Why Not Give Each Side Their Weapons.

[Ksdsdf]

Should have lock the side from the very damn start of the event. The switching side and the current reward make it one sided. That's the real problem here.

[GeoffFromAccounting]

See this.

 

 

I did, I must be blind (or my brain's not working, it is 7:45pm after all) because I'm still missing it

[Taranis49]

And DE would really have to make the cost to build the gun obscene to make it a clear inconvenience, especially since this event keeps rewarding rare materials left and right.

 

I posted a more in depth "method to my madness" earlier, so I'll just repost it here.

 

 

Somebody likes their hyperbole, it seems - first there's the notion that it wouldn't be hard to potato the weapon of choice "with all the taters we've gotten" (the event's only offered two catalysts total, and I'm obviously not the only person that missed atleast one).

 

The event also doesn't "reward rare materials left and right", out of the five active nodes (as of this posting), only one offers rare resources. The only rare material reward that's been offered more than once are cells (for a grand total of two times). The Control Modules that drop within the missions? The only weapons that use them are clantech. By contrast, the rare resource most frequently used for sidearms (i.e. Neurodes) were only offered once that I know of, and if you're grinding the event, you're not farming them.

 

Fact is, DE rigged the event at the start rather than actually letting the chips fall where they may - they point-blank admitted as much when it came to Gradivus and the early rewards, which definitely tainted the game... and I say this as a Grineer supporter. Typically, when it's shown that a game gets rigged or its played from an uneven field, it's actually the winners that usually end up forfeiting everything they worked for, even when they didn't knowingly do anything wrong themselves.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Taranis49

[Boomstick720]

I did, I must be blind (or my brain's not working, it is 7:45pm after all) because I'm still missing it

Basically what I'm trying to say is that the current way of their reward system is the "least terrible".  The suggested way, while at face value makes more sense, actually will more likely than not cause more conflict, and unlike with standard weapons, a simple fix is not likely, particularly when one weapon isn't even on the market anymore.  The fact is that one, possibly two, weapon(s) is bound to be better than the faction counterpart, and whoever is the "loser" in this situation is not going to be happy, particularly if its the grineer.  By only releasing one weapon at a time, they do a few things.  

 

1. They make it so they don't have to spend even more time rebalancing all 4 weapons, which would cause more work and more delays on updates.

 

2. They get a more focused response to the effectiveness of the weapon, rather than everyone and their mother comparing the counterparts and talking about how awful one is compared to the other.

 

3. They have another opportunity to develop a different set of weapons for a similar future event (I would be surprised if this type of event never occured again).

 

 

Somebody likes their hyperbole, it seems - first there's the notion that it wouldn't be hard to potato the weapon of choice "with all the taters we've gotten" (the event's only offered two catalysts total, and I'm obviously not the only person that missed atleast one).

 

The event also doesn't "reward rare materials left and right", out of the five active nodes (as of this posting), only one offers rare resources. The only rare material reward that's been offered more than once are cells (for a grand total of two times). The Control Modules that drop within the missions? The only weapons that use them are clantech. By contrast, the rare resource most frequently used for sidearms (i.e. Neurodes) were only offered once that I know of, and if you're grinding the event, you're not farming them.

 

Fact is, DE rigged the event at the start rather than actually letting the chips fall where they may - they point-blank admitted as much when it came to Gradivus and the early rewards, which definitely tainted the game... and I say this as a Grineer supporter. Typically, when it's shown that a game gets rigged or its played from an uneven field, it's actually the winners that usually end up forfeiting everything they worked for, even when they didn't knowingly do anything wrong themselves.

 Somebody likes conspiracies, it seems.  The fact is, people complaining about how the event is "rigged" are either too naive to understand how awful the alternative is, or too dead set on finding some reason to hate DE (for a forum for people who play this game, I'm still shocked with how many people fit this profile).  Do you really think that the outcome would be so much more fair if this was random?  Have you seen how "effective" RNG is in determining fairness?  I'd rather have it supposedly "rigged", because then at least there is some chance for fairness.

