**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
Units are also a closely controlled system that allows us to ensure that there's only X amount available by grinding every day/week/month/year. This has not prevented F2P players from finding great success in the game, and has been the case since the beginning of the game, including most of the game's lifetime that occurred before farming was possible.
The tradeoff is not the same in these cases.
We could try to engineer all content that contains revives to just coincidentally happen to work out so that the time spent grinding them happened to coincide with the amount of time it takes to earn the equivalent amount of units to buy the revives, with not only the same amount of time but also the same amount of actual effort. But that would be pointless. That's a lot of effort to put players back to where they are now. In fact, when you can earn a certain amount of revives or a certain amount of units equal to the cost of those revives with identical amounts of effort and time, it is *always* better to go for the units, because the units are intrinsically more useful, as you can either buy the revives or save them for something else. Revives do not have that flexibility.
A fundamental game economy consideration is that different players use differing amounts of resources and earn them at different rates. There's no way to perfectly balance resources for all players. But if you add more of a certain resource to accommodate the players who need more or who otherwise earn less, you'll be providing those who don't have that limitation a large excess of those resources. If that excess can be converted into highly valuable commodities, then that excess isn't really extra: it fundamentally shifts the economy. Conversely, if you take those excesses away to eliminate that possibility, you constrain other players far more harshly than intended. The obvious solution that literally everyone uses is to apply either caps, limits, or diminishing returns on resource excesses, so that the players who need them more can take advantage of that higher availability to accommodate their needs, while players without those limitations cannot use them to gain too high of an advantage in other areas.
Plus, I'm going to be blunt here. You want them to "restore" the revive situation to its original state, and replace that with removing energy from the game that could be used to farm revives. If you were serious about such a suggestion, you would be recommending energy reductions so harsh that it would be impossible to farm revives in any large scale. But you aren't really suggesting that, are you? Your suggestion is the illusion of constraint without actually constraining anyone.
The entire premise of most F2P games is that you always have a choice: do it for free or do it with the assistance of spending. Doing it for free generally takes more time, more effort, and more skill. The Necropolis is no more "intended" to cost units than Act 5 is.
There is no content in the game that can't be beaten eventually for free with the right roster, the right skillset, and the right amount of practice. The problem is a lot of players have a single player mindset: they think the game is supposed to be balanced around them. If *they* can't do it for free, *today*, then the game is forcing *them* to spend. But the game is not forcing any one player to spend. It simply doesn't care if you spend or not, or for that matter if you ever do the content or not. It presents opportunities, knowing some players will succeed and some will fail, some will do it for free and some will spend.
Even if you could mathematically prove that some Necropolis paths required units, that wouldn't mean the game was forcing players to spend equally. There's a huge difference between a player choosing to spend 8000 units on Necropolis and a player choosing to spend 120. A player spending 120 is essentially spending nothing, unless it is against their religion to spend units. But a player spending 8000 a path is having to make a completely different choice than the first player, and it is a valid choice to consider whether that expenditure is worth it. If it is just gating Valiant, there will certainly be cheaper ways to get Valiant down the road than to spend fifty thousand units exploring Necropolis. But that is for the player to decide. The game isn't forcing that player to do anything. The whole history of the game, in fact, would demonstrate to any observant player that anything that costs a lot today will cost less tomorrow and eventually be achievable for free. The thing that is forcing a player to spend on Necropolis is not the game, it is their own impatience.
But those assumptions have been long broken. Even Proven players have ridiculously strong rosters today relative to what we veterans had when we were doing that level of content. The lower tiers were not made more difficult to make it impossible to autofight (and honestly, I can still autofight everything below UC) it was made more difficult to match the strength of rosters that exist for the average player at those progression tiers. Doing that as a consequence makes it much harder to autofight unless you roster wildly overpowers it, but that's a logical side effect, not the intended effect.
