Why Not Give Each Side Their Weapons.

[ApeMummy]

They wouldn't spend the time and effort making a gun just to have no one have it.

It'll be in the clan dojo research in the next update 100% guaranteed.

It's not like anyone goes home empty handed either, those silly goofs who support the corpus still get their BP but they'll probably need like 20 fieldron to craft it I'm guessing.

[Paxolotl]

Thanks Santiak for your thoughts. (youre one of the few that actually dont instant flame me as a greedy kid)

 

I do understand DE cannot pleases everyone happy and that the loosing side has to have a kind of a disadvatage.

I would never complain about not getting a free weapon slot, potatoes, catas and all the stuff the winner can enjoy, cause i know i sided with the loosing fraction.

Still, I think we deserve more than a badge for siding with the corpus cause we did exactly what the winners did. Same effort, same time spend.

I dont count the Brakk BP or machete as "rewards" I feel taunted by recieving them (and thats the main problem for me).

I quote someone to clear out my frustration:

"Its like giving a WWII Allied forces veteran a Nazi armband for his efforts. (- in a horrible parallel universe where the nazi won)"

 

If corpus were winning - the grineer would complain about getting corpus rewards despite the fact they choosed the other faction

- And I would support them. Its highly unlogical and offensive in an odd way.

[Snougar]

Winners - They get their chosen factions weapons pre-build, with slot and catalyst.

Losers - They get their chosen factions weapons as a blueprint.


Honestly how is that so hard? It's an easy fix, rewarding the winners with what they want with a bonus. While the losers get what they want, but with a penalty.


/end thread,

[Santiak]

Winners - They get their chosen factions weapons pre-build, with slot and catalyst.

Losers - They get their chosen factions weapons as a blueprint.

Honestly how is that so hard? It's an easy fix, rewarding the winners with what they want with a bonus. While the losers get what they want, but with a penalty.

/end thread,

 

The problem that might very well arise if that was made the case, is why should anyone play beyond 100 missions, let alone wait for the later ones to do so?

Granted, each mission has its own reward, but its not really something that would encourage actual competition nor participation, and then it devolves into an event that could have just as well been a linear one, with a higher-than-usual rate of Alerts.

 

As I mentioned earlier, part of the description for "competition", is "One side inevitably loses to the other".

Along the same lines, part of the description of "losing", is "not achieving the goal you desired".

A whole plethora of things are off-balance in regards to the Event and its structure, but the reward system isn't one of them, if anything it's not harsh enough - in my opinion. :)

[Snougar]

The problem that might very well arise if that was made the case, is why should anyone play beyond 100 missions, let alone wait for the later ones to do so?

Granted, each mission has its own reward, but its not really something that would encourage actual competition nor participation, and then it devolves into an event that could have just as well been a linear one, with a higher-than-usual rate of Alerts.

 

As I mentioned earlier, part of the description for "competition", is "One side inevitably loses to the other".

Along the same lines, part of the description of "losing", is "not achieving the goal you desired".

A whole plethora of things are off-balance in regards to the Event and its structure, but the reward system isn't one of them, if anything it's not harsh enough - in my opinion. :)

I still believe that the losers should get their chosen weapon as a blueprint after 100 missions. I've done just shy of 130 missions (78 corpus, 51 grineer) and I would like to think I've put in enough time, effort  and platinum with this event, that I can at least get the blueprint I want.

Though I definitely agree the execution of this event could of been done better.

 

[-dicht.ThanksFrost-]

agreed , i dont care for the slot and potato in it, i just want it to be availabe to me by some means. besides Brakk looks so bad compared to the Detron

it looks a awful

[Santiak]

I still believe that the losers should get their chosen weapon as a blueprint after 100 missions. I've done just shy of 130 missions (78 corpus, 51 grineer) and I would like to think I've put in enough time, effort  and platinum with this event, that I can at least get the blueprint I want.

Though I definitely agree the execution of this event could of been done better.

 

 

Your example serves perfectly to showcase the issue I have with this event. :)

You obviously really want a specific end-event reward, yet you have a 60/40% spread on the missions you've completed.

 

The reason Corpus have to stare so far off into the distance, with such a faint hope of getting their end-event rewards, is exactly because players have been switching sides over and over, favouring the instant-gratification rewards from each individual mission, rather than "sticking to their guns", so to speak.

By that, I'm not directly blaming the players, but the way the system has been set up.

 

Let's say, for a moment, that your example is typical of the entire playerbase.

Every "Corpus supporter" shares your 60/40, and every "Grineer supporter" are biased a bit differently, and holds a 80/20.

