Shard Economy Changes [MEGA]

Replies

  • You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    Your snarkiness never gets old though. I truly do find it enjoyable. I chuckle often.

    I get you want me to drop it. I’m sure CG wants to drop it too. If we let them, they just keep winning in these situations.

    Stand by your initial statement, CG. Make it right and the issue will be dropped.
  • CG doesn't want or not want you to drop it. It's Kyno's personal motivation to straighten things out on every single topic while feigning objectivity. Though he doesn't realise it hurts more than it helps in most instances.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    Didn't Bulldog do the math & it came to 2 StunGuns a Month.

    So that is 12-18 StunGuns by your own timeline.

    Lets face it the easiest solution wasn't to double the single shard drops, the easiest solution would have been to cut Bronzium cost in 1/2.

    It would have left us with the same amount of shard gear & even given a TINY boost in the form of the crap lowbie gear & creds & resulted in the extremely rare Mk3 Carbanti every couple of months.

    It would have been EASY to leave this as a full positive event instead of the sour taste of loosing 2 Stun Guns a month.

  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CG doesn't want or not want you to drop it. It's Kyno's personal motivation to straighten things out on every single topic while feigning objectivity. Though he doesn't realise it hurts more than it helps in most instances.

    I certainly do not understand his intentions most of the time. And that’s ok. I still respect Kyno. And frankly, I don’t feel he understands my intentions most of the time either.

    I am coming from a place of love. I love that the devs made this game, I am excited that they look to a brighter future and are actively trying to improve that future. I dislike there was a nerf when there is no need for it to occur. Fix it and I’m done.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    edited December 2020
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll see our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.
  • Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CG doesn't want or not want you to drop it. It's Kyno's personal motivation to straighten things out on every single topic while feigning objectivity. Though he doesn't realise it hurts more than it helps in most instances.

    I certainly do not understand his intentions most of the time. And that’s ok. I still respect Kyno. And frankly, I don’t feel he understands my intentions most of the time either.

    I am coming from a place of love. I love that the devs made this game, I am excited that they look to a brighter future and are actively trying to improve that future. I dislike there was a nerf when there is no need for it to occur. Fix it and I’m done.

    It is the non official individual who's taken as official spokesperson and confused as a dev most of the time...who even has access to non public information that becomes a problem which otherwise won't exist.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    edited December 2020
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll see our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I think we agree, I was maybe clunky in my first post you quoted.
  • Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.

    If we are talking long time intervals like "what have I lost in 6 months?", the rng flattens as well.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.

    If we are talking long time intervals like "what have I lost in 6 months?", the rng flattens as well.

    Still more for some and less for others.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    In 6-9 months, I believe the amount of currency would be such. Plenty of math earlier in the thread on how this equates to a stun gun a month. Granted stuns are cheaper. So maybe G11-G12 would be more accurate.

    Plus if people are intelligent with their resource efficiency, they aren’t wasting their ally tokens on nerfed Bronziums until there is a fix. The nerf is circumstantially much larger. Full player data would be required to see how many people have decided to hoard the ally token resource vs spend it. I have no access to such data so it is circumstantial.

    You get 10 bronzum pulls a day for free.

    The math showing a stun gun a month is not accurate, in any real sense of the game.

    I would prefer them put energy over 6-9 months into real economy changes that will help everyone. You may not, but that seems a little short sighted.
  • Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.

    If we are talking long time intervals like "what have I lost in 6 months?", the rng flattens as well.

    Still more for some and less for others.

    Hmm no. Your loss vs. mine will differ, but if we both have a large enough sample of boxes to open our -loss per x ally coins- will be very close.

  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    All of those suggestions have other impacts that have farther reaching effects than you realize and would cause other issues with further changes to other economies.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    In 6-9 months, I believe the amount of currency would be such. Plenty of math earlier in the thread on how this equates to a stun gun a month. Granted stuns are cheaper. So maybe G11-G12 would be more accurate.

