Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
But knowing the tier is important ‘cause the lower it is the less items players spend. So when player in tier 10 says he never uses items and there’s no need to use a lotta potions and boosts this is a distortion of the real situation with the problem of loyalty spending. No speaking of if you see that kinda player you start to believe that everything you are doing is right when it is not. ‘Cause everything you did to loyalty store is still wrong and don’t do much for high tier alliances.
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
But knowing the tier is important ‘cause the lower it is the less items players spend. So when player in tier 10 says he never uses items and there’s no need to use a lotta potions and boosts this is a distortion of the real situation with the problem of loyalty spending. No speaking of if you see that kinda player you start to believe that everything you are doing is right when it is not. ‘Cause everything you did to loyalty store is still wrong and don’t do much for high tier alliances.
Perhaps, but calling people out for their Tier in the middle of these discussions tends to be destructive.
But the devs changed inventories when they changed the nature of potions and split them off into the loyalty economy. People used to have dual use potions stocked up and purchasable with other currency, now they have to explicitly stock up AW-specific potions they could not possibly have had prior.
Untrue, those resources have been available for loyalty for so long I would use the term forever. Average players simply paid them no mind prior but certainly had access to them and could stockpile them.
I stand corrected. They could have them stockpiled if they were idiots or couldn’t do math to calculate the most economically efficient means of managing potions, or if they possessed a crystal ball that would tell them that the potions would be buffed in the future and alternatives would be simultaneously restricted. So people should restrict this discussion to only affecting the subset of players that are none of those, as I have not been able to discuss the potion economy with representatives of any of those groups.
Again you’re accounting for things the developers specifically said they were not with these changes. Why?
“but to ensure that we are accounting for the number of Potions and Revives that Summoners were using prior to the weekly compensation packages going live.”
Because I think they are wrong? Is this a trick question?
Why are higher level pots and revives relevant today and not yesterday? (Given Kabam has stated the intent of loyalty potion changes are to replace what players used to spend glory for whole accounting for higher ranked champions.)
What would be a fair cost for a summoner to have every item available available to them at will? Why Should that be an option for an average player?
I have absolutely no idea. Perhaps you should start a thread and ask those questions to see if there is anyone who can help you with those. They have no relevance to anything I’m discussing here, though.
You’re thread title explicitly states Kabam has overlooked the argument within. that argument is that players should be able to have every item in the game available at all times. Perhaps you just do not understand yourself.
I’m afraid that is not even remotely close to what the post says or presents an argument for. In particular, if a player were to use more potions on average than they can purchase, they would eventually exhaust their potions of they sustained that burn rate for a sufficiently long period of time, and nothing I’m suggesting in this thread would remedy that.
The costs I mention, and this is clearly spelled out in the post, are the costs associated with employing a sustainable potion management strategy assuming such a strategy is even possible. The developers assume this is possible for at least some fraction of players, when they describe how things are intended to work. For those people, this cost is a cost Kabam has not factored into their decision to say that the loyalty earning changes they themselves explicitly put into the system to balance the cost of potions don’t need to be phased in until compensation potions are no longer being handed out.
For everyone else, of course, as has been discussed elsewhere, they are just plain out of luck. This says even if Kabam thinks you’re one of the players who is perfectly fine, you’re still not fine.
Let me refer you to your own tl;dr
“TL;DR: to use portions effectively and efficiently, you really need to stock up. And you're going to spend about three million loyalty to do that over some period of time. That's a lot of loyalty the players have to eventually put up to "prime the potion pump", and for all practical purposes will never get back. Where is it supposed to come from, when we aren't getting increased loyalty yet?”
Your entire post is about players being able to access every single item in the loyalty store to have on hand and you sum that up in your tl;dr
The devs accounted for replacing what was lost via the glory store which is a fraction of the 3m loyalty you believe players need in order to have every single item in hand at all times.
You clearly missed the mark on this one.