 

Resources, aside from orokin cells, are really fairly easy to come by.  Xini drops neurodes like candy, morphics are probably the easiest to find rare resource, and neural sensors are pretty frequent on jupiter survival and defense missions.  Again, the only resource that I consistently have trouble finding are the damn orokin cells, as it seems that only Ruk drops them ever. 

 

I always try to keep a spare catalyst on me when I can, because I can never tell when something will be released that I really want, or if I have some clan tech that could use a bit more oomph.  

[Volthorne]

I don't mean to sound like a $&*^, but do you understand the meaning of the term "loose"?  Generally speaking, it means that it is directly related to the topic at hand, but in a different way.  A "loose" analogy of the situation would be if you were given 100 hours to get the new concept, and the winner gets paid for his work plus any related royalties, and the loser gets paid for his work.  To think that they owe you for playing their game is kind of disturbing to be honest.  If you don't want to play, then don't.  They don't owe you money, you pay for their service.  If you aren't satisfied, then say so, but don't act like you are the one holding all the cards.  No one is forcing you to play, so you might be more satisfied going somewhere else.

My point was that in real life it's unacceptable to F*** over everyone but the guy who ended up doing the best - those graphic designers/artists are all going to get paid for the time they worked, no matter whose concept/artwork gets the final go-ahead. Under slightly different circumstances, the Corpus players would not be getting #*($%%@ over twice (once for the Wrachete - although arguably it is damned cool - and once for the turdgun). Essentially, we're doing all the fighting for the Corpus and then we're not being paid (if you're going to argue we are getting paid, just by the Grineer, then you need to ask the question "why the hell are the Grineer paying people who tried to actively kill them?").

 

And yes, DE does - in theory - owe us for playing their games. Clearly you don't understand the F2P concept. Here, let me lay it out in some short points:

 

1) Game developer company makes game

2) They put it out as F2P

3) They HOPE enough people come and play and spend enough money for the staff to buy food for the next month

4) If they want to try and entice the first few "buyers" in, they make a faux-kickstarter "Founder's" package (I use the term "faux" in the most basic sense, since the game has already been made, whereas with a Kickstarter all the guys doing the pitch generally have to produce is a proof of concept and then when the Kickstarter goes through they start the actual work... usually. If it's a sure-fire thing like Star Citizen, then the Developers will start work before the funding process even finishes.)

5) If people stop paying/playing then the game FAILS

 

This is different from games like Call of Duty (I feel dirty for having to use it as an example) where you buy the game and then the Developers can give not even a single F*** if you stop playing. F2P game Devs should be constantly worrying how they're going to keep current players playing and entice new players in. If they're not, then they're either Riot Games (playerbase is basically self-sustaining) or they're Hi-Res (theoretically worst Devs ever, managed to kill off 3 separate titles at last count) equivalents.

 

Edited for clarity.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Volthorne

[Potcat]

Question: if we're all Tenno and thus all under the same flag, why aren't we all voting for the "let everyone be happy" option? Why are we letting people we normally kill for fun, profit and experience get between what should be a united effort against a common enemy, regardless of the enemy's faction? We all know that we'll never see those captured Tenno again; our enemies are paying good rewards to see to that. Most of us are fighting based on reward. Why not demand a better reward from our employers? Why settle for this terrible blueprint from the Corpus when you can demand the real prize? Let the fools fight their own battle until they come up with something better. Strategically, this is the best outcome we can hope for. 

End the fighting today! Demand better payment for fighting the harder war! If we're going to be mercenaries, then damn it we should be highly paid mercenaries, and we should hold the interests of ours in this war far more than that of the Corpus or the Grineer. 

Love thy fellow Tenno, and demand a better payment today! 

[Boomstick720]

My point was that in real life it's unacceptable to F*** over everyone but the guy who ended up doing the best - those graphic designers/artists are all going to get paid for the time they worked, no matter whose concept/artwork gets the final go-ahead. Under slightly different circumstances, the Corpus players would not be getting #*($%%@ over twice (once for the Wrachete - although arguably it is damned cool - and once for the turdgun). Essentially, we're doing all the fighting for the Corpus and then we're not being paid (if you're going to argue we are getting paid, just by the Grineer, then you need to ask the question "why the hell are the Grineer paying people who tried to actively kill them?").