    Plus if people are intelligent with their resource efficiency, they aren’t wasting their ally tokens on nerfed Bronziums until there is a fix. The nerf is circumstantially much larger. Full player data would be required to see how many people have decided to hoard the ally token resource vs spend it. I have no access to such data so it is circumstantial.

    You get 10 bronzum pulls a day for free.

    The math showing a stun gun a month is not accurate, in any real sense of the game.

    I would prefer them put energy over 6-9 months into real economy changes that will help everyone. You may not, but that seems a little short sighted.

    I would rather put them energy to both overall economy package and this loss. Your either/or presentation is fallacious.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    Your opinion of me or what I find important does not matter, and is off topic. It is unfortunate that you wasted time to say it. It is unfortunate that I have to waste time addressing it.

    This fix would help everyone. I advocated that gear is the hardest crunch of all many times in this thread.

    They just released the shard fix that hurt gear acquisition. Will the gear economy fix hurt relics? Or mods? We need to look at precedents being set by CG. Gear economy may be addressed. This bronzium issue might also be addressed. Both have been stated as they are being looked into. I would feel better about future updates as a “formerly” paying customer if they didn’t come with a nerf.

    Trust me, I believe you have tried. I’ve seen posts in here about how you think it should be fixed. It isn’t so I’m not stopping.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    In 6-9 months, I believe the amount of currency would be such. Plenty of math earlier in the thread on how this equates to a stun gun a month. Granted stuns are cheaper. So maybe G11-G12 would be more accurate.

    Plus if people are intelligent with their resource efficiency, they aren’t wasting their ally tokens on nerfed Bronziums until there is a fix. The nerf is circumstantially much larger. Full player data would be required to see how many people have decided to hoard the ally token resource vs spend it. I have no access to such data so it is circumstantial.

    You get 10 bronzum pulls a day for free.

    The math showing a stun gun a month is not accurate, in any real sense of the game.

    I would prefer them put energy over 6-9 months into real economy changes that will help everyone. You may not, but that seems a little short sighted.

    I would rather put them energy to both overall economy package and this loss. Your either/or presentation is fallacious.

    Im just being realistic, since they are very unlikely to address this particular issue outside of the plan they have.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    All of those suggestions have other impacts that have farther reaching effects than you realize and would cause other issues with further changes to other economies.

    I would love to hear some of the negative impacts. Please enlighten me.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    In 6-9 months, I believe the amount of currency would be such. Plenty of math earlier in the thread on how this equates to a stun gun a month. Granted stuns are cheaper. So maybe G11-G12 would be more accurate.

    Plus if people are intelligent with their resource efficiency, they aren’t wasting their ally tokens on nerfed Bronziums until there is a fix. The nerf is circumstantially much larger. Full player data would be required to see how many people have decided to hoard the ally token resource vs spend it. I have no access to such data so it is circumstantial.

    You get 10 bronzum pulls a day for free.

    The math showing a stun gun a month is not accurate, in any real sense of the game.

    I would prefer them put energy over 6-9 months into real economy changes that will help everyone. You may not, but that seems a little short sighted.

    I would rather put them energy to both overall economy package and this loss. Your either/or presentation is fallacious.

    Im just being realistic, since they are very unlikely to address this particular issue outside of the plan they have.

    You don't know anything we don't know as in who's assigned to which duty and how hard it's to do something, or do you? If not, that's pure speculation.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    No change, no fix. I just don’t want this to die, but it certainly feels over to me. Many changes could work:

    1. Double full character drops from Bronziums.
    2. Adjust shard shop prices to account for this resulting 10-15% decrease in shard shop gear from the Bronzium nerf.
    3. Reward 1 full character Bronzium daily. 10, 25, 50, or 80 shards a day will not destroy the game.
    4. Reward more shards from other events (GW, Assault Battles, Galactic challenges, Ally token shipments, etc.)
    5. Double ally tokens.
    6. Cut cost of Bronziums in half.
    I’m sure there are many other proposed fixes that would work as well.