Please explain? The op goes into explicit detail about the costs of individual health related items and inventory limits of the loyalty store then goes onto say players need to have them at will. Which means Kabam overlooked this aspect because they didn’t allow for players to obtain them all today and it is also an inherent fault within the system because players cannot obtain that today.
That is simply untrue, loyalty is being balanced around replacing what players lost from the changes to the glory store, only a fraction of what this ridiculous 3m loyalty the op is saying (this includes having 20 l4,l3,l2 and l1 heals, 10 l1-4 team heal and 10 l3,l2,l1 revives on hand). Previously this was unobtainable (and completely unreasonable) for anyone in the glory store. This is contradictory to what Kabam has said the set out to do with the loyalty changes, it wasn’t overlooked or missed.
Additionally the idea that l1 and l2 of any team/heal pot is relevant to anyone who would be looking to amass a war stash including the highest level of orbs is ridiculous, is exaggeration, and is meme worthy when people take the time to think about it rather than react to it.
“Make sure you’re stocked up on those l1 and l2 health potions for the upcoming war season.” Said no officer/player ever.
Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
Of course it is, I don’t think anyone has an issue with people saying “this is my tier and this is my opinion”.
The issue is if someone who isn’t in a high tier says “this issue doesn’t affect high tiers”, or when they comment about what’s going on at the top when that goes against what those at the top are actually saying is going on.
I’d never be against someone adding their opinion, but I feel it’s important to back opinions up with experience (1st or 2nd hand) and facts.
Someone in tier 10 saying they don’t have issues with potions: valuable feedback. Someone in tier 10 saying nothing needs to be changed because they don’t have issues with potions, gameplay at the top is fine, and that’s the way it’s always been: it’s probably worth asking them what tier they’re in, and how they know what it’s like at the top.
But the devs changed inventories when they changed the nature of potions and split them off into the loyalty economy. People used to have dual use potions stocked up and purchasable with other currency, now they have to explicitly stock up AW-specific potions they could not possibly have had prior.
Untrue, those resources have been available for loyalty for so long I would use the term forever. Average players simply paid them no mind prior but certainly had access to them and could stockpile them.
I stand corrected. They could have them stockpiled if they were idiots or couldn’t do math to calculate the most economically efficient means of managing potions, or if they possessed a crystal ball that would tell them that the potions would be buffed in the future and alternatives would be simultaneously restricted. So people should restrict this discussion to only affecting the subset of players that are none of those, as I have not been able to discuss the potion economy with representatives of any of those groups.
Again you’re accounting for things the developers specifically said they were not with these changes. Why?
“but to ensure that we are accounting for the number of Potions and Revives that Summoners were using prior to the weekly compensation packages going live.”
Because I think they are wrong? Is this a trick question?
Why are higher level pots and revives relevant today and not yesterday? (Given Kabam has stated the intent of loyalty potion changes are to replace what players used to spend glory for whole accounting for higher ranked champions.)
What would be a fair cost for a summoner to have every item available available to them at will? Why Should that be an option for an average player?
I have absolutely no idea. Perhaps you should start a thread and ask those questions to see if there is anyone who can help you with those. They have no relevance to anything I’m discussing here, though.
You’re thread title explicitly states Kabam has overlooked the argument within. that argument is that players should be able to have every item in the game available at all times. Perhaps you just do not understand yourself.
I’m afraid that is not even remotely close to what the post says or presents an argument for. In particular, if a player were to use more potions on average than they can purchase, they would eventually exhaust their potions of they sustained that burn rate for a sufficiently long period of time, and nothing I’m suggesting in this thread would remedy that.
The costs I mention, and this is clearly spelled out in the post, are the costs associated with employing a sustainable potion management strategy assuming such a strategy is even possible. The developers assume this is possible for at least some fraction of players, when they describe how things are intended to work. For those people, this cost is a cost Kabam has not factored into their decision to say that the loyalty earning changes they themselves explicitly put into the system to balance the cost of potions don’t need to be phased in until compensation potions are no longer being handed out.