 

And yes, DE does - in theory - owe us for playing their games. Clearly you don't understand the F2P concept. Here, let me lay it out in some short points:

 

1) Game developer company makes game

2) They put it out as F2P

3) They HOPE enough people come and play and spend enough money for the staff to buy food for the next month

4) If they want to try and entice the first few "buyers" in, they make a faux-kickstarter "Founder's" package (I use the term "faux" in the most basic sense, since the game has already been made, whereas with a Kickstarter all the guys doing the pitch generally have to produce is a proof of concept and then when the Kickstarter goes through they start the actual work... usually. If it's a sure-fire thing like Star Citizen, then the Developers will start work before the funding process even finishes.)

5) If people stop paying/playing then the game FAILS

 

This is different from games like Call of Duty (I feel dirty for having to use it as an example) where you buy the game and then the Developers can give not even a single F*** if you stop playing. F2P game Devs should be constantly worrying how they're going to keep current players playing and entice new players in. If they're not, then they're either Riot Games (playerbase is basically self-sustaining) or they're Hi-Res (theoretically worst Devs ever, managed to kill off 3 separate titles at last count) equivalents.

 

The fact that our money keeps the game alive does not mean that we owe the devs something.  This is how literally every business survives, off of people purchasing their product.  Look at it this way.  Generally, most F2P models treat their game as complete, but you need to buy certain aspects to get the full experience.  Now most F2Ps do this by locking certain content behind paywalls, or making certain content impossible unless you purchase certain items.  At the end of the day, you are paying for the service.  If anything, you owe them for offering you this product, and then you, literally can choose whether or not you want to pay for it.  Can you imagine doing this literally anywhere else?  Like go to a McDonalds, get a Big Mac, and then don't pay for it unless you liked it and want more.  I'm sure that would go over well.  Or perhaps go and take a new computer, and then decide whether or not you want to pay for it in the next month.  And hey, if you can't, then no big deal, just keep the computer.  You might not be able to get absolutely everything you want, but you still get to have it for free.  

 

There is some truth to what you are saying though.  They do rely on people constantly purchasing things, but one thing you fail to realize is that people are purchasing these things not out of the goodness of their heart (at least not most people), but because they want to play more of the game.  They like what they received, again for free, so they are willing to pay money to receive more of it.

 

Its like a trial demo you see on a lot of software programs.  It works for a while, and then it stops working until you decide to pay for it.  You liked the software, you will probably pay for it.  You didn't like the software, you probably won't.  But to assume that just by trying the software you have somehow put yourself above the people who developed it reeks of such insane arrogance I don't even want to go into it.  One bullsh*t line that I hate that everyone says is that the "customer is always right".  Bullsh*t.  In fact, most of the time I would bet they are pretty wrong.  The trick is not to assume they are right, just do what is necessary to make them think they are right.  Seems like DE is doing a pretty good job, making you think that you hold all the cards on their survival.  That isn't meant to be an attack on you, just an admiration that means that DE must be doing something right.

[Greyryder]

We're fighting our fellow Tenno, because some of them are dirty Grineer sympathizers. They don't seem to care that our sleeping comrades (or any Tenno worth his or her blade) would never accept their own freedom, at the cost of enslaving so many of the innocent people of the solar system.

[Taranis49]

 Somebody likes conspiracies, it seems.  The fact is, people complaining about how the event is "rigged" are either too naive to understand how awful the alternative is, or too dead set on finding some reason to hate DE (for a forum for people who play this game, I'm still shocked with how many people fit this profile).  Do you really think that the outcome would be so much more fair if this was random?  Have you seen how "effective" RNG is in determining fairness?  I'd rather have it supposedly "rigged", because then at least there is some chance for fairness.

