Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25730832-20150715144558/@comment-26410416-20150716042333

Ok, continuing from the previous thread:

202.166.14.133 wrote: OatMealFriend wrote: @202.166.14.133

In my opinion the devs have to work to make the game enjoyable for the highest amount of people (from novices to veterans) Meh. You're just saying that because you want the devs to accomodate things to *your level (Rewards and all). You're not saying it because you genuinely care about other new TTKs

Come back in a few months after you have invested a lot of time to do enough LSC, leveling etc. etc. I'll bet that you won't be singing the same tune. Like most vets (if you are one by then), you probably won't say anything at all to "defend" the novices

Your "ideal" is the same as saying you're entitled to beat the elite four and catch legendaries in any pokemon game easily only after a few hours of playing. Or in real life terms, something like "everyone should be getting equal pay no matter how much effort they put into their career". From the 25y/o working at Macdonalds to the 35y/o Junior Doctor who had spent years (and money) on studies

It's just bullshit

Let's leave behind that you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of doing, that is, wanting the developers to cater to "my level". Remember, unless you are one of those who have been playing since mid 2013 and consistently score the highest monthly rewards, there is always scores of players stronger and weaker than you.

Anyway, I'm afraid you are misinterpreting me. I mentioned, repeatedly, in my previous posts that I want events that can accommodate the different "power levels", play styles, experience, commitment, etc. of the player base. In the same way, the challenge and rewards should be balanced to please all these players (from novices to veterans). That would make much better events and as I said, it seems that the developers share this mindset. And no, pleasing the user base doesn't mean giving the same rewards to everyone, this would be quite counterproductive.

Now to explain again my point, think of this:

What do you want as a player?

As you may imagine, it depends. However, I believe it is fair to say that you could accommodate then in several groups:

- Those who want to finish the event and get the basic rewards of it. (Those who want to have fun)

- Those who want everything valuable from the event. (Those looking for a challenge)

- Those who want to brag. (Those who want to suffer)

At this point you could say that the current difficulty system works to classify these 3 groups... however, there is a catch, there are extremely important expectations based on your time playing the game, or for our purpose, HQ lvl. (Something even the game uses)

Basically, all players expect to have some progression in the game, and events are without doubt the biggest progress markers for this. In other words, all players would want to challenge harder difficulties as they progress in the game. However, this comes with a caveat, the game has been around since 2013 and new players join nearly every day. A simple 3 difficulty settings can't possibly accommodate this user base, in fact, when you include the different play styles and commitment, even players with 2 years playing consistently could have entirely different "power levels".

Now, a solution to this would be to include more difficulty settings: that is easy, normal, hard, very hard, ultra hard... and well, pretty much every now and then a new setting would be added to accommodate the oldest players, while the previous settings remain more or less equal for the rest of players. Naturally, each difficulty will come with its respective rewards. Now, this method while functional is just too problematic for the developers: defining and balancing this difficulty settings is just way too much work and will clutter things quickly.

My original proposal was something considerably easier to implement and balance. Basically, by adding more routes in the maps the developers could accommodate far more people under the current 3 categories.

Naturally there are some basic ideas of the overall challenges you should expect from the event. For example, existing maps could be used for reference for what to be considered the basis for "hard" settings. The additional routes could bring better rewards with higher challenges.

By using this, yes!, the previous event wasn't well balanced. In fact, some maps were cleared in hard with low level ships, that should not be possible unless we are talking about masochists with the resources and patience to challenge tests above their expected performance. And food for thought, don't they deserve too a good reward for achieving so much with so little?

Anyway, pursuing a fun, balanced and rewarding experience should be the biggest concern for any developer. This not only helps to keep a happy community, it invites the players to spend their money in the game and bring other players to the game. And at the end of the day the developers do have the tools to identify the nature of their players and adjust the difficulty of the events accordingly. In other words: are the majority of the players veterans? Expect harder events. Are the majority of the players novices? Expect easier events. Neither? Well, then a mixed bag of event is in store.