    No change doesn’t necessarily mean it was an intentional nerf, but either they DO care and are INCOMPETENT or they simply DO NOT care about the nerf at all. BTW it could still have been an intentional nerf.

    Lastly, I am happy to help new players and am glad CG is taking steps to secure a brighter future for the game, but not by hurting the huge existing player base (evidenced by the huge number of Division 1 players). Please DO something. It is past time.

    Or, as they have stated they will likely be looking at the gear economy too, and this change will be balanced out when they do that. Since they dont like to commit to things that are not "ready" they cannot come out and directly say that.....

    Also lets keep in perspective that actual size of the change, when saying they are "hurting players"

    You are right they did say they were going to look at gear economy. Viewing their “timely” response to other issues we can expect that in 2022. Hyperbole potentially, but you get my point. It IS a nerf NOW.

    I believe I said 10-15% gear from shard shop in the post you quoted. I don’t believe I have exaggerated the degree to which they have hurt our gear farming. I believe the word “hurt” is appropriate as the gear crunch was always harder than the shard crunch.

    Again, helping new players is great.

    Yep, and look at how long that 15% takes to add up to 1 piece of gear. It being a nerf now, and taking 6-9 months to fix, adds up to maybe a couple of full pieces of gear.

    I believe you are undercutting the issue.

    Its math. 15% of daily shard shop currency is not a huge amount. What you buy there are pieces some that need 20-50 to make part of a piece of a piece of gear.

    I have not run the actual numbers so I left my comment vague to say a couple of pieces, but if someone ran the math even for 1 year, I would think its closer to 2 than 10. I think a couple is fitting, maybe a few.

    Happy to meet you at 6, a full gear tier. Could have another relic in the roster. It matters.

    You would have to show your math on that one. I would love to see you close out g13 on 1 toon only from bronzium and the shard shop. That is a stretch.

    In 6-9 months, I believe the amount of currency would be such. Plenty of math earlier in the thread on how this equates to a stun gun a month. Granted stuns are cheaper. So maybe G11-G12 would be more accurate.

    Plus if people are intelligent with their resource efficiency, they aren’t wasting their ally tokens on nerfed Bronziums until there is a fix. The nerf is circumstantially much larger. Full player data would be required to see how many people have decided to hoard the ally token resource vs spend it. I have no access to such data so it is circumstantial.

    You get 10 bronzum pulls a day for free.

    The math showing a stun gun a month is not accurate, in any real sense of the game.

    I would prefer them put energy over 6-9 months into real economy changes that will help everyone. You may not, but that seems a little short sighted.

    Why not both? Their packs team gets a lot done. This could be solved quickly IMO.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.

    If we are talking long time intervals like "what have I lost in 6 months?", the rng flattens as well.

    I think around a year or 2 would definitely be evened out. I’m not a statistician, so you could be right at 6 months too.
  • Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    You can't ever get a universal figure how impactful the change is on average since it's player farming specific.

    Absolutely right. We are also using numbers based upon RNG for all of the math earlier. RNG takes any ability to be accurate out of the equation. This nerf is a larger impact to some than others for sure.

    Double bronzium full character drops then. Double ally token acquisition. Cut in half the price of Bronziums. No change in the shard shop economy with these changes. If they simply double the bronzium full drop, are they not also helping new players get those older characters faster?

    Naw, I don't agree with the rng angle either. You'll our rngs of full drops flatten as the individual samples expands; like from great variety on 100k tokens to much less variety on 1m etc. It the individual acquisition rate of those tokens that differs between all players.

    I know from a player to player standpoint, RNG definitely matters. For some that have fewer ally tokens, they have a smaller sample to work with than say a whale with many ally points. The larger the sample, the overall less impact of RNG.

    I think the RNG impact for the player base as a whole evens out.