For everyone else, of course, as has been discussed elsewhere, they are just plain out of luck. This says even if Kabam thinks you’re one of the players who is perfectly fine, you’re still not fine.
Let me refer you to your own tl;dr
“TL;DR: to use portions effectively and efficiently, you really need to stock up. And you're going to spend about three million loyalty to do that over some period of time. That's a lot of loyalty the players have to eventually put up to "prime the potion pump", and for all practical purposes will never get back. Where is it supposed to come from, when we aren't getting increased loyalty yet?”
Your entire post is about players being able to access every single item in the loyalty store to have on hand and you sum that up in your tl;dr
The devs accounted for replacing what was lost via the glory store which is a fraction of the 3m loyalty you believe players need in order to have every single item in hand at all times.
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
But knowing the tier is important ‘cause the lower it is the less items players spend. So when player in tier 10 says he never uses items and there’s no need to use a lotta potions and boosts this is a distortion of the real situation with the problem of loyalty spending. No speaking of if you see that kinda player you start to believe that everything you are doing is right when it is not. ‘Cause everything you did to loyalty store is still wrong and doesn’t do much for high tier alliances.
Everyone is entitled to describe their own anecdotal experiences, so long as they don't overgeneralize them. The important thing is to call out overgeneralizations, but not the experience. If you're not spending on potions, that's good for you. Does that mean everyone in that tier doesn't spend? Probably not. Does that mean the costs are correct, just because you don't buy them? Probably not.
Voicing your experience is always valid. Extrapolating that experience to players in similar situations is sometimes valid. Constraining the game to that experience alone is never valid.
We should attack ideas, not posters. And the most effective counterarguments are not ones that attack the poster anyway. If someone says no one in tier 1 spends, it is a weak argument to say that person isn't in tier 1 and can't know. It is a devastating argument to simply get tier 1 players to state that's not true for themselves, and not true for the majority of players they have direct experience with. People win and lose arguments, but at the end of the day the facts ultimately always win.
Also, trust me when I say: the devs are directly hearing from a significant number of tier 1 players. That position is not underrepresented in the devs' feedback. There is zero chance that the devs would read a comment on the forums and conclude most tier 1 players have no problems with the potion costs and generally never need them anyway.
If anything, I consistently hear the opposite: that tier 1 players burn way more potions than lower tier players. Which may be true on average, but that masks the fact that while lower tier players have less pressure to win, they possess less skill and less roster strength to avoid dying in the first place. I've seen Bishop team wipe three players on an intermediate map. I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen very often in tier 1. Everyone, at every tier, has their own problems, and high potion costs affect every tier. If anything, they probably affect the weakest links in every alliance at every tier more than they affect everyone at a particular tier. I know tier 1 is a special case, because there is no tier zero that outranks them, but still: problems exist everywhere, because most alliances are not homogenous and most players are not the strongest player in their alliance.
A lot of tier 1 players do not like the current potion changes, because they are at the pointy end of the spear. But there are a lot of tier 6s and tier 12s that will end up just as broke, and broke is broke: there's no such thing as a problem worse than "can't afford to play anymore, so have to quit completely."
This is the danger of balancing around averages. Half the players will sit above the average and think nothing is wrong. The other half will wonder what they did wrong. Some people will honestly believe all is well. If anything, this is part of the problem, not a path to a solution.
Has anyone said anything about the loyalty rewards not being updated to the new amounts for war that were supposed to be in place when this season started?
Has anyone said anything about the loyalty rewards not being updated to the new amounts for war that were supposed to be in place when this season started?
They weren't supposed to be updated when the Season started. They'll be updated sometime close to when the Compensations end.
Has anyone said anything about the loyalty rewards not being updated to the new amounts for war that were supposed to be in place when this season started?
In many other posts, Kabam never stated that they would increase the loyalty when the season started. Only that they were fine tuning the numbers and that it would be implemented before the compensation ends.
