Let's be honest, there are really no other benefits to reaching the higher levels of progression...
Valroz
Member Posts: 211 ★★
A...subject continued...(Uncollected, Cavalier, Thronebreaker, Paragon, ? (someday)...except:
1. Access to later end game content whether story mode or the monthly EQ/side/"sub-side" events like EOP)
2. Cheaper cost of items in the stores
3. Access to higher tier rank up materials
4. The "title" to show off what rank you are
5. Access to better rewards in the unit store or offers
(Nothing here really directly benefits the Summoner per se in terms of negotiating the actual fighting except of being able to grow your roster faster than someone who is lower rank than you).
B. Why doesn't the Kabam game dev team consider providing the following as you progress in summoner rank:
1. Additional levels (10 more would be nice)
2. Additional masteries (10 more would be optimum)
3. Access to certain special nodes or pre-fight abilities not available to lower ranks
Imagine if Kabam considers "B," for a moment. It solves a plethora of problems. Allowing higher tier players to have access to levels, masteries and special nodes will enable them (us) to negotiate more end game content with the power and abilities justified for their rank. The highly problematic mystic path in this month's newly released Thronebreaker difficulty level EQ will be mitigated and/or compensated for that special power that a Thronebreaker or Paragon player will have (like a semi-direct counter for the node that will lessen its harshness).
While this might be an unfair or comparing-apples-to-oranges comparison, imagine a Level 60 Fighter's only difference with a Level 30 fighter is that he can buy a +5 Plate Mail cheaper from the blacksmith. But in actual combat they are at par with their fighting abilities. Or a Level 60 Wizard's fireball has the same damage as the fireball of a Level 30 Wizard.
There are so many ways to spin this off. It's just really frustrating, after reaching Paragon, there's not much difference from an Uncollected player except those I stated in "A".
Thoughts?
1. Access to later end game content whether story mode or the monthly EQ/side/"sub-side" events like EOP)
2. Cheaper cost of items in the stores
3. Access to higher tier rank up materials
4. The "title" to show off what rank you are
5. Access to better rewards in the unit store or offers
(Nothing here really directly benefits the Summoner per se in terms of negotiating the actual fighting except of being able to grow your roster faster than someone who is lower rank than you).
B. Why doesn't the Kabam game dev team consider providing the following as you progress in summoner rank:
1. Additional levels (10 more would be nice)
2. Additional masteries (10 more would be optimum)
3. Access to certain special nodes or pre-fight abilities not available to lower ranks
Imagine if Kabam considers "B," for a moment. It solves a plethora of problems. Allowing higher tier players to have access to levels, masteries and special nodes will enable them (us) to negotiate more end game content with the power and abilities justified for their rank. The highly problematic mystic path in this month's newly released Thronebreaker difficulty level EQ will be mitigated and/or compensated for that special power that a Thronebreaker or Paragon player will have (like a semi-direct counter for the node that will lessen its harshness).
While this might be an unfair or comparing-apples-to-oranges comparison, imagine a Level 60 Fighter's only difference with a Level 30 fighter is that he can buy a +5 Plate Mail cheaper from the blacksmith. But in actual combat they are at par with their fighting abilities. Or a Level 60 Wizard's fireball has the same damage as the fireball of a Level 30 Wizard.
There are so many ways to spin this off. It's just really frustrating, after reaching Paragon, there's not much difference from an Uncollected player except those I stated in "A".
Thoughts?
11
Comments
I'd say the biggest benefit to your account is pushing progression.
You ever notice UC/Cav players complaining about the lack of T5CC? I've seen a ton of reddit posts and had a few alliance members say they have trouble getting materials for R3s, which is pretty much a non issue for TB+ players (maybe not newer TB). Same thing for R4s, you're gonna have a much easier time getting R4 materials (unless you spend or get lucky during banquet) once you're TB.
Then there's the stores. You already mentioned it but I feel like you kinda downplayed it. You need to be Cav to get 6 star shards from BGs, and getting paragon cuts the price of shards by 1/3. That's pretty huge. Then there's the catalyst and glory stores which have items and priced locked behind progression.
To a lesser extent there's also the monthly events which have stores that are locked by progression. They usually cap at Cav+ tho which is long over due for a TB or even Para level.
I do think they could reward or do more for Paragon players, though. But pushing story content is still the best way to expand your account imo.
50 daily uncollected crystals wouldnt even come close to a single TB daily crystal.
bro you got some outlandish thoughts...
This sums up what I said, basically.
There should be at least some kind of fighting "perk" provided for every level of advancement in rank progression.
Maybe a better metaphor or analogy would be the mythic rank in the popular Pathfinders Game series by Owlcat. When you get to Mythic rank, your character will be given special powers that is not available before you reached the mythic status.
@Crusaderjr I never said to take out whatever is already the rewards system. My concern is the fighting power or ability. Everything stays the same except that Kabam consider adding perks that will be commensurate to the rank you are in.
Or maybe the relics mechanic can be incorporated into this idea of giving a fighting perk on a summoner's rank in the game?
Of course it's cool to be Paragon and all but there should be more than just easier game economics that benefits reaching Paragon.
I think not.
You see where your analogy with another game isn't 100% correct?