    If we are talking long time intervals like "what have I lost in 6 months?", the rng flattens as well.

    I think around a year or 2 would definitely be evened out. I’m not a statistician, so you could be right at 6 months too.

    I threw the 6 months figure pretty randomly but with a basis on how much samples we are getting on this thing. i.e. we can compare it with the most popular event of shard drops, in order to see flatter rng you would need a few hundred samples of this event at the very least...which is hard to reach in short term. Now I don't know the full drop distributions within bronziums (and it differs in between 1*-2*-3*-4* unlocks). But within 100k coin opening we already have 400 samples, within 500k we have 2000 samples.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    I think lack of communication from the devs on this is the real problem. If they are already addressing the gear crunch in an update that will be coming soon (within a month or so), then I completely agree that it isn't worth the time to address this specifically.

    But if the plan is to observe for 6 months and then maybe address the gear crunch at a later time, then it is most definitely worth the time to fix this now with something as simple as adjusting shard shop prices.

    But they haven't said what their plan is. I'm not asking for details since obviously there could be issues but a big picture answer of a rough timeframe would help a lot in this case.
  • Konju
    1142 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    I think lack of communication from the devs on this is the real problem. If they are already addressing the gear crunch in an update that will be coming soon (within a month or so), then I completely agree that it isn't worth the time to address this specifically.

    But if the plan is to observe for 6 months and then maybe address the gear crunch at a later time, then it is most definitely worth the time to fix this now with something as simple as adjusting shard shop prices.

    But they haven't said what their plan is. I'm not asking for details since obviously there could be issues but a big picture answer of a rough timeframe would help a lot in this case.

    Absolutely. I agree 100%.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    I think lack of communication from the devs on this is the real problem. If they are already addressing the gear crunch in an update that will be coming soon (within a month or so), then I completely agree that it isn't worth the time to address this specifically.

    But if the plan is to observe for 6 months and then maybe address the gear crunch at a later time, then it is most definitely worth the time to fix this now with something as simple as adjusting shard shop prices.

    But they haven't said what their plan is. I'm not asking for details since obviously there could be issues but a big picture answer of a rough timeframe would help a lot in this case.

    The phrasing we got is as committal as they will make it at this time. It's not about details, it's just not something they will say more on, much like what Doja tries to explain about his position. They just cant/wont until things are more "real".

    We did get big picture answer, if that's all you are looking for.
    These changes clearly open the door to conversations about other economies, including Gear. Without making promises, we are in the midst of exploring how this could change in the future - but we need to adjust Shard rates first.
  • Gifafi
    6017 posts Member
    So is GG ever going to get a node? Bc his shard shop shards were insanely overpriced BEFORE the change and now...
    Maybe End Game isn't for you
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    I think lack of communication from the devs on this is the real problem. If they are already addressing the gear crunch in an update that will be coming soon (within a month or so), then I completely agree that it isn't worth the time to address this specifically.

    But if the plan is to observe for 6 months and then maybe address the gear crunch at a later time, then it is most definitely worth the time to fix this now with something as simple as adjusting shard shop prices.

    But they haven't said what their plan is. I'm not asking for details since obviously there could be issues but a big picture answer of a rough timeframe would help a lot in this case.

    The phrasing we got is as committal as they will make it at this time. It's not about details, it's just not something they will say more on, much like what Doja tries to explain about his position. They just cant/wont until things are more "real".

    We did get big picture answer, if that's all you are looking for.
    These changes clearly open the door to conversations about other economies, including Gear. Without making promises, we are in the midst of exploring how this could change in the future - but we need to adjust Shard rates first.

    Yes but in the midst of exploring is very vague. People are calling for a fix to this because they assume a 6 month to a year timeframe to the exploring phase. If it's much shorter than that, then your point of it not being worth it is fine.

    But at the very least we should get an answer as to whether they plan to fix the bronizum nerf or if they agree with you that it isn't worth the time.

    We should get a statement similar to one of the following.