I think this is an amazing post. I was going to make a post similar to this, nowhere near as eloquent or evidenced but assumed Kabam would close it down and refer us to the main, closed thread. I’m glad they are allowing this thread to stay open for discussion.
I used to spend 260 glory daily to buy 6k health pots I could use in AW, or until I capped out on the max inventory amount. Now, I can’t do that, at least not with what we small amount of loyalty there’s currently available to earn.
I don’t personally think they have overlooked the cost. I think they are very aware of how much loyalty everyone has saved up from the weekly compensation and want us to use this up before they start the new loyalty economy. I doubt they want us to be able to stockpile health pots whilst we are still getting compensation health and loyalty. Just a quick look at some recent streams of YouTubers who do AW and how much loyalty they have and you see KT1 has over 440k, Lagacy over 1m, Karatemike over 1.4m. My guess from Kabams perspective is they want to wait as long as possible to introduce the new loyalty economy so we use up all this stockpiled resource first.
Would item use as a negative points metric put downward pressure on using items?
Once upon a time I suggested AW potions be purchasable with points. However, this was seen by many people who heard the suggestion as defeating the purpose of potions in the first place at higher tiers. At higher tiers, you spend potions to prevent dying - in effect to prevent losing points. If you had to lose points to buy or use a potion, that meant some players now had no way to avoid losing points, and every single mistake was now irrecoverable, and this could have the effect of increasing the stress on high tier players exponentially.
This would be one of those cases where higher tier war psychology probably differs dramatically from mid and lower tier psychology. In general, the psychology of higher tier war is to avoid losing points to the highest degree possible. But for lower tiers, the pressure to avoid losing points is not as high, and the more dominant stress is managing resources enough to keep costs low throughout the season. Spending points instead of units would be a godsend for most lower tier war players, but would be a nightmare for a substantial number of higher tier players.
This is admittedly one of the things that I only learned from discussing war with higher tier players The game is basically the same, but the meta is completely different at radically different tiers, and it takes open discussion with people at all tiers to know what those differences are.
Has anyone said anything about the loyalty rewards not being updated to the new amounts for war that were supposed to be in place when this season started?
They weren't supposed to be updated when the Season started. They'll be updated sometime close to when the Compensations end.
I don't think this is the case, compensation I cannot see ending anytime soon. Hope I am wrong as they fix bugs new ones appear. Nevertheless, I believe kabam mike said there will be an update next month. This was not crystal clear but was sort of said in his last post, when the old forum post was closed
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
We get you want to mediate the chat but why not chime in on the actual discussion? What is kabams take on DNA post who brings up a very valid point. The cost of doing alliance war.
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
We get you want to mediate the chat but why not chime in on the actual discussion? What is kabams take on DNA post who brings up a very valid point. The cost of doing alliance war.
Same as it was a few days ago. They're at the beginning stages of calculations.
I have played from gold 3 to p2/p3 alliance. Right now we are p3(can get to p2 too) and t3 wars. All I can say is that , most of the players use some items as attack values aren't that light and block damage can't be ignored at some paths with given choices. So buying Pots at daily basis is necessary evil. But in long run, we will lose more loyalty than we are getting right now. And 1 bug/lag/glitch can cost ton of items (personal Experience) So cost will rise up even if we don't buy in daily basis.
The price of AW is ridiculous right now. I know that below my posts about this loyalty issue people pressing a million of disagree buttons but i will keep say it anyway cause the price is really insane.
9500 health potions cost 20k loyalty. It means that 1 hp = 2,1 loyalty. If you want wars not to be expensive - YOU MUST forget about boosts and etc. Why? Cause if you make mistakes - you spend millions of loyalty during season. Now the third war is running and me personally lost 157k health in 3 wars total (don’t worry, no deaths and yeah i heal to full every fight cause my alliance play wars for results). 157k health = 300k+ loyalty. And it’s just health. And what about boosts? With boosts it’s about 500k loyalty. In 3 wars. And in 12 it’s x4 and it is about 2 million loyalty.
