players complain, as the case may be).
Neither of those things is true. No player complaint by itself has ever directly forced a decision by Kabam. Contrawise, no player complaint has ever been completely ignored either. Instead, the developers listen the complaints, consider them, then make their own decisions - just like all other normal people.
It is good for the game if the developers listen to the players. It is not good for the game if the developers bow to every complaint but I think it is safe to say that no one can make the reasonable case that Kabam bows to every complaint. And not even every content creator complaint: the content creators make complaints practically every day. Most don't directly seem to cause any obvious changes to the game. *Especially* when it comes to rewards. The content creators' track records for complaints leading to reward buffs is dismal. That is, if you thought they were supposed to have outsized influence in the first place.
Personally, I was surprised by the reward buff but I don't think it is wildly out of whack for a special side event. But this gets into another long topic of horizontal verses vertical progress in the game, and special event verses monthly event rewards.
Comments
Nevermind, I won't stoop to personal level convo.
RNG is pure luck, fair is not a factor...if so, Vegas would look like a row of $20/night motels.
Many of us have asked you repeatedly to explain your dissatisfaction in more detail, but so far your only defense is to go off on tangents to turn the focus elsewhere or accuse everyone of hurting your feelings.
You came here to make a statement, which we all found very puzzling, so elaborate on it. If you can’t then don’t be surprised that your strong stance, whatever it is, gets met with an equally aggressive rebuttal.
I’ll make it easy for you...
Take a room full of adults, each with not a dime to their names, and give everyone $100. Who has the advantage? Go! I’ll give you a hint, the money given to them, since it’s the exact same amount for all, has zero to do with who succeeds and who fails.
Considering the same time played, you are basically asking if you had less than average luck with the pulls that would happen to 50% of players. Although you will still get ahead of the pack because some players quit.
The question is about being worse off, not about yor individual progression. Ofc even opening a single crystal helps your own progression. Even if the competitive mcoc is small: AW, prestige for AQ and ranks in Arena..it is still insightful to ask this question.
In any case please consider that statistically on the long term we will be the the same supposing we play the same and have the same skill level
I however commend you for your willingness to dig in and keep coming up with baseless statements and arguments. And I don't think you should stop complaining though. Look at Raffster, one of the biggest whiners on this forum, and he pulled a 6* Warlock, to go with a 6* CapIW he got from a Cavalier crystal some time ago. So your time will come. Keep grinding and keep complaining. I'll keep reading with popcorn in my hand.
Sure, having great top-tier champs will help you progress faster. But other people pulling better champs than you with ‘less effort’ (aka good luck) does not make you yourself progress any slower.
The OP, for some reason, seemed to have a problem with other people pulling great champs this month with the higher-than-average 5* shard availability. Given that other people’s pulls don’t affect the progression of your own account, I can only see jealousy in his argument.
If
X=Y,
then
X+1=Y+1
Both sides are still equal. Giving everyone the same chance is the exact same as giving no one the same chance. Think of the incredible a quote: “And when everyone’s super...*evil chuckle*...no one will be.” The compensation merely
Kabam did absolutely fine on this compensation and you know it 🤨
Edit: consider this: the larger sample size, the more predictable the results will be. Like, if I flip a coin 5 times and a friend flips a coin 5 times and heads are good and tails are bad, and I get 4 heads and he gets 2, there is a great imbalance right? Right. If we both flip it 2000 times, we would probably have something like 1000+/- 20 for both of us. That is MUCH more even.
Now apply that logic to crystal openings. The more openings you do, the more even the lucky to unlucky ratios will be.
Neither of those things is true. No player complaint by itself has ever directly forced a decision by Kabam. Contrawise, no player complaint has ever been completely ignored either. Instead, the developers listen the complaints, consider them, then make their own decisions - just like all other normal people.
It is good for the game if the developers listen to the players. It is not good for the game if the developers bow to every complaint but I think it is safe to say that no one can make the reasonable case that Kabam bows to every complaint. And not even every content creator complaint: the content creators make complaints practically every day. Most don't directly seem to cause any obvious changes to the game. *Especially* when it comes to rewards. The content creators' track records for complaints leading to reward buffs is dismal. That is, if you thought they were supposed to have outsized influence in the first place.
Personally, I was surprised by the reward buff but I don't think it is wildly out of whack for a special side event. But this gets into another long topic of horizontal verses vertical progress in the game, and special event verses monthly event rewards.