 

Resources, aside from orokin cells, are really fairly easy to come by.  Xini drops neurodes like candy, morphics are probably the easiest to find rare resource, and neural sensors are pretty frequent on jupiter survival and defense missions.  Again, the only resource that I consistently have trouble finding are the damn orokin cells, as it seems that only Ruk drops them ever. 

 

I always try to keep a spare catalyst on me when I can, because I can never tell when something will be released that I really want, or if I have some clan tech that could use a bit more oomph.  

 

First, plagiarism is bad - gotta have original thoughts, afterall ;-)

 

And it's not a conspiracy - a conspiracy implies it's hidden or secret. Steve openly admitted these things when questioned; the rewards were deliberately unbalanced to slant the playing field in the Grineer's favor, he point blank said as much on twitter. There may have been good intentions for it with a "Corpus make a comeback" narrative or some such down the line, but as the saying goes, good intentions, road to hell and all that.

 

And who said anything about random rewards? Although even that would've been better (since then it'd atleast more or less be a coin flip on whether or not a given faction gets support for a given node), but no... God forbid, maybe the two parties should've had equal mission rewards on a given node from the get go, keep the playing field and let the chips fall where they may - this is how it's traditionally done in games.

 

Which... is dodging the point, nice red herring though. The most common rare resource required for sidearms (i.e. what the Tier 3 rewards in question happen to be) are Neurodes... and just because they drop easily for you, doesn't mean they do for everyone, regardless, these were only offered once. Someone grinding their 100 missions in the event probably isn't running Xini either. Your claim was that the event rewards "rare materials left and right", the fact remains that insofar as standard weapon construction goes, the only rare resource that's been offered more than once are cells.

 

Here's the thing, not everyone's you.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Taranis49

[Paxolotl]

Whoa, this event divides the community.

 

To be honest I didnt expect such - narrow-mindedness (?)

If it were up to some players to throw out the rewards it would be like:

 

Winners get: Slot, potatoes, weapons, etc..

Loosers get: Nothing

 

Corpus ask for a Corpus weapon blueprint, thats all.

Some of you wont grant us even this - and this making me sad. Were still all Tennos, arent we?

 

Like Ive posted before Corpus Supporters put at least the same effort and time in this event as the Grineer Supporters. Denying us any adequate reward just because we choose x not y just seems to me a lack of social skills. ( Sry i dont mean to offend anyone - but kicking someone whos already on the ground isnt "sportsmanlike" - to say it in a friendly way.)

 

We dont ask for the same rewards the winner would get - just a consulation prize.

Whoever states "You with the loosers - you deserve nothing" is a bad winner, nothing more.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Sunfox069

[t4m5t3r]

He means its an illusion of choice. There is no reason to play Corpus after it was clear that they could not win. I.E. An hour into the event. The illusion that he had a CHOICE for an item was gone. He could choose between getting a gun+slot+potato, or a BP.

 

There was no "fighting for your cause" or even 'competing'. It was a week long event won in an hour. That's the problem.

 

This is pretty much the best summary of this event, its a good event & i actaully think this is something that should be implemented into the actualy standard game. (having different factions take over different planets) but the rewards & the way it started effectively meant there was literlaly no way for Corpus to win and after that first day it was pretty much a forgone conculsion.

 

Grineer win, game over.

 

This is further made worse by people switching sides to get the rewards, myself for example, I have about 20-25 runs by the time it became apparent corpus had no chance, I dont want the grineer weapons, not my thing so not othered about them so there is no point in my doing 100 runs, now I'm only doing ones with half decent battle pay as there is no other reason to do them.

 

(I also find it very weird that people seem to think that "Lore" dicates we side with the Grineer, perhaps it says more about the actual world we live in, but in my experience the good guys would never allow entire planets of people to be enslaved so they could save a few of their mates, there is literally not a single example of this happening in any movie, TV show , game EVER. I just think its pretty weird, Tenno are supposed to be soldiers & thats what soldiers do one way or another, they SACRIFICE .)

Edited October 27, 2013 by t4m5t3r

[Potcat]

Whoa, this event divides the community.

