Removal of Revive Farming and the Apothecary Discussion

1313234363756

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 37,167 ★★★★★
    Mr_West said:

    Lucrative to the players?
    That's what I meant, yes. I'm not feeding this narrative of Kabam vs. Players.
  • Mr_WestMr_West Member Posts: 18

    That's what I meant, yes. I'm not feeding this narrative of Kabam vs. Players.
    It did help offset the cost of doing end game content, but that’s what I’ve been saying.
  • Mr_WestMr_West Member Posts: 18
    DNA3000 said:

    The last piece of content I attempted and failed was the Maze. If the last piece of content I attempted was the Maze, then you are using a time machine to talk to me in 2019.

    The very next sentence says "if it came and went after that, I completed it at its highest difficulty." That's all the Boss Rushes, all the celebrity challenges, all the special one time quests, the Gauntlet, Summer of Pain, and all of the weekly EoP quests. All points, all milestones, all achievable rewards. The only EoP content I haven't done yet are the permanent EoP objectives, as I mentioned. I don't think that counts as "barely did EoP."
    Did you farm revives to offset spending?
  • Kratos_charlyKratos_charly Member Posts: 14
    There is no kabam vs player, it's just their game and they're going to do what they want with it. Users have every right to complain because most of them like this game and they don't want to leave it. but many of us don't want a pay-to-win either and if not there is no choice but to leave the game then no way. In the end, they seem to have many more compliant players, who will simply adapt and always applaud Kabam's decisions, no matter how bad they are.
  • Mr_WestMr_West Member Posts: 18
    DNA3000 said:

    Enough to be able to tell you that the revives in 3.2.6 cost 32.9 energy per revive on average, assuming you use the optimal path strategy, and if you include the energy capturable with the optimum strategy.
    So a lot. Probably more that me. Yet you still think that this isn’t a terrible idea aimed at nothing more than increasing spending? I understand that this is a business and they must remain profitable, but this strikes the wrong note and will end up costing them more than money and the community more than revives.
  • This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 37,167 ★★★★★
    Mr_West said:

    Then the chef comes out and says the fork and knife cost extra. Pick it up and take a bite or pay more for the tools to eat it. Are you going to continue to frequent that establishment?
    That's not what we're looking at here. Revives are still available for zero dollars. What isn't on the "table" is an unlimited supply for a nominal cost of Energy.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 37,167 ★★★★★

    You're missing the fact that the challenging content is challenging regardless of how many revives you use. That's actually the point of the content, is that you have to use dozens and dozens of revives to get through it. If they didn't intend for that then they did a terrible job designing it and need to nerf all of the everest content considerably.

    If Kabam really wanted to make challenging content only doable by highly skilled players, they would put a revive cap on that content. They didn't do that. Instead they only limited the amount of revives you can get for free. They literally did nothing to stop people from "spamming revives" to get through difficult content. Now you just have to buy those revives.

    It's disingenuous at best and a straight up lie at worst.

    Is the revive farm extreme and could it be toned down a little? Sure, absolutely. But the fact that the game is overrun by bugs and modders and the thing they choose to address is to take away free revives from players, and then spout off some completely BS and flawed reasoning for doing it is why people are upset.
    People are upset because it was an easy-breezy way of getting them. I'm sorry if that offends people, but that's really the crux.
    I've been playing for over 7 years. I haven't farmed. Not because I consider myself above it. I just never looked for easier avenues. As long as I've been playing, if I'm attacking a particularly challenging piece of content, I save up as many Pots and Revs as I can muster, AND go in with a certain amount of Units on-hand. That's been the general suggestion for years now.
    No content requires people to spam the lower Acts for Revs. That's just not a thing when it comes to the design of the game, and I'd bet my bottom dollar that no content was designed with that in mind, or the preface that people can just spend ad nauseum *muahahaha*. It takes patience, planning, and forethought. That's it.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,622 Guardian
    Mr_West said:

    So a lot. Probably more that me. Yet you still think that this isn’t a terrible idea aimed at nothing more than increasing spending? I understand that this is a business and they must remain profitable, but this strikes the wrong note and will end up costing them more than money and the community more than revives.
    Opposing this change on principle would go against everything I've ever stated about good game design. So changing my mind just because it impacts me personally would be hypocritical.

    I *can* oppose the details, if I discover a problem with the details. But I won't oppose a change the developers make that is clearly (to me) targeted at infinite farming of resources being used in end game content without some really good overriding reason.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,622 Guardian
    Mr_West said:

    I oppose the details they listed. Do you? The explanation given is clearly not true, and the proposed solution proves that.
    I'm not sure why you believe the provided explanation isn't true, because that exact situation is something I've mentioned more than once on the forums as being a very problematic one. Had you put me in charge of the game economy a year ago, some sort of change would have happened a year ago.

    Proposing a solution you like better doesn't prove someone is not sincere in their belief there is a specific problem. I doubt you would accept such reasoning yourself: if you claim there's a problem and propose a solution, and I propose one I like better but you disagree, I couldn't use that fact to prove you were insincere.

    As to the specifics, I'm still thinking them over.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Mr_WestMr_West Member Posts: 18
    DNA3000 said:

    I'm not sure why you believe the provided explanation isn't true, because that exact situation is something I've mentioned more than once on the forums as being a very problematic one. Had you put me in charge of the game economy a year ago, some sort of change would have happened a year ago.

    Proposing a solution you like better doesn't prove someone is not sincere in their belief there is a specific problem. I doubt you would accept such reasoning yourself: if you claim there's a problem and propose a solution, and I propose one I like better but you disagree, I couldn't use that fact to prove you were insincere.

    As to the specifics, I'm still thinking them over.
    The timeframe for farming free revives/ expiration and storage limits is what makes me say that. Give us the equivalent units everyday and I would change my mind.
  • krystolixkrystolix Member Posts: 122 ★★
    Soooo what telling us is you guys make extreme content, and expect us to go in with little resources to complete it. The option now being doing a daily quest that MIGHT give us an extra revive. I couldn't care less about the potions. Potions to me are useless. Revives are worth infinitely more and cost lest units (hmmm weird). Would be cool if we had a limit of 50 for items like that. But I doubt that'll happen. BUT HEY!!! We can still BUY infinite revives! So that's good!
This discussion has been closed.