If we then suppose there are equal amounts of players on both sides, doing equal amounts of missions, that equates to 70/30 distribution in completed and won missions, but from an even 50/50 distribution among players.

 

We're putting ourselves in a hopeless situation because of people turning coats like mad, and if that's the case, then isn't it in some twisted manner only fair that one is ultimately punished for ones inability to stick to any one side?

 

Again, I'm not necessarily blaming the players, who are arguably merely operating within the confines of a flawed system.

 

Were we forced to stick to our guns, I wholly agree that getting ones desired - but "watered down" - reward would be preferable; you committed to a single side, knowing full well the risks involved.

Yet, since that's not the case, people were left with a choice of what they wanted most; the "here and now" rewards, or the unique end-reward. Obviously, using your own example, some, and I dare say a good chunk of the playerbase, preferred the instant-gratification rewards, knowing full-well, I hope, how it would impact their chances of getting that final, unique reward.

 

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but "we brought this on ourselves", given we were aware of how all this would work out.

One of those things that fit perfectly into the old proverb; "You can't have your cake and eat it". :)

For the record, I've done 83 missions. 83 Corpus, 0 Grineer.

[Lyphian]

Yes please!

[Dako_Shark]

I kinda don't see how people are saying that getting your chosen factions weapon BP isn't punishing.

 

We'd have to buy a weapon slot, spend credits and materials, both which could be pretty pricey since it's not been announced, and on top of that we have to wait 24 hours and buy or build a catalyst for it. That compared to a pretty much free catalyst and weapon is pretty punishing as it is. So far with the Corpus supporters getting the Grineer BP, that's just getting spat in the face.

I'm sorry, I know that there's no rewards in war and that stuff, but come on. All they'd have to say is, "Alad V, was unable to manufacture the Dentons but he decided to offer the BP to the supporters." It's not that hard.

[LostShadow]

why we cant get what we fight for?

[Snougar]

Your example serves perfectly to showcase the issue I have with this event. :)

You obviously really want a specific end-event reward, yet you have a 60/40% spread on the missions you've completed.

 

The reason Corpus have to stare so far off into the distance, with such a faint hope of getting their end-event rewards, is exactly because players have been switching sides over and over, favouring the instant-gratification rewards from each individual mission, rather than "sticking to their guns", so to speak.

By that, I'm not directly blaming the players, but the way the system has been set up.

 

Let's say, for a moment, that your example is typical of the entire playerbase.

Every "Corpus supporter" shares your 60/40, and every "Grineer supporter" are biased a bit differently, and holds a 80/20.

If we then suppose there are equal amounts of players on both sides, doing equal amounts of missions, that equates to 70/30 distribution in completed and won missions, but from an even 50/50 distribution among players.

 

We're putting ourselves in a hopeless situation because of people turning coats like mad, and if that's the case, then isn't it in some twisted manner only fair that one is ultimately punished for ones inability to stick to any one side?

 

Again, I'm not necessarily blaming the players, who are arguably merely operating within the confines of a flawed system.

 

Were we forced to stick to our guns, I wholly agree that getting ones desired - but "watered down" - reward would be preferable; you committed to a single side, knowing full well the risks involved.

Yet, since that's not the case, people were left with a choice of what they wanted most; the "here and now" rewards, or the unique end-reward. Obviously, using your own example, some, and I dare say a good chunk of the playerbase, preferred the instant-gratification rewards, knowing full-well, I hope, how it would impact their chances of getting that final, unique reward.

 

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but "we brought this on ourselves", given we were aware of how all this would work out.

One of those things that fit perfectly into the old proverb; "You can't have your cake and eat it". :)

For the record, I've done 83 missions. 83 Corpus, 0 Grineer.

To be fair, I was 78:0 yesterday afternoon. But hearing that the Grineer were likely to dominate this event, I honestly thought I may as well get to 50:50 and just go with whoever wins. If anything, I wont get what I want, but I will get a free weapon slot. 

There is nothing wrong going into an event, picking a side and spending your time to get a specific reward. Stop making it out that doing so is bad. I went corpus at first, to hopefully get their rewards. It's turning less likely I will get that, so I shall go for Greineer. 

How bad of me.

 

 

Edited October 27, 2013 by Snougar

[Santiak]

To be fair, I was 78:0 yesterday afternoon. But hearing that the Grineer were likely to dominate this event, I honestly thought I may as well get to 50:50 and just go with whoever wins. If anything, I wont get what I want, but I will get a free weapon slot. 

There is nothing wrong going into an event, picking a side and spending your time to get a specific reward. Stop making it out that doing so is bad. I went corpus at first, to hopefully get their rewards. It's turning less likely I will get that, so I shall go for Greineer. 

How bad of me.

