**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.

Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.

A hidden cost of war (that Kabam overlooked)

So for a while now I've been buying war potions and revives, to try to slowly stock up on them You want to buy these over time if possible, because the costs escalate. I know a lot of people are hoping the entire system is either scrapped or radically overhauled, but I'm not going to wait around for that Christmas miracle.

However, it occurred to me today that this process of stocking up contains a somewhat hidden, but gigantic cost of war that Kabam has introduced. This might seem obvious to some, but I don't believe it has been actively discussed. So let's look (again) at some numbers.

The loyalty store has three levels of revives for sale: L1, L2, and L3. Their costs are 7k, 25k, and 45k. For now, it isn't important what they do. The inventory limits on those are 10 each, 13 if you have the Sigil. I'm going to assume no Sigil for now. In theory, that means you actually fully stock your inventory, even if you spread out the purchases enough to only buy one at a time at the base cost, it will cost you 770k loyalty to fill your inventory with those revives. Similarly, single potions cost 1500, 7500, 15k, and 20k. Their inventory limit is 20, which means it would cost 880k loyalty to fill that inventory. And finally team potions cost 4k, 25k, 50k, and 75k with a 10 inventory limit. This costs 1.54 million loyalty to fill. This means it will take a total of 3.19 million loyalty to stock up to full. We are, however, getting a flood of certain items, including L2 revives. Let's assume no one has to spend anything to fill up on that one item (we are also getting a flood of L5 health potions, but we can't buy those anyway from the loyalty store). So let's deduct the 250k it would take to fill up L2 revives. That leaves 2,940,000 loyalty to stock up on the potions for sale in the loyalty store.

That loyalty is just *gone*. What do I mean? Well, let's consider the case of anyone who's actually doing war, actually using potions, and actually wants to avoid ever running out of potions. You know potion costs escalate, so there's a huge advantage to spreading out your purchases if you can. You never want to be in a position to have to buy more than one per day if you can avoid it. Your inventory is your buffer to prevent that from happening. Even if you don't expect to burn ten potions in the next war, you still have an enormous incentive to keep buying potions as long as you are not maxed out in your inventory, if you can. If you're not full, and you have loyalty, and you're doing war, you're going to buy potions. Maybe not the little ones, but the little ones also don't matter in terms of cost in the grand scheme of things. Something closes to three million loyalty is going to go towards keeping inventory up that unless the player decides to quit spending potions, they will never actually get back.

The cost to fill war potion inventory is like a security deposit. You pay it with first month's rent, and in theory you get it back eventually, but as a practical matter that money is just gone. You get it back when you move, just like a player can theoretically get that loyalty back by just deciding to stop doing war (or playing it at a level where they know they will never need potions ever again). But so long as a player is reasonably active, so long as they know they will need potions, and so long as potion costs escalate and there's a significant discount to spreading out purchases, that loyalty has essentially been permanently removed from circulation. It is a little more dynamic than that, but that's the bottom line.

Kabam has said that the new potion costs go in now, but the increased loyalty isn't going to be added to the game until the issues with gameplay are fixed and compensation goes away, because in their opinion players shouldn't need those expensive potions until compensation goes away. When players start needing to use them, they will also have the higher loyalty amounts from war. Fair enough. But this line of thinking doesn't account for this somewhat hidden invisible cost of war. Players are, in a sense, being charged three million loyalty to participate in war. Whether you pay it up front or put it on layaway, if you play war at all competitively and make any attempt to play it efficiently, you're eventually going to be paying this three million loyalty. And I don't think this "security deposit" for war has been accounted for anywhere.

Maybe the time to start giving players the enhanced loyalty numbers is now, when they are still getting compensation packages and can use that loyalty to start stocking up for the time when compensation will go away.


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?
«13

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    Isn't that how it's always been? Having a consistent store of Pots and Revs has never been a normalcy on my end. I'll admit I'm not at the top, but it's always been something I start out having and ration throughout the Season based on whether it's worth investing into it or not judging the likelihood of us winning.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    Not to take away from what you're pointing out. I see the increasing scale you described. I'm speaking of having a steady supply in general. I agree there's an issue with amounts that gets worse.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    thepiggy said:

    Isn't that how it's always been? Having a consistent store of Pots and Revs has never been a normalcy on my end. I'll admit I'm not at the top, but it's always been something I start out having and ration throughout the Season based on whether it's worth investing into it or not judging the likelihood of us winning.

    Competitive teams play differently. They have to clear the map in full every war and boost enough to prevent death.

    If you don't save enough potions you have to use units.
    I'm aware of that, but that's never been a guarantee to do free as long as I can remember.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    thepiggy said:

    thepiggy said:

    Isn't that how it's always been? Having a consistent store of Pots and Revs has never been a normalcy on my end. I'll admit I'm not at the top, but it's always been something I start out having and ration throughout the Season based on whether it's worth investing into it or not judging the likelihood of us winning.

