View Single Post
Old 07-20-2020, 01:16 PM   #110
doublezero
Bat Boy
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by waittilnextyear View Post
(1) Most players will not complete the FOTF series of missions right as they come out, but there are a few that will. Personally, I just completed the Padres for 100 Gwynn and that cost me a bit over 200k on top of the assets I already had. I probably won't do the other FOTFs, at least not right away. But, let's not mistake completing something the week it comes out with not completing it all fall/winter etc. I think it's good to have an aspirational set of missions that can be done over time. People can chip away as they grumble about whales and about how the game is a disaster. With the new pyramid structure, most of these teams that are complaining or can't afford the new FOTF (at least initially) probably aren't in position to compete with those that do anyway.

(2) I don't think juicing the pack odds is a bad idea, but I'm not even sure if they can change that mid-cycle. I also think releasing the hounds with supply undercuts people that have valuable supplies and I know people with a scarce 300-400k Roger Connor aren't going to want to see that price get halved because the pull rates have gone out of control. I think FOTF is the best and most straightforward way to prop up the entire marketplace through increasing demand. It also builds in more opportunities for speculation income, and that has been a staple of F2P teams since the inception of this mode. Maybe if the balance is off, gone too far toward demand, then they hit us with another pack/PP sale sometime soon. They did this type of thing in PT20, my speculation is they did this to ease the bottleneck problem for certain missions.

(1, again) I'm not sure. But most games have gone the way of the microtransaction. People know what this game/mode is and know that you can either spend or work at it, or do both. Those that spend and work will always have an edge. These are the teams that will do FOTF quickly. Those that work can make up for much of their disadvantage at choosing not to spend. Those that spend and don't work can also be dumb money and can get beaten to the punch by better F2P teams. Everyone might be able to do some/all of FOTF over time. Problem is people can't have it all. And especially not for free. If people are just now realizing that, then they can always hop over to another title. If they've invested $0, there's not much sunk cost.
There's greedy then there's this game, which is the very definition of a money sinkhole meant for whales and privileged individuals. I was actually okay with it until they went over the edge this year with missions that lead to other missions, which meant one single mission wasn't enough to be competitive and get a decent return. Now it takes 4 missions to get a decent reward. And because they've increased the curve, now it's hard to be competitive without spending at least 50 dollars once, which is what I did a few months ago. So the balance is way off in my opinion and I don't feel I was getting a new game or a brand new experience for 50 dollars. Even with that investment, I don't think it would be possible to complete the FOTF missions anyways, so the cost has just gotten too extreme for the return. The next thing you know they'll have 10 mission ultimate combos for some ridiculous reward. I get that this is the perfect vehicle to get plenty of money via the rich %10 but I don't think it's very ethical as a viable "game". I'm sure I'll get told not to play if I don't like it, which is passive aggressive BS. The amount of missions has now skewed the auction house and the curve about as far to the extreme as I've ever seen it. I'm perfectly fine contributing money but missions leading to missions leading to missions is too much. I'm not contributing another 50 dollars. It's not going to happen.

Last edited by doublezero; 07-20-2020 at 01:20 PM.
doublezero is offline   Reply With Quote