We need loyalty to be increased as soon as possible.
Who says that he plays with no items used doing 7-10 fights - write your Tier and Alliance Tag or better show some videos of the whole war, I would like to see how great the forum players are doing their work in AW.
I'm not saying I'm in favor of this change. This change barely affects me nor the top alliances.
All I'm saying is, there was a concept, and it stopped midway instead of going all the way. Leaving the bad part of it just a downgrade for the game mode.
But the arguments provided here are just poor. People make it seem like they prefer to spend (resources and money) rather than not spend, which I can't think of any reason why besides getting the upper advantage more guaranteed. From the previous discussions on similar subjects, most people stated that they rather prefer to spend than not spend, and get the exact same results in the end.
No one is saying that they'd rather spend than not spend. That's the whole reason people are upset because they are being forced to spend. You said it yourself, this barely affects you. You also have no clue what tier 1 AW is like. Wins/losses are 1 or 2 deaths apart so boosting and replenishing health is something that HAS to happen. Again, why do you have such strong opposing opinions when you have zero experience with what people are upset about?
I do play on high tiers of AW, and I do complete the paths barely with any item usage. Most wars completely itemless. So I'm sure I know what I talk about there.
What tier do you define as "high tier"?
He plays p3 lol, not even high. He speaks for allies he will never step foot in.
The price of AW is ridiculous right now. I know that below my posts about this loyalty issue people pressing a million of disagree buttons but i will keep say it anyway cause the price is really insane.
9500 health potions cost 20k loyalty. It means that 1 hp = 2,1 loyalty. If you want wars not to be expensive - YOU MUST forget about boosts and etc. Why? Cause if you make mistakes - you spend millions of loyalty during season. Now the third war is running and me personally lost 157k health in 3 wars total (don’t worry, no deaths and yeah i heal to full every fight cause my alliance play wars for results). 157k health = 300k+ loyalty. And it’s just health. And what about boosts? With boosts it’s about 500k loyalty. In 3 wars. And in 12 it’s x4 and it is about 2 million loyalty.
We need loyalty to be increased as soon as possible.
Who says that he plays with no items used doing 7-10 fights - write your Tier and Alliance Tag or better show some videos of the whole war, I would like to see how great the forum players are doing their work in AW.
I'm not saying I'm in favor of this change. This change barely affects me nor the top alliances.
All I'm saying is, there was a concept, and it stopped midway instead of going all the way. Leaving the bad part of it just a downgrade for the game mode.
But the arguments provided here are just poor. People make it seem like they prefer to spend (resources and money) rather than not spend, which I can't think of any reason why besides getting the upper advantage more guaranteed. From the previous discussions on similar subjects, most people stated that they rather prefer to spend than not spend, and get the exact same results in the end.
No one is saying that they'd rather spend than not spend. That's the whole reason people are upset because they are being forced to spend. You said it yourself, this barely affects you. You also have no clue what tier 1 AW is like. Wins/losses are 1 or 2 deaths apart so boosting and replenishing health is something that HAS to happen. Again, why do you have such strong opposing opinions when you have zero experience with what people are upset about?
I do play on high tiers of AW, and I do complete the paths barely with any item usage. Most wars completely itemless. So I'm sure I know what I talk about there.
What tier do you define as "high tier"?
He plays p3 lol, not even high. He speaks for allies he will never step foot in.
He said it? Or it’s just your thoughts?
Not just my thoughts
This is his ally
this image will probably get removed, but out of morbid curiosity why do you know this
Ebony may is extripa. That's kind of known. He doesn't exactly hide it
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
We get you want to mediate the chat but why not chime in on the actual discussion? What is kabams take on DNA post who brings up a very valid point. The cost of doing alliance war.
Same as it was a few days ago. They're at the beginning stages of calculations.
Well he asked a kabam employee, i dont see a reason for you to chime in here.