    Competitive teams play differently. They have to clear the map in full every war and boost enough to prevent death.

    If you don't save enough potions you have to use units.
    I'm aware of that, but that's never been a guarantee to do free as long as I can remember.
    It was never free and I don't anyone ever claimed that. It costs something...units, glory, time grinding..
    Yes, but I meant it was never a guarantee to get all we need without using Units, whether Grinded for or bought. We have a certain amount acquired by game play, and that's the subject in question. The issue is people are never going to get all they need to play at the highest level without spending Units. War will never be demonitized.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★

    TyEdge said:

    We shouldn’t normalize the expectation that players fully heal and boost every fight.

    Wrong. You should be healing and boosting if are playing competitively. By that I mean tier 4 and above. If my champ is below 60% I usually heal. Sometimes for no reason but that’s the cost of high tier war.
    What they're pointing out is that it's an expectation Alliances are placing on their Members in order to be competitive. That's really what's pressuring people to spend. Not the game mode itself.
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★

    TyEdge said:

    We shouldn’t normalize the expectation that players fully heal and boost every fight.

    Wrong. You should be healing and boosting if are playing competitively. By that I mean tier 4 and above. If my champ is below 60% I usually heal. Sometimes for no reason but that’s the cost of high tier war.
    What they're pointing out is that it's an expectation Alliances are placing on their Members in order to be competitive. That's really what's pressuring people to spend. Not the game mode itself.
    Say SIKE right now!
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★

    TyEdge said:

    We shouldn’t normalize the expectation that players fully heal and boost every fight.

    Wrong. You should be healing and boosting if are playing competitively. By that I mean tier 4 and above. If my champ is below 60% I usually heal. Sometimes for no reason but that’s the cost of high tier war.
    What they're pointing out is that it's an expectation Alliances are placing on their Members in order to be competitive. That's really what's pressuring people to spend. Not the game mode itself.
    Say SIKE right now!
    No. I was being serious. I get the pressure it takes to maintain positions. I also understand that the only ones who make it a dire issue for membership is the Alliances. Contrary to popular belief, the game allows people to lose. It also rewards them based on the results. The ones who can't accept the possibility are the Alliances and their own requirements. There's pressure from playing, and then there's pressure based on expectations. One of those is within the control of Kabam. The other is not.
    It's a competition. There are people who have more means to compete than others. That's not a design flaw.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    thepiggy said:

    TyEdge said:

    We shouldn’t normalize the expectation that players fully heal and boost every fight.

    Wrong. You should be healing and boosting if are playing competitively. By that I mean tier 4 and above. If my champ is below 60% I usually heal. Sometimes for no reason but that’s the cost of high tier war.
    What they're pointing out is that it's an expectation Alliances are placing on their Members in order to be competitive. That's really what's pressuring people to spend. Not the game mode itself.
    The pressure comes directly from the game mode itself by imposing it's scoring system on players.

    Teams don't force boosting and healing because they are a given. Anyone not willing to do those things can't complain because that's what they signed up for.
    Imposing its scoring system? Pretty sure it's a choice to play. It's a choice to compete. It's a choice to accept wherever we Rank. It's a choice to invest, and it's a choice to play without spending. It's not an all-or-nothing game mode, and it awards people at every stage they're at within the minimum requirements. It "imposes" the scoring system because that's the determining factor within the competition, and in a competition, there are winners and losers. None of that is a given. The Rewards are not a stipend. They're earned.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    There is a reason that ~3m😂 is not accounted for, it was never a genuine part of the calculation, previously you had 6k heals and 350hp revives that players would use and stock pile.

    Prior to these changes players had 6000 heals and 350 hp revives giving making an equal security deposit ceiling of 370,000.

    Additionally if you need 10 l3 revives on hand and 10 l4 team heals on hand you’ve got bigger issues to tackle.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Isn't that how it's always been? Having a consistent store of Pots and Revs has never been a normalcy on my end. I'll admit I'm not at the top, but it's always been something I start out having and ration throughout the Season based on whether it's worth investing into it or not judging the likelihood of us winning.

    Yes and no. Yes, it has always been the case that players need to spend just to fill their potion inventories so they can actually function as proper inventory buffers. 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.
    Fair point. It does change things to have one less source.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    Nice to see dna so emotionally involved to the point where no true summoner is an argument.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    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.”
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    Wicket329 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    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.”
    I don’t follow your argument here. DNA is referring to the changes that went live recently to the loyalty-based AW potions. Prior to this point, they made no sense to purchase. They were inefficient, expensive, and had their purposes filled by other more easily acquired items. They did not make sense to buy. I’m not sure that they do even now.
    Those high end pots and revives (argued about, accounted for and under contention) are not meant to be a direct replacement for what was acquired via glory in the past. Glory was specifically 6k heals in the past. (3k if you were lower tier or felt the need to heal beyond 90%hp).
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,552 Guardian

    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    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?
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    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?
Sign In or Register to comment.