Hello,
I always play the TIER 3 credit Heist battles. I still don't understand why EA/CG designed it so you can score lower rewards (e.g. $1.5M) in the Tier 3 battles than if you played the TIER 2 OR TIER1 battles. The higher tier battles presumably should always provide greater rewards than lower tiers.
The Tier rewards bands overlap significantly.
so basically, over time, isn't it theoretically possible that no matter - whether it's Tier 1, 2, or 3 - each Player can be receiving the SAME average payout of a certain amount like $2 M per battle, In other words, there is a cap on the rate at which we can accumulate rewards. T3s lower range ($1.5M) shouldn't be the mid-range of T2, should it?
I'm just waking up so I don't know if I'm calculating, communicating, evaluating this right.
0
Replies
Yes but the amount of times people receive the 1.5 mil is insane. (myself at least 6-8 times)
I'm not saying tier 3 has given out at least 6-8 1.5 mil but the 1.5 mil in tier 4 should have the same RNG as 10 mil which is almost never received.
+INFINITY
Trust me, it is.
i got 1.5 mil again and none of my scoundrels ever lose protection
1.5mil is 1mil less than the normal 2.5mil. 10mil on the other hand is a whopping 7.5mil more. So you can get 1.5mil seven times, 10mil one time and you're still better of than the normal 2.5mil. That kinda justifies 10mil being less common.
that said, i ofcourse wouldn't mind more credits eventhough i'm not suffering from the so called "creditcrunch"
Yea but 1.5 mil is a slap in the face. And 10 mil is a miracle. I shouldn't expect to get either but i always seem to get 1.5 mil.
Not to mention the vast majority have never seen 10 million drop, ever, while I'm quite sure just about everyone has gotten the 1.5 slap in the face.