Shouldn't your comparison be: You're using an R4 6* as an Archmage (Paragon) vs a "Pre-Archmage" (Thronebreaker) also using an R4 6* doing the same damage? Both of you are Level 60, except as Paragon, you have reached Mythic status (of sorts).
Shouldn't you have at least 1 strategic advantage as a Paragon over the Thronebreaker in dealing damage, all else being equal.
Yes, I agree, Pathfinders Wrath of the Righteous might not be the best game to compare but it's the only game I can think of at the moment that can somewhat get my point across. haha
Okay this is a long shot. Shouldn't the Catholic Pope have special privilege over the other Cardinals who are technically also his level, except that he is Pope? LOL. Pope would be a Level 60 Cleric casting a Turn Undead Spell vs Cardinal also Level 60 Cleric casting Turn Undead ... the Pope should turn more undead right? haha.
I think that's alot of staff you get when you progress.
Let me turn your first analogy around: i shouldn't have an advantage with a 6r4 (paragon) vs the same 6r4 (thronebreaker). Correct that we're both lvl 60 but the one with mythic status (paragon) has much more access to r4 materials that he will have more 6r4. So while thronebreakee will have 1 or 2 (3 at most) options, the paragon player will at least have 4 options at that power level.
I hope I explained myself well. You can't compare mcoc to the genre of games you mentioned because roster building is such a great aspect of mcoc. You aren't just one character but you are all the characters in your roster.
Paragon have more r4s then thorn breaker
Thorn-breaker have less r4 but more r3 then cavs
cav player may have less r3 but more 6* then uncollected
Uncollected have less 6* but more r4 5* then conqueror and ect.
This games progress level isn’t linked to how well they fight (although it may have a small part) its mainly the depth of their roster level.
Until they can resolve that issue, no new masteries. And without new masteries to unlock no new levels. Levels are gates to other stuff, not things unto themselves. Without particularly important stuff to gate, more levels is pointless.
The OP is basically saying "the game could do more." Which is always true. But every thing you ask for is something else you don't get to have, and you also don't get to decide which things to trade because different things require different areas of expertise and workload. You want new masteries, you can't just say well, I'll trade relics for those. You may lose things like EoP and Gauntlet instead. You might lose champion updates. Or because new masteries will change the balance metrics across the entire game, maybe what you lose is reward updates for the next two years.
Anyway, from your vantage, I totally agree that the introduction of new masteries and new levels will most likely compromise other existing "perks" of higher rank players.
Perhaps I've been too persistent relentless in comparing MCOC to a traditional Dungeons and Dragons game which both operate on very difficult mechanics, mainly that MCOC is really an action/fighting/collecting game while a game like Pathfinders is RPG/adventure/strategy.
More mastery points would allow that.
Inequity and Resonance look interesting, but they are hard to justify with the current mastery budget.
Would it be nice to have some kind of added base power? Sure. Oh ****. We do. Mastery points.
I will admit titles alone don’t feel like enough. And getting a daily crystal with a mostly junk base pool doesn’t really feel like a reward.
So sure things need to get better.
But another 10 mastery points would go a long way towards that.
The problem is that PnP games and (MMO)RPGs have one critical fundamental difference that makes how we judge balance completely different. Pathfinder (and D&D 5e) are both relatively well balanced when judged as PnP games. But if we judge them by the same standards as online games, they are childishly, unimaginably broken. What is the difference that makes the standard so different?
PnP games have human game masters.
Human GMs are the regulating presence that makes PnP games function. Pathfinder is not the Pathfinder 2e books. The game isn't in those books. Pathfinder is Pathfinder 2e filtered through a human being, which if you have an even half-way decent GM is a hundred times more complex and complete than the rulebooks themselves. They prevent the game's rules from being exploited to the point of completely destroying the game.
MCOC doesn't have a GM. If there is even the slightest bit of breakage anywhere, someone is going to find it and exploit it. And while hundreds of thousands of players play Pathfinder or D&D, a game typically has less than a dozen players who all (usually) have a vested interest in not breaking the game. MCOC is played by hundreds of thousands of players *none* of whom have a vested interest in not finding and exploiting the absolute best possible performance they can get out of the game.
Paizo can introduce any mechanics they want, any additions they want, any modifications or extensions they want, and if they are broken there are thousands of GMs ready to reject them to protect their games. If Kabam introduces a breakage, well we know from experience what happens next.
The dynamics of PnP social role playing games is fundamentally different from that of online MMORPGs and similar games like MCOC. It would be like if there was just one massive Pathfinder campaign going on 7x24, with one super GM running it all, and all of his or her rulings were absolute, binding, and inescapable, and the vast majority of players playing this campaign had no idea who you were and had no reason not to simply TPK your alliance when they stumbled upon it just to get the better loot and then disappear back into anonymity. Pathfinder's rules would probably be a lot more rigorous, a lot more explicit, and a lot more tightly controlled than they are now.
There are players who take inequity and/or resonance. They looked at the same masteries you did, but they made a different choice. If there were enough mastery points to allow you to take those, and allow the people who took them to take what you took instead, then in effect your choices would matter less, because you both would get more of what you want, and in the process look more alike. Choice would no longer differentiate you, and as a result choice would cease to matter.
Games and game design are fundamentally about choice. Creating choices, presenting choices, and ensuring that choices matter.