After 3 wars, im down 200k loyalty since the start of the season. I take a lot of fights usually, average about 9-11 fights a war since my team can be built around it. Everyone in my alliance is reporting negative loyalty gains. My guess is after this season we will have zero loyalty, or close to it, which i guess was the whole point of this exercise.
Hey all, let's remember to keep discussions civil and avoid attacking each other. Everybody's feedback is valuable, regardless of what tier they play in.
But knowing the tier is important ‘cause the lower it is the less items players spend. So when player in tier 10 says he never uses items and there’s no need to use a lotta potions and boosts this is a distortion of the real situation with the problem of loyalty spending. No speaking of if you see that kinda player you start to believe that everything you are doing is right when it is not. ‘Cause everything you did to loyalty store is still wrong and don’t do much for high tier alliances.
Perhaps, but calling people out for their Tier in the middle of these discussions tends to be destructive.
No, it doesn’t. ‘Cause you can not be constructive enough if you misinform other players with your experience which don’t fit the whole situation generally. One more time: the lower the tier is the lesser players spend. The lesser low tier players spend the lesser we need to focus on that tier in the first place and balance it. I don’t say that we gotta forget about low tier alliances. I just say if player in the low tier thinks that everything’s fine - don’t say anything for those who on the different level much higher than you. You don’t want to ask scholars how to build rockets cause if you will - you will destroy cosmic industry. Same situation here in the game: we don’t need to ask low tier how to deal with high tier alliances not because we don’t care about low tiers. And because they don’t know what they talking about. It’s not hatred or neglect of em’. It’s only the rational approach to solving the loyalty problem which EXISTS in the game and that NEEDS to be solved ASAP.
I play in Tier 1 and spent 500k+ loyalty from my stock of items. And got only 50k loyalty. And when some tier-5 player says that everything’s fine - in my opinion it’s not fair AT LEAST. And as a maximum it’s misunderstanding of the situation in general.
I just say if player in the low tier thinks that everything’s fine - don’t say anything for those who on the different level much higher than you.
I think this is something we all should try to keep in mind going both ways. If you're in tier 12, unless you have spent a lot of time learning from tier 1 players, you don't know anything about what's going on in tier 1. This is probably true even if you are in tier 4. But the same thing is true in the reverse case, and we need to try to keep that in mind: tier 1 players don't necessarily know what's going on in tier 12 just because they are higher. Tier 1 players are not universally experiencing greater hardship than all tier 12 players just because they are competing in a higher tier. Tier 1 wars are vastly harder, no question. But tier 1 players are vastly stronger.
It is almost certainly true that on average, tier 1 wars are more expensive than lower tier wars. But I do not think it is true that all tier 1 players are outspending all tier 2-22 players. They have the stronger rosters, they are the better players, they aren't going to team wipe several times on a hard defender. A tier 10 player might.
The squeeze that high cost potions applies to the playerbase applies in two different directions. First, the squeeze is harder the higher you go. That's undeniably true. But it also pulls alliances apart by placing more pressure on the lower players in the alliance than the higher ones. The top player in a tier 6 alliance might have it easy while the bottom player in that same tier 6 alliance might be getting crushed. This is something you would have to be in those alliances to fully appreciate.
*Everyone* needs to be careful not to overgeneralize. It doesn't help if tier 15 players say there's no problem because they aren't spending any potions. But it also doesn't help when tier 1 players say they have the real problem, and everyone else is just a smaller version of that problem. This breeds animosity that is unproductive, because expensive potions impacts players at every level. We don't want players at one tier to think that the players on another tier don't care about them. As I said previously, broke is broke. A broke tier 1 has the same problem as a broke tier 5 and a broke tier 10. *How* they got there might be different, *how* we address those problems might be different at different competitive tiers, but their problems all deserve equal attention.
If we can't all agree that our individual problems are equally important to everyone else's problems in this situation, how are we going to convince the developers to spend any time addressing our own individual problems alone? *My* problems ultimately don't matter. But the ones that are affecting *all of you* do matter, because all of your collectively *are* the game.