I'm not making it out that picking a side and spending your time to get a specific reward is in any way bad.

In fact, I'm stating the exact opposite, that not picking a side and sticking to it for a specific reward is bad. So with all due respect, there's no need to be passive-aggressive.

The fact that you switched sides at "the last moment" only reflects the poor set-up of the event, and as I said, I wasn't blaming neither you nor any other player for operating within those faulty premises, but as I said, doing so and still bemoaning not being awarded the reward you so desired is, sorry to say, quite an odd concept to me, one that I'm tempted to label as double-standard, and in all honesty, a stance on the issue that, to me, reeks of the modern-day child rearing slogan; "Everyone's a winner!".

Which is, of course, perfectly fine if the aim is to both teach children, who've yet to develop a notion of cause, affect, and consequence some social skills, and at the same time shield them from parents piling their own ambitions on the child. But I'd hope we're well beyond that phase and we as players have a clear notion that picking a side, or opting to not pick a side, as the case might be, will have consequences, especially when the outcome was made clear before the start. :)

Edited October 27, 2013 by Santiak

[Snougar]

I'm not making it out that picking a side and spending your time to get a specific reward is in any way bad.

In fact, I'm stating the exact opposite, that not picking a side and sticking to it for a specific reward is bad. So with all due respect, there's no need to be passive-aggressive.

The fact that you switched sides at "the last moment" only reflects the poor set-up of the event, but as I said, doing so and still bemoaning not being awarded the reward you so desired is, sorry to say, quite an odd concept to me, one that I'm tempted to label as double-standard, and in all honesty, a stance on the issue that, to me, reeks of the modern-day child rearing slogan; "Everyone's a winner!".

 

It's not that odd of a concept if you sit and think about it. Nor really a double-standard.

 

[Ksdsdf]

With current reward (get the winning side weapon even if you support them or not) then they should have lock the side from the start, then it will prevent ppl from doing 100 mission, and have to try harder for the losing side.

 

But since we can switch side easily, then, why should the losing side fight harder when most people can just switch side and get the better version of the reward?

 

Honestly, it seems that ppl who support the current reward or that loser deserves nothing ignored this flaw in the event.

[Liminal]

All I really need to say is "If you lose, you lose".

I don't understand why so many people think they should reap full rewards for simply participating, might as well just give everyone a free ride if you do it that way.

Playing over 100 missions isn't a free ride.

[awolin]

I think they're doing this because maybe the weapons have different stats and they dont want people to complain "Hey their weapon is better I want that one instead!" I don't blame theme honestly this community is full of whiny *@##$es.

[S5alad]

Again with the "I want".

Maybe you want, but you don't get.

Get your &#! in gear and fight for it. Not just those 5 missions so you ensure your Battle Pay.

If you want, then earn it.

I was number one for Corpus missions for two days running.  Didn't matter.

 

STFU about earning it.  When you more points than me(over 300) THEN try telling me to, "fight for it."

[S5alad]

Thanks Santiak for your thoughts. (youre one of the few that actually dont instant flame me as a greedy kid)

 

I do understand DE cannot pleases everyone happy and that the loosing side has to have a kind of a disadvatage.

I would never complain about not getting a free weapon slot, potatoes, catas and all the stuff the winner can enjoy, cause i know i sided with the loosing fraction.

Still, I think we deserve more than a badge for siding with the corpus cause we did exactly what the winners did. Same effort, same time spend.

I dont count the Brakk BP or machete as "rewards" I feel taunted by recieving them (and thats the main problem for me).

I quote someone to clear out my frustration:

"Its like giving a WWII Allied forces veteran a Nazi armband for his efforts. (- in a horrible parallel universe where the nazi won)"

 

If corpus were winning - the grineer would complain about getting corpus rewards despite the fact they choosed the other faction

- And I would support them. Its highly unlogical and offensive in an odd way.

It IS offensive.  It's basically saying, "despite investing 20+ hours in this event, you're still stuck with crappy rewards.  Now buy more platinum for the potato you'll need... kthxbai."

[Ferriwind]

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?

The Grineer also came in from Olympus and that node next to it, so the foothold was actually not a foot hold as I initially thought. And Corpus won the Catalyst v. Reactor node but the snowball effect was not sufficiently balanced besides that one node so late game(yes I am doing this) Grineer have a huge advantage.

 

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.

Also this^, morale <-> snowball

Edited October 28, 2013 by Stygi

[Oizen]

Thanks Santiak for your thoughts. (youre one of the few that actually dont instant flame me as a greedy kid)

 

I do understand DE cannot pleases everyone happy and that the loosing side has to have a kind of a disadvatage.