 

To be honest I didnt expect such - narrow-mindedness (?)

If it were up to some players to throw out the rewards it would be like:

 

Winners get: Slot, potatoes, weapons, etc..

Loosers get: Nothing

 

Corpus ask for a Corpus weapon blueprint, thats all.

Some of you wont grant us even this - and this making me sad. Were still all Tennos, arent we?

 

Like Ive posted before Corpus Supporters put at least the same effort and time in this event as the Grineer Supporters. Denying us any adequate reward just because we choose x not y just seems to me a lack of social skills. ( Sry i dont mean to offend anyone - but kicking someone whos already on the ground isnt "sportsmanlike" - to say it in a friendly way.)

 

We dont ask for the same rewards the winner would get - just a consulation prize.

Whoever states "You with the loosers - you deserve nothing" is a bad winner, nothing more.

 

Same effort and time? There's no way fighting for the Grineer is as hard as fighting for the Corpus. Those robots must have been designed by Microsoft because they are the dumbest, most useless things to have in a battlefield.

But aside from that, you're completely right. And it'd be much easier to explain how the Corpus provided a blueprint of their own weapon rather than some super powered Grineer thing they stole, presumably just to pay us.  

[Boomstick720]

First, plagiarism is bad - gotta have original thoughts, afterall ;-)

 

And it's not a conspiracy - a conspiracy implies it's hidden or secret. Steve openly admitted these things when questioned; the rewards were deliberately unbalanced to slant the playing field in the Grineer's favor, he point blank said as much on twitter. There may have been good intentions for it with a "Corpus make a comeback" narrative or some such down the line, but as the saying goes, good intentions, road to hell and all that.

 

And who said anything about random rewards? Although even that would've been better (since then it'd atleast more or less be a coin flip on whether or not a given faction gets support for a given node), but no... God forbid, maybe the two parties should've had equal mission rewards on a given node from the get go, keep the playing field and let the chips fall where they may - this is how it's traditionally done in games.

 

Which... is dodging the point, nice red herring though. The most common rare resource required for sidearms (i.e. what the Tier 3 rewards in question happen to be) are Neurodes... and just because they drop easily for you, doesn't mean they do for everyone, regardless, these were only offered once. Someone grinding their 100 missions in the event probably isn't running Xini either. Your claim was that the event rewards "rare materials left and right", the fact remains that insofar as standard weapon construction goes, the only rare resource that's been offered more than once are cells.

 

Here's the thing, not everyone's you.

Yeah, because it would have made so much sense to give the same rewards to both sides, making the event a boring grind fest (depending on your view point, even more so).  Also, since you seem to think that DE has somehow sabotaged the event by actually making it so the event is actually somewhat interesting, lets play out this scenario.  What if the Grineer lost on Gravidus?  I mean, event it over then right?  There are no ways of getting into the system now, and everyone who wasn't there just missed this supposedly week long event.  I'm kind of getting sick of this implication that the grineer are only winning because of the better reward first, because as far as I can tell, they are about to win almost every mission today even when they have the objectively far worse reward.  And you know what?  If the big clans were so influential, you'd think that the corpus would be doing better, since their number one supporters have well over 25,000 points, a number only surpassed by the grineer number 1 supporters.

 

Also, please don't say equivalent rewards would have balanced it out.  If we are going to say the big clans are the reason the fight is going one way, then it wouldn't make any difference on how good the reward was.  See what happened when both factions had forma as a reward.  The grineer freaking destroyed the corpus.  It wasn't even close.  And if you are seriously going to say that its the first event's fault that that happened, you may need to seriously rethink everything, instead of parroting what people were saying 3 days ago.  