When the change first appeared I told one of the developers that it seemed overtuned to me, because the implication was that Proven players (for example) had rosters of a certain strength - I forget what I calculated, but it was probably something like 5* R2s and R3. And I was told that yeah, because that is what the data showed those players actually had. Essentially, players were running through Act 2 and Act 3 with roster strengths stronger than what we had when we first tackled the Collector in Act 5. That's how much roster inflation has happened from then to now.
Apologies for the character name, it was the wrong choice. Should have gone with “Other Players”.
I was trying to find a way to convey how some of the messaging seemed disconnected.
I get that Kabam needs to control the economy. I get that unintended revive farms are a problem for that.
Maybe it’s semantics, but the part that bugged me was how it was portrayed. The issue isn’t too many revives being used. It’s those revives not costing what they should in the current economy of the game. I understand why that needs reigned in and I’m not bothered by it at all.
It would be greatly appreciated.
Could you give me a preview of your forum posts when you reach the final boss, with say, 3 items left to use, and the flavor of the month bug causes you to die (dropped input, AI behavior, striker whiff, etc, etc, etc), forcing you to restart the entire quest.
This is what it used to be. We went from asking how many units something would cost to complete vs asking where the best spot to farm revives is at.
It would create more outrage than any revive nerf could bring.
Let alone the actual super frustrating situations, like your example would create.
On the topic now.
As a spender, I’m zero affected from revive farming, since I can buy them with units.
Removing revive farming is healthy for the game, but there should be more ways to acquire L1 revives, other than the Apothecary.
Level 1 revives for 20 units in the store, would be a pro player move by Kabam, to help FTP players, that now will have to grind arena a lot to buy the quite costly L2 revives for 40 units.
Additionally the Apothecary could be buffed to give an additional L1 revive on easy difficulty exploration, or increase the drop rate of L2 at higher difficulty from 5% to 10% or 15% 🙂
Apart from that, I disagree that people can grind for units and revives simultaneously. Time is, perhaps the only, finite resource we cannot acquire more of. It's not possible to do one thing in game while also doing another, there are only so many hours in a day. Either grind arena, or grind for revives.
Now if you're saying that the ratios are off, and that Kabam needed to control the flow of revives the same way it controls the flow of units available by playing the game... I understand that. I get the idea that you target a certain amount of resources in game that can be gained with time playing, and that if people want more, they need to pay for them. That's fine, it's not P2W, it's how the game economy works.
But please, say that in the beginning. Don't throw up a smokescreen that revive use trivializes endgame content, which in turn causes an existential threat to the game. Be honest and upfront that it's about unit sales. People may be mad at first, but they'll also respect you for telling them the truth.
Similarly, I respect your responses and engaging in conversation on this issue. I appreciate the level-headed discussion.
USE THOSE UNITS, Kabam want everyone to use units instead of farming revive because everyone is just saving up units for deals and not spending them anywhere and this makes the deals suffer, the price of deals in July4 increased from 15k something to 28k? Why? because players were saving units all year long and Kabam don't want everyone to buy every single deal that easily.
Before revive was a thing and I was act-4 scrub, I did indeed farmed 4000 units for collector. If I knew about 3.2.6 I wouldn't do that.
But I WANT to see improve 3 things, 2 at least.
1. Reduce the % chance for energy refill in 4h crystals, those refills are now just not that needed and perhaps, improve % to obtain revive?
2. Maybe a small, diminutive, slight, miniature, little,tiny buff to Apothecary will be nice, maybe increase the chance to get L-2 revive to 30%?
3. Ability to purchase L-1 revives with units.
Ftfy miike.
Again, revives aren't what's driving profit for the game. Not only that, Kabam isn't getting that revenue anyway. It all goes to Netmarble. Do they have sales goals? Sure. Are they based on what content is released, very unlikely. That's why deals like C.W are around. Those used to be 1 day or 3 days for Christmas. Now they're a week long with more quantity you can buy.
Spare me the fake outrage.