I guarantee that everyone who paid for Deathknight Armor would fill Sirrian’s inbox with complaints if such an armor ever went up for sale at less than $100. And they would have a point.
2 Likes
Free items should be changed but not items u only get through buying. If they are changed Payne customers should get a credit, refund or something else. This is my opinion of the situation
How about we just make gems redeemable for money then? 
i absolutely loved the way blizzard implemented the Diablo 3 real money auction house, however there aren’t any trade able items in this game so i feel its a moot point… but I’ve always loved economy based games, entropia universe and EVE online were a few others i played… 
I like that idea Just lol
even if there was a limit to how much irl money you could redeem per week, but then again its an indie studio so they would probably go bankrupt lol… blizzard has thousands of employees, thats why they were able to.
I think “top 10 guilds get too much stuff” is a faulty generalisation considering the weekly trophy gains of top10 guilds vary vastly anywhere between 3k and 25k or even more.
So while some guilds fueled by their core players who seem like lifeless Gems of War machines do indeed rack up massive amounts of gems, for other guilds that are still to be considered top 10 guilds, the rewards are vastly more reasonable.
So i hope there wont be an overcorrection causing the more reasonable “top guilds” to virtually never be able to mythic up their troops in the future, or have a reasonable shot at getting the base mythic cards of which, with all the support of a top guild, many players still don’t have a single one yet.
Let’s GOOOO clean sweep for everyone let’s start back @ lvl 1 !
The top guild members already got like 50+ cards @ mythic and even some members ascended almost every card to mythic…
Sooo yeah changing the guild task will only affect the weak-mediocre players cuz the late gamers already got EVERYTHING with the thousands of gems/keys so they’re sitting pretty happy cuz no one can catch up lol
Even with thousands of gems and keys weekly… 5 starring all kingdoms is rather difficult
There’s only one more thing I want to say. People bought the DK armor to get bonuses on gold/souls and most probably use that bonus gold for guild tasks to get resources. Decreasing that ability reduces the value of that purchase. Why should I pay for a bonus that gets nerfed months later? My VIP level gets nerfed as well…this seems like reduction of a benefit we paid real money for. Just looking at my guild about half the players have the DK armor, isn’t that the point of this armor to accelerate growth and now we get punished for utilizing it along with VIP points…isn’t this almost like punishing for contributing?
That incredibly wide variance is what makes it difficult to assign appropriate costs. How can everyone have a “reasonable” shot at mythics, whether base or via ascension, when the gap is that wide? Either it’s trivial at the top, or impossible for everyone else. Reducing that variance makes it possible for the developers to provide a better experience for everyone.
Really? Economics is based solely on human decision? And you are lecturing me about my understanding of the word “economy?”
economies are always based on human decisions, don’t you see the irony man?
2 Likes
Because we’re not actually planning on NERFING the Guild Tasks, just reworking the system so that gold donations give a greater variety of stuff, some of which will probably be unique to guild tasks, and may not even be in the game yet.
5 Likes
Okay, plus 1 to you. But I still disagree with your application.
(Hmmmm…that sounds sort of like what I was saying…)
The part where this gets murky is that nothing is rare in a video game, so you have to axe the supply and demand aspect. There are infinite quantities of all resources. In the real world, if some rich guy goes to the store and buys all the food, you go hungry. In the video game, if some guild earns 500,000 gems per week, does that lessen your chance of earning gems? No. The actions of the members have no economic effect on others.
Any kind of “economic” change in the video game has to be effected by the actions of an external party, i.e. one of you guys, and must consist of actually changing code. So it’s not really an economic change. It’s a subjective, decision-based change stemming from your assessment of economic-like factors. This is something you have the right to do and about which I have no issue.
My issue is that huge guild rewards are being presented as a major economic problem when there really isn’t one. Because minus the “hand of god,” the guild rewards have no effect on the availability of any other resource or anybody else’s enjoyment of the game.
That’s all I’m trying to say. If someone will admit that the huge guild rewards in and of themselves have no effect, I’ll shut my trap.
You talked about cosmetics and I think that the Blue armor is a good beggining.
Why not new visual for cards (Christmas Mab for example)?
Path of Exile is a very good example of a free game without any P2W buyables. But they propose this kind of cosmetics that make a player different that the other ones.
For the moment, I cannot see what I can bought in your game that I cannot have by playing…
1 Like
What do you know? You’re just a kid!
1 Like
Yes. The guild level has NOTHING to do with number of tasks completed or resources earned. One can start a new guild with 30 active members and if they play and donate whatever they earn, would get the same resources.
The guild position is “only” effecting the recruitment chance – obviously. But I always see holes and a really active player should not have a problem getting into an active guild.
That’s true if you measure “top 10 guilds” by total trophies since the beginning of the game, but in makes no sense to use that definition in the current context. You need to measure top 10 by the current weekly activity (be it donations or trophies). If you do that, you’ll find that said “generalization” is not as faulty as you think.
No doubt there are reasons that things need to be secretive but there must be value in giving examples of the changes and receiving feedback prior to the changes going live
I feel bad for the direction this convo has turned and really wanted it to be a productive design discussion (sorry @Sirrian!), so let me see if I can explain it:
The Dev team only has so much time in the day to create stuff for the next update so they need it to last, and they need it to last for the top players or else those players will leave. That means they have to design things with the resources of the top players in mind. When resources are too easy to obtain, this leads the Dev team to one of two choices: either restrict the flow by making changes to the source of the problem, or to inflate the costs of subsequent things so the resources go less far (have less purchasing power). This is exactly how national economies work in the real world: if you give out too many dollars then a single unit is no longer actually worth a dollar. This can lead to a spiral and the next thing you know it costs $10,000 dollars for a loaf of bread bc the currency has been devalued. (This has happened many times throughout the world, one of the best examples being Zimbabwe about 20 years ago.)
This latter inflation scenario is what @Mr.Strange is referring to. If top players can get massive amounts of resources then the devs have to design new systems with those resources in mind. Doing this negatively impacts newer players bc they’re at such a disadvantageous starting point and see such crazy high costs that they will just go to another game. (And, as mentioned above, the game must be friendly to new players or it will wither and die. This also has a real world corollary: All populations have a “replacement rate” that’s necessary to sustain them or else they’ll disappear.)
So when the devs talk about the economy, they’re talking about the rates at which players can earn resources and how those rates affect balance and design decisions for the development of the game and its content. They’re humans and they make mistakes, and this particular one is leading to a lot of inflation (as top players pull in excessive amounts of resources), which needs to be corrected for the long-term health of the game.
5 Likes