 

Please don't call my rebuttal of your claims a red herring.  I tell you this as a word of advice, because it makes you look like a fool when your counter-argument boils down to "well I can't be wrong, so you are just being manipulative!".  Please.  I specifically stated where to find neurodes, and if you would like I can give a point by point place where I have found the most luck with neurodes.  Any survival, defense, or mobile defense, tends to yield at least 1-5 neurodes per run in my experience.  And no I can't claim to speak for everyone, but I'd like to think that I'm fairly average.  About 90% of the 45 neurodes I currently have I got just from farming keys in survival, so I'm pretty sure it isn't that hard to find them.  But since eris is apparently so hardcore, eurasia on earth is a fairly decent place, and everest is always an option if you are for some reason completely unable to find anything.  Again, the only resource that I consistently have to actively farm are the OC, because they only drop from like one boss in the game and almost nowhere else.

 

I'd personally call you out on some logical and argumentative mistakes you've made (ad hominem attacks for instance), but I'd like to think I'm better than that and try my best to keep it civil.

[VodkaGR]

Agreed.This is the most logical solution,and doesn't doom every corpus player that wants the detron.Even at this VERY simple thing,DE manages to screw up.It's amazing

[OriochiX]

Hard to chose a side?

everyone just did 50-50 and in the end will just switch to grineer since is just better only for the tier 3 reward soo sad the only reason u whant to stay whit corpus is for the badge XD

they shud of made is like this tier 2 reward is determined by the wining side since the sword is just a trophie by who won but the tier 3 is a dif story

the reason grineer ar wining is becose DE started whit a catalist on grineer side insted of the other way around since the corpus ar kinda the badies about the whole sacrifise thing(a whole head start disadvantage) i think corpus shud of goten the lead and if they did i fear they still lose

supporting corpus now is crazy just for the badge and im suprised everyone chose grineer since the pistol dosint look promising is a semi-auto pistol

= lex lato kinda thing and nothing special but the corpus one is more like a granade launcher or shmt XD pistol that makes explosions what else can it be

anyway i think the tier 3 reward shud be determined by the side u chose the losing side geting a BP

sry bad eng

[Kacc]

Make a choice.... be a man XD

[CaptainohCaptain]

I WAAANT SHINYYYYYY!

That's how it looks like.

Now excuse me when I farm for greedy milk.

[Paxolotl]

I WAAANT SHINYYYYYY!

That's how it looks like.

Now excuse me when I farm for greedy milk.

Then youve missed the point and quick read over this Thread.

 

We deserve it cause of the things stated above.

[CaptainohCaptain]

Then youve missed the point and quick read over this Thread.

 

We deserve it cause of the things stated above.

I read that. You deserve nothing.

You failed organisation work.

You failed propaganda work.

You failed on your efforts to run missions.

You failed on loyality part, giving in to the greed.

You failed at reading.

You failed at accepting game.

You even failed at reasons in this thread.

[Paxolotl]

I read that. You deserve nothing.

You failed organisation work.

You failed propaganda work.

You failed on your efforts to run missions.

You failed on loyality part, giving in to the greed.

You failed at reading.

You failed at accepting game.

You even failed at reasons in this thread.

 

http://www.wikihow.com/Improve-Social-Skills

[Capt.Lolz]

This isn't really on topic, but I just wanted to say it, if we get one of the exclusive weapons, does that mean the other is gone for good? Out of our reach forever?

[Santiak]

It's a hard question, to be sure - as is evident from the different viewpoints given in the thread.

 

On one hand, I understand the notion of more or less being able to pick your own reward, where it isn't what item that varies depending on performance, but the quality of the item.

On the other, I also see the validity of not granting the players the reward they most want.

 

Personally, I lean towards the latter, especially when taking into consideration the conditions of the event.

Basically, because the event is structured in such a way that you can freely side or switch sides again and again, it necessitates to a greater degree fatalistic rewards, in order to encourage participation; in other words, were we free to pick our reward, it's more likely most players would simply stop playing after they unlocked T3 rewards, because there'd be little incentive after that.

By having these fatalistic rewards, the players are encouraged to support the side that offers the rewards they want, because they might not get the rewards otherwise.

 

If the structure had been such that picking a side was a permanent choice, and not something one could easily change, it would speak in favour of the former model, but it would arguably have to have a higher requirement for the different tiers, to avoid seeing the event dying off after the ~20th Invasion, where almost everyone would have unlocked their desired reward anyway.