@Kabam Miike I am sorry to rehash this, but I am confused with the economic decision on how wars are funded (revives potions etc). You yourself appear to play high level war I have seen your videos on YouTube and as others swede and lagacy etc all heal before every single fight as you do, run loyalty boost (class, attack and hp) plus invulnerability etc. Without knowing the exact revenue (loyalty earnt) which I put as a max of about 45k for 3 war wins and 1k a day. How are we and including you suppose to make ends meet. If you need I can upload videos. Respectfully there please needs to be a sense of urgency. Regards
Comments
That is simply untrue, loyalty is being balanced around replacing what players lost from the changes to the glory store, only a fraction of what this ridiculous 3m loyalty the op is saying (this includes having 20 l4,l3,l2 and l1 heals, 10 l1-4 team heal and 10 l3,l2,l1 revives on hand). Previously this was unobtainable (and completely unreasonable) for anyone in the glory store. This is contradictory to what Kabam has said the set out to do with the loyalty changes, it wasn’t overlooked or missed.
Additionally the idea that l1 and l2 of any team/heal pot is relevant to anyone who would be looking to amass a war stash including the highest level of orbs is ridiculous, is exaggeration, and is meme worthy when people take the time to think about it rather than react to it.
“Make sure you’re stocked up on those l1 and l2 health potions for the upcoming war season.” Said no officer/player ever.
The issue is if someone who isn’t in a high tier says “this issue doesn’t affect high tiers”, or when they comment about what’s going on at the top when that goes against what those at the top are actually saying is going on.
I’d never be against someone adding their opinion, but I feel it’s important to back opinions up with experience (1st or 2nd hand) and facts.
Someone in tier 10 saying they don’t have issues with potions: valuable feedback. Someone in tier 10 saying nothing needs to be changed because they don’t have issues with potions, gameplay at the top is fine, and that’s the way it’s always been: it’s probably worth asking them what tier they’re in, and how they know what it’s like at the top.
Voicing your experience is always valid. Extrapolating that experience to players in similar situations is sometimes valid. Constraining the game to that experience alone is never valid.
We should attack ideas, not posters. And the most effective counterarguments are not ones that attack the poster anyway. If someone says no one in tier 1 spends, it is a weak argument to say that person isn't in tier 1 and can't know. It is a devastating argument to simply get tier 1 players to state that's not true for themselves, and not true for the majority of players they have direct experience with. People win and lose arguments, but at the end of the day the facts ultimately always win.
Also, trust me when I say: the devs are directly hearing from a significant number of tier 1 players. That position is not underrepresented in the devs' feedback. There is zero chance that the devs would read a comment on the forums and conclude most tier 1 players have no problems with the potion costs and generally never need them anyway.
If anything, I consistently hear the opposite: that tier 1 players burn way more potions than lower tier players. Which may be true on average, but that masks the fact that while lower tier players have less pressure to win, they possess less skill and less roster strength to avoid dying in the first place. I've seen Bishop team wipe three players on an intermediate map. I'm pretty sure that doesn't happen very often in tier 1. Everyone, at every tier, has their own problems, and high potion costs affect every tier. If anything, they probably affect the weakest links in every alliance at every tier more than they affect everyone at a particular tier. I know tier 1 is a special case, because there is no tier zero that outranks them, but still: problems exist everywhere, because most alliances are not homogenous and most players are not the strongest player in their alliance.
A lot of tier 1 players do not like the current potion changes, because they are at the pointy end of the spear. But there are a lot of tier 6s and tier 12s that will end up just as broke, and broke is broke: there's no such thing as a problem worse than "can't afford to play anymore, so have to quit completely."
This is the danger of balancing around averages. Half the players will sit above the average and think nothing is wrong. The other half will wonder what they did wrong. Some people will honestly believe all is well. If anything, this is part of the problem, not a path to a solution.
I used to spend 260 glory daily to buy 6k health pots I could use in AW, or until I capped out on the max inventory amount. Now, I can’t do that, at least not with what we small amount of loyalty there’s currently available to earn.