    1. We are aware of the community sentiment on the bronizum nerf. We will be adjusting the shard shop prices shortly to make the effects as neutral as possible.

    2. We are aware of the community sentiment on the bronizum nerf. We are currently working on an overhaul of the gear economy and view that it isn't prudent to address this individually since the overall impact will be far less once our overhaul is implemented.

    Still vague enough with no promises but answers one way or the other whether this is going to be addressed separately.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    The original post was “neutral” not minimal. You should know you started the thread. If you choose to take the second statement you have just allowed CG to not stand by their first statement.

    You are correct, I will allow people to get close and keep an understanding that, that was the intention the whole time. I also understand that certain things do not work out the way everyone wants them to, but they are still going to do their best to make things happen.

    I also understand that there is an input of effort vs outcome examination of every situation, and that some projects have a scope that doesnt allow for certain things to be addressed to the fullest extent.

    I also understand that the losses here are fairly minimal, but not "non existant", and IMO if they plan to address it, as they have stated as firmly as they can at this time, then this is a good situation and change that will benefit everyone and I would prefer their time/effort be put into other things than addressing this further.

    I understand you are happy to drop it. Feel free to do so, it is absolutely your right. I am not happy to drop it.

    When every game mode (especially new ones) is dependent upon high gear levels, any nerf to the acquisition of gear is of the most importance to me. The new content rewards being slowed by needing niche faction-based characters and gear for niche factions and nerfing that gear only makes the new content less engaging and rewarding. This is especially important for GC content and the new mod slicing materials IMO.

    Its unfortunate that you would prefer them sink time into this rather than tackling the real economy changes that would help everyone.

    It's also unfortunate that you cant realize that it will be addressed when they make further changes or be overcome by any further changes made.

    I didnt give up, nor do I, never give up on things like this. I pushed for the best outcome, and worked with Doja trying to make a case for this, but there are many factors and I know it may be hard to see and understand , but nothing said at this point will likely cause them to circle back around to this one point and address it any differently than they have planned.

    I think lack of communication from the devs on this is the real problem. If they are already addressing the gear crunch in an update that will be coming soon (within a month or so), then I completely agree that it isn't worth the time to address this specifically.

    But if the plan is to observe for 6 months and then maybe address the gear crunch at a later time, then it is most definitely worth the time to fix this now with something as simple as adjusting shard shop prices.

    But they haven't said what their plan is. I'm not asking for details since obviously there could be issues but a big picture answer of a rough timeframe would help a lot in this case.

    The phrasing we got is as committal as they will make it at this time. It's not about details, it's just not something they will say more on, much like what Doja tries to explain about his position. They just cant/wont until things are more "real".

    We did get big picture answer, if that's all you are looking for.
    These changes clearly open the door to conversations about other economies, including Gear. Without making promises, we are in the midst of exploring how this could change in the future - but we need to adjust Shard rates first.

    Yes but in the midst of exploring is very vague. People are calling for a fix to this because they assume a 6 month to a year timeframe to the exploring phase. If it's much shorter than that, then your point of it not being worth it is fine.

    But at the very least we should get an answer as to whether they plan to fix the bronizum nerf or if they agree with you that it isn't worth the time.

    We should get a statement similar to one of the following.

    1. We are aware of the community sentiment on the bronizum nerf. We will be adjusting the shard shop prices shortly to make the effects as neutral as possible.

    2. We are aware of the community sentiment on the bronizum nerf. We are currently working on an overhaul of the gear economy and view that it isn't prudent to address this individually since the overall impact will be far less once our overhaul is implemented.

    Still vague enough with no promises but answers one way or the other whether this is going to be addressed separately.

    I understand, but then what you are saying is that you want more details, which is fair, but not what you said before.

    Both of those seem to be promising things, IMO, and dont seem to be vague at all. So I think you have different ideas about how committal they can/will be to things like this.
Sign In or Register to comment.