If the choice of who to side with had been permanent, one could argue that it would be fine with the consolation prize being a not-as-high quality variation of the desired item; the event would inherently be driven by a risk/reward system, where you risk picking the "wrong side", and being forced to stay with that choice, but the reward for doing so would either way be a reward you desired.

 

As it stands, I would personally prefer if the only influence players had on which reward they would inevitably receive, would be by playing hard in order to earn exactly what they wanted - not by reaching a benchmark.

 

If you'd indulge me also coming with a real-world example;

In sports, the losing team doesn't get to decide what type of metal their medals are made of.

In industry, employees who perform worse than someone else do not get to decide their bonus, nor their raise.

In competition, the loser doesn't get to decide what type of car they receive if the arrangers have already decided it; let alone the same car as the winners.

 

What sports and industry have in common, is that rewards for effort are graded rather than completely different, but you also risk not receiving a reward entirely, or actually being punished for poor performance.

What's unique for competition, is that rewards can be completely unique, so you might get something you didn't really want, but you will be getting something.

 

The ideal scenario for me, would go something along the lines of:

- Either intial choices were permanent, and rewards based on who you supported rather than who won.

- Or, initial choices were not permanent, but those who stayed completely and utterly loyal to one side got an additional bonus reward.

 

For this event to hold any meaning for me - and I'd like to clarify this is my subjective opinion on it, not my objective one - there'd have to be consequence, or it might as well have been a story-driven event that simply went from point A to point B.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Santiak

[Kurokazin]

Doing 5 missions for 3-5 clan weapon mats, or 100k+ credits, or orokin catalysts/reactors are extremely cost effective time investments. This "Woah to us corpus who have to grind 100 missions only to not get what we DESERVE" garbage is laughable. Grow up you spoiled, rotten, little children. Take away the tier 2/3 weapons and the event is still very well worth doing.

 

There has also not been a SINGLE event in the history of warframe where a non-wraith/vandal weapon has been exclusive to the event and completely inaccessible later down the road. This is all a lot of unnecessary foot stomping because a portion of the playerbase isn't getting what they want(A single weapon that is EXTREMELY likely to be available at a later date). Life ain't burger king, you don't always get to have it your way.

[Paxolotl]

If you'd indulge me also coming with a real-world example;

In sports, the losing team doesn't get to decide what type of metal their medals are made of.

In industry, employees who perform worse than someone else do not get to decide their bonus, nor their raise.

In competition, the loser doesn't get to decide what type of car they receive if the arrangers have already decided it; let alone the same car as the winners.

 

What sports and industry have in common, is that rewards for effort are graded rather than completely different, but you also risk not receiving a reward entirely, or actually being punished for poor performance.

What's unique for competition, is that rewards can be completely unique, so you might get something you didn't really want, but you will be getting something.

This real-world examples about competitions and sports are not valid to be compared with this event due this:

(my opinion ofc)

 

DE is a company - we are their customers. They need us to stay in a good mood, so we play/support their game.

Yes its sad, but true. We are little children who used to be threatened like little children - we want everything and we want it asap.

 

&!$$ing off a big (Corpus supporters) part of the community by denying them an adequate reward isnt a smart move.

But giving them the winners weapon is not a consulation prize - its a kind of a taunt to me. Corpus dont WANT grineer weapons - DE should have known that. And apparently its all about what the community wants.

 

DE made two BIG mistakes imo:

 

1. Showing the End Rewards transforming all noble Tennos into mercaneries.

2. Opportunity to switch sides easily. I would have made the rewards faction only and permanent - means Grineer would never achieve Prova / Detron and Corpus never giving a chance to loot/farm/get Machete / Brakk pistol. This would have added some kind of account uniqueness and you could proudly show who you supported in this event by the weapons you use.

 

So in thoose two concerns im on your side. DE made mistakes, and even making it worse.

 

Winner get a win-win-win situation while Loser have to deal with a loose-loose-loose.