I don’t personally think they have overlooked the cost. I think they are very aware of how much loyalty everyone has saved up from the weekly compensation and want us to use this up before they start the new loyalty economy. I doubt they want us to be able to stockpile health pots whilst we are still getting compensation health and loyalty. Just a quick look at some recent streams of YouTubers who do AW and how much loyalty they have and you see KT1 has over 440k, Lagacy over 1m, Karatemike over 1.4m. My guess from Kabams perspective is they want to wait as long as possible to introduce the new loyalty economy so we use up all this stockpiled resource first.
This would be one of those cases where higher tier war psychology probably differs dramatically from mid and lower tier psychology. In general, the psychology of higher tier war is to avoid losing points to the highest degree possible. But for lower tiers, the pressure to avoid losing points is not as high, and the more dominant stress is managing resources enough to keep costs low throughout the season. Spending points instead of units would be a godsend for most lower tier war players, but would be a nightmare for a substantial number of higher tier players.
This is admittedly one of the things that I only learned from discussing war with higher tier players The game is basically the same, but the meta is completely different at radically different tiers, and it takes open discussion with people at all tiers to know what those differences are.
Nevertheless, I believe kabam mike said there will be an update next month. This was not crystal clear but was sort of said in his last post, when the old forum post was closed
Right now we are p3(can get to p2 too) and t3 wars. All I can say is that , most of the players use some items as attack values aren't that light and block damage can't be ignored at some paths with given choices. So buying Pots at daily basis is necessary evil. But in long run, we will lose more loyalty than we are getting right now. And 1 bug/lag/glitch can cost ton of items (personal Experience)
So cost will rise up even if we don't buy in daily basis.
This is his ally
I skipped infinite long essays in this post and this summarised everything lmao.
After 3 wars, im down 200k loyalty since the start of the season. I take a lot of fights usually, average about 9-11 fights a war since my team can be built around it.
Everyone in my alliance is reporting negative loyalty gains. My guess is after this season we will have zero loyalty, or close to it, which i guess was the whole point of this exercise.
I play in Tier 1 and spent 500k+ loyalty from my stock of items. And got only 50k loyalty. And when some tier-5 player says that everything’s fine - in my opinion it’s not fair AT LEAST. And as a maximum it’s misunderstanding of the situation in general.
It is almost certainly true that on average, tier 1 wars are more expensive than lower tier wars. But I do not think it is true that all tier 1 players are outspending all tier 2-22 players. They have the stronger rosters, they are the better players, they aren't going to team wipe several times on a hard defender. A tier 10 player might.
The squeeze that high cost potions applies to the playerbase applies in two different directions. First, the squeeze is harder the higher you go. That's undeniably true. But it also pulls alliances apart by placing more pressure on the lower players in the alliance than the higher ones. The top player in a tier 6 alliance might have it easy while the bottom player in that same tier 6 alliance might be getting crushed. This is something you would have to be in those alliances to fully appreciate.
*Everyone* needs to be careful not to overgeneralize. It doesn't help if tier 15 players say there's no problem because they aren't spending any potions. But it also doesn't help when tier 1 players say they have the real problem, and everyone else is just a smaller version of that problem. This breeds animosity that is unproductive, because expensive potions impacts players at every level. We don't want players at one tier to think that the players on another tier don't care about them. As I said previously, broke is broke. A broke tier 1 has the same problem as a broke tier 5 and a broke tier 10. *How* they got there might be different, *how* we address those problems might be different at different competitive tiers, but their problems all deserve equal attention.
If we can't all agree that our individual problems are equally important to everyone else's problems in this situation, how are we going to convince the developers to spend any time addressing our own individual problems alone? *My* problems ultimately don't matter. But the ones that are affecting *all of you* do matter, because all of your collectively *are* the game.
How are we and including you suppose to make ends meet. If you need I can upload videos. Respectfully there please needs to be a sense of urgency. Regards