I guess the fact that we have to build, potato, and buy a weapon slot with plat isn't disadvantage.

 

Or that the side we wanted to win lost in the lore.

[MECT_HET]

yes please. I'm fighting for Corpus, more than 200 games, and not a single match supporting Grineer. 

 

I want this Detron pistol. Keep your ugly grineer's one.

[Paxolotl]

I guess the fact that we have to build, potato, and buy a weapon slot with plat isn't disadvantage.

 

Or that the side we wanted to win lost in the lore.

 

This is exactly what most ppl dont understand / dont want to understand.

 

Grineer supporters getting their desired weapon - pre build and supercharged - and still dont grant the loosing faction a single bp.

All thoose "You LOST you deserve nothing, you filthy, greedy kids" posts only split the already divided community even more.

 

DE made no statement to our concerns about the T3 rewards - so i guess they will NOT change it.

Corpus supporters are forced to switch sides to get the free weapon slot - to prevent the double/triple punishment. And this sucks.

Why you are even allowed to switch sides ?

 

So wrongheaded, im really disappointed of DE / they way they think / dont think.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Sunfox069

[seth]

I don't think Corpus supporters should get Brakk bp or even Detron bp.

If players supported Corpus and after all this $h1tstorm from day one of event stayed on Corpus side they deserve all Corpus items including Detron with slot and potato and a HUGE APOLOGY FROM DE!

[Phatose]

In future events, using a setup like proposed here might be a good idea.

 

Changing this event is a terrible idea.  As a simple rule, you should not change the rules or rewards structure of an event in progress - there's always someone out there who played by the rules and gets screwed by the rule change.  While you guys may not want to hear it, the fact is that screwing someone who did play by the rules for the sake of those who dislike the rules is completely unacceptable.

 

Worse, a rules change at this point will totally undermine future events.  Why even pay attention to the rules when DE will change them if enough people complain? 

 

It's a terrible idea, and it's bad for the future of the game.

 

I'm sorry you guys aren't happy about the reward you're getting, but you knew from the get go that this was a possible result.  You don't deserve to dictate your rewards based on what you feel is appropriate any more then everybody else.  Were I to decide that I've 'earned' a million forma for my efforts, it would be laughable - the rules of the event were clear that wasn't going to happen.   Same thing for you guys. 

 

Take heart, the Detron will become available later.  And then you'll have two guns instead of one.

[TwiceDead]

So you don't want the weapon we might get? Well, that's just too bad.

In war the losing side gets nothing. Just be glad that you actually get something and learn to accept defeat.

Corpus, all the way.

 

I really don't see why everyone is so hellbent on implementing real life into video games. This is not a war, it's something called a COMPETITION, the event may have the excuse of it being a war in it, but that doesn't make it a war. Lorewise there is a war is between Grineer and Corpus, Tenno at this point are just mercenaries as they can switch allegiances at any point. Had you been locked into the faction you first selected, I could see why it could be called a war.  

 

On to the point: 

You are not supposed to punish your playerbase for putting a lot of time and dedication into your game.

The keyword in video-games are escapism and 'fun'. Getting a gun you didn't want for putting 100% time and dedication into getting a different gun is just insult to injury, and a waste of time for the players on the losing side. This event is handled poorly, and it showed from day one. 

 

Try hards may come with the excuse of "Well stop whining and go play then!".

 

Most people are not going to keep doing the event after reaching the T3 rewards, which is 100 missions for one side (or the 50/51 method), because the missions are so boring and repetitive, and is basically a grind. They may do more missions if the rewards are good for either side (potatoes), but that's probably the most they're going to bother with. 

Now the hardcore clans have quite a lot of members, and it's not unrealistic to expect that a majority of the players in those clans will not just stop with 100 missions. No, they might go to 200, 300, or even 500, and those numbers will probably just keep increasing. 

Now take the biggest clans on either side and multiply their numbers by your presumed number of missions they are going to complete.

Their incentive is the promise of a golden statue in their honor. 

Now take the clanless nobodies who 'supposedly' have a chance of turning the tide as one person as long as they play for corpus. 

Why would they? What's their incentive for doing so? Is there a point to put 100% of my time and dedication into a faction? Nah i'll just go for the rewards in the missions instead. Way more beneficial than sticking to one side. 

 

Reality is:

One more person is not going to make a single difference in the course of this event, because the no-lifers have already picked their sides, and as we know, one no-lifer is worth a hundred general players in warframe. While a normal player with a day-life schedule may only get two hours free-time, which is probably enough for 10-30 missions depending on your effectiveness, the 'hardcore' playerbase in most cases have all day, and that triples or quadruples their numbers. 

Hence why one additional body to the event won't make much of a difference.