Dont forget the loosing faction also did 100+ missions (8+h of play) but just clicked x instead of y.

Too hard punishment for a mistake DE created.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Sunfox069

[Santiak]

This real-world examples about competitions and sports are not valid to be compared with this event due this:

(my opinion ofc)

 

DE is a company - we are their customers. They need us to stay in a good mood, so we play/support their game.

Yes its sad, but true. We are little children who used to be threatened like little children - we want everything and we want it asap.

 

While I do understand it's your personal opinion, I hope for the same reasons you'll forgive me for commenting on it:

You are judging the event from a company-costumer perspective, which in some cases is a good thing, but other times, aren't.

 

While there is a notion of "keeping the costumers happy", two things should be considered:

1. The game is what keeps the costumers happy, the competitions based on the premise of those games, aren't - or are so to a lesser extent.

2. Making costumers happy is a very broad term, just  by looking at this thread it's clear that there isn't a clear-cut majority who prefer it a specific way. While some argue against the harshness of the reward system, others argue for an even harsher interpretation.

 

A lot of things can be sacrificed on the altar of "Keeping costumers happy", and a lot of things are. But as stated, in the case of competitions, you are inevitably going to tick off one half of the playerbase, because that's one part of the defining characteristics of competitions: not everyone gets it the way they want.

 

Had the Event been set up with a premise that at some point stated: "You are entirely entitled to this reward based on your participation, but you aren't getting it.", I'd have been more inclined to agree that something was amiss. But because it is a competition, it's not DE's responsibility to make sure we get what we want, that's up to us by actually competing - otherwise, as I stated before, it might as well have been an A -> B event with no competitive element, or different rewards.

 

To mirror your own argumentation - which is in no way meant as an insult:

It's not up to DE to determine what we get based on what we want.

It's up to us as players to participate in the competition to get it.

 

In this instance there are, of course, questionable mechanics that have "corrupted" the competition - but as you said, those two points we both - and a lot of other players - agree on were wrong moves, regardless of what faction we support.

 

On that note, while it shouldn't really carry any weight in my argumentation; I fully and utterly support Corpus, so I can't claim I'm biased towards favouring them, given my stance on the matter.

 

As I hinted at earlier, I'm the type of player who enjoys a high risk versus a high reward, and I would actually have preferred that the reward system had been harsher in some ways, and milder in others.

Yes, I can understand the annoyance of not getting a desired reward, but I contribute that to a mentality of not being familiar with loss - in competitive terms - more than anything inherently wrong with the competition.

 

The thrill of winning is diminished the less risk there is in losing. The less risk there is in losing, the less encouragement there is to participate. The less encouragement there is to participate, the less the people take part in the competition. The less the people take part in the competition, the more of a failure an event or competition becomes.

 

It's a competition as much as it is an event, and as such, the rewards are determined more by us as players, than DE as a company. The fault lies more with the players who gave up, and to a lesser extent with the conditions of participating in the event, than it lies with the final rewards - which as I already stated, are actually too forgiving in my opinion, opposite the OPs opinion. :)

 

 

Edit:

As a comparison, let me bring up EVE-Online.

Their Alliance Tournaments required many more times the dedication than this event, but rewards were reserved for the top two to three performing alliances, the rest got diddly for their time invested.

During the competition, players would lose their ships, as destroying them was a determining factor in the outcome. As was "losing" in general; if you failed, you lost your ship and mods, along with all the time you spent acquiring them.

And to add to that, they often took a lot longer to get ones hands on than any Warframe currently available.

 

The end result: The game was much more exhilarating to play, not because you gained more merely by playing, but lost more if you did fail.

The tournaments themselves were extraordinarily fun to watch, because it had one thing that the current event lacks; suspense. And that suspense was directly derived from the notion that there'd be clear-cut losers, who wouldn't get anything, and as a result, everyone fought with tooth and claw, instead of dilly-dallying and AFK-participating. Which also held true when they introduced their Faction Warfare system, as well as their Incursion event (very comparable to our current event). :)

Edited October 27, 2013 by Santiak