The issue is, why is it any time Kabam makes a change we have to wait for you or someone to try and explain what the positive reasoning *might* be behind their choices. Where is the transparency or explanation? Why is it a theory posited by you, instead of an explanation by them? There's a certain irony to asking me this question. But while in general I agree with you that communication could be much better almost everywhere, in this case maybe author's intent isn't the best thing to come directly from the author. Maybe the developers want players to make up their own minds about how the loyalty store alters their approach to war without being told there's a specific choice that was intended to be the "right one." Maybe it is more important for players to decide what the loyalty store means to them, than it is to inform players what the devs are hoping will happen.I can say whatever I want, because if a player decides not to believe I'm right, they are free to do so. And I may in fact be completely wrong about the developer's intentions. But your agency becomes significantly impaired in an inescapable way if you're told by the designer what you're supposed to do with the design.
The issue is, why is it any time Kabam makes a change we have to wait for you or someone to try and explain what the positive reasoning *might* be behind their choices. Where is the transparency or explanation? Why is it a theory posited by you, instead of an explanation by them?
Not really a problem. It's really about choices. grounded wisdom moment When we're talking about making choices between using all Loyalty to run Wars, or saving for Mats, that's a choice. Not everyone is going to run high Tier Wars. I had to stop and re think this argument when I realized I'm in agreement with grounded wisdom, but facts are facts and an enormous part of this game is resource management and deciding where you want to use your resources. Precisely. That's exactly my point. Which means we can't choose to buy them if we're choosing to dedicate those Resources to Wars. That's not a bad thing. That's choices. I agree with you dude. And ironically, I'm seeing some people complaining about this loyalty issue who always bash on people who complain about lack of gold. Literally some same people who always bash on those low on gold and tell them to better manage their resources are upset about loyalty which again, is 100% about resource management.People choose where they use loyalty, you do not have to use it on war, so it is 100% a choice and resource management issue.
Not really a problem. It's really about choices. grounded wisdom moment When we're talking about making choices between using all Loyalty to run Wars, or saving for Mats, that's a choice. Not everyone is going to run high Tier Wars. I had to stop and re think this argument when I realized I'm in agreement with grounded wisdom, but facts are facts and an enormous part of this game is resource management and deciding where you want to use your resources. Precisely. That's exactly my point. Which means we can't choose to buy them if we're choosing to dedicate those Resources to Wars. That's not a bad thing. That's choices.
Not really a problem. It's really about choices. grounded wisdom moment When we're talking about making choices between using all Loyalty to run Wars, or saving for Mats, that's a choice. Not everyone is going to run high Tier Wars. I had to stop and re think this argument when I realized I'm in agreement with grounded wisdom, but facts are facts and an enormous part of this game is resource management and deciding where you want to use your resources.
Not really a problem. It's really about choices. grounded wisdom moment When we're talking about making choices between using all Loyalty to run Wars, or saving for Mats, that's a choice. Not everyone is going to run high Tier Wars.
Not really a problem. It's really about choices. grounded wisdom moment
Not really a problem. It's really about choices.
The issue is, why is it any time Kabam makes a change we have to wait for you or someone to try and explain what the positive reasoning *might* be behind their choices. Where is the transparency or explanation? Why is it a theory posited by you, instead of an explanation by them? There's a certain irony to asking me this question. But while in general I agree with you that communication could be much better almost everywhere, in this case maybe author's intent isn't the best thing to come directly from the author. Maybe the developers want players to make up their own minds about how the loyalty store alters their approach to war without being told there's a specific choice that was intended to be the "right one." Maybe it is more important for players to decide what the loyalty store means to them, than it is to inform players what the devs are hoping will happen.I can say whatever I want, because if a player decides not to believe I'm right, they are free to do so. And I may in fact be completely wrong about the developer's intentions. But your agency becomes significantly impaired in an inescapable way if you're told by the designer what you're supposed to do with the design. This I tend to agree with. We all have the freedom to consider what we think are the motivations for these things, but it's more often than not less guided than that. I believe they provide options. Some options involve making choices, and those choices usually relate to certain balancing limitations, but it's really not about encouraging people to do much of anything other than play how they choose within the framework. Man this is some word salad right here
The issue is, why is it any time Kabam makes a change we have to wait for you or someone to try and explain what the positive reasoning *might* be behind their choices. Where is the transparency or explanation? Why is it a theory posited by you, instead of an explanation by them? There's a certain irony to asking me this question. But while in general I agree with you that communication could be much better almost everywhere, in this case maybe author's intent isn't the best thing to come directly from the author. Maybe the developers want players to make up their own minds about how the loyalty store alters their approach to war without being told there's a specific choice that was intended to be the "right one." Maybe it is more important for players to decide what the loyalty store means to them, than it is to inform players what the devs are hoping will happen.I can say whatever I want, because if a player decides not to believe I'm right, they are free to do so. And I may in fact be completely wrong about the developer's intentions. But your agency becomes significantly impaired in an inescapable way if you're told by the designer what you're supposed to do with the design. This I tend to agree with. We all have the freedom to consider what we think are the motivations for these things, but it's more often than not less guided than that. I believe they provide options. Some options involve making choices, and those choices usually relate to certain balancing limitations, but it's really not about encouraging people to do much of anything other than play how they choose within the framework.
I'm 20,000 away from a 6 star unstoppable, but may reconsider him now...
First of all, it's nice to have something valuable to spend loyalty on.Power boosts change is bad and unnecessary, as we had it limited anyway, but not the end of the world. Personally I can't remember when I used pretty boost before eop warlockPotions are an issue only for high tier wars, so my guess is they how to see more units spent on potions.Overall new things are good (even though expensive), old things became a little worse
Wait until they update season rewards to include loyalty and it will make more sense while bringing back the incentive.
Lol, rip for the people who bought Unstoppable Colossus.
People tend to want others to tell them what to do cause it’s the easier way out. If you want to rank high in AW, max boost and pot to full each fight. It’s easy.But with the loyalty store changes, everyone contemplating that choice will have to ask themselves, “Every pot I spend is 20k loyalty further from that 6* AG that I could have sooner, should I? Or should I just die and 40% revive for 1 loyalty? But what about my death count?” etc questions.It’s much tougher psychologically imo.(Love the loyalty store update though.)
People tend to want others to tell them what to do cause it’s the easier way out. If you want to rank high in AW, max boost and pot to full each fight. It’s easy.But with the loyalty store changes, everyone contemplating that choice will have to ask themselves, “Every pot I spend is 20k loyalty further from that 6* AG that I could have sooner, should I? Or should I just die and 40% revive for 1 loyalty? But what about my death count?” etc questions.It’s much tougher psychologically imo.(Love the loyalty store update though.) If you could choose between pushing in war and using all loyalty towards potions and boosts WHILE STILL getting equivalent rewards in ranked season rewards as a "reward" for your efforts OR not pushing and collecting loyalty and getting these rewards from loyalty store, then yes.. it would be a choice between pushing in war or not pushing. But as is, there is no incentive to push. There is no choice. the "choice" is between pushing in war, spending hours fighting in a competitive way to get outdated rewards OR relax, do no stress wars, and get better rewards. This change makes no sense.
You guys are saying that now no one would buy health potions and would just use 1 loyalty based revives.Tell me what would you do if Kabam increase the revives from 1 loyalty to lets say 20k loyalty?You would stop playing AWs entirely?
Well I'm glad I've spent 1.7 million of my 2 million loyalty the last few seasons for gold 3 rewards to see this roll out. I don't even have enough loyalty to buy potions for the upcoming season let alone R4 Mats. We're not even getting enough loyalty after a war match to buy a team potion that's worth anything. So out of touch with the player base it's unreal.