[Feedback Thread] Server Update - Economy Fixes

Exactly right. This would be the best change.

2 Likes

Also, a point on odyssey buffs: I’ve heard it mentioned every now and then that there are caps, but it would seem that the caps are very high, and what is more, there’s no scaling of rewards as you pile on more and more bonuses, so grinding high-level odysseys week after week certainly allows players to gain massive advantages.

Personally I think there’s a huge oversight here. IMO in addition to a hard cap, there should definitely be an introduction of “diminishing returns” to odyssey bonuses. So as you accrue more and more bonuses of a given type, the additional bonus percentage per adventure of that type should be reduced accordingly. Say you get a 1% bonus at the start, if you already have 20% of a given bonus, you should only gain 0,5% more in place of that initial 1%, or something along those lines.

The exact formula can be set however devs think is reasonable, but I think it’s essential that this sort of change be made. This would a) encourage people to diversify their bonuses more, and b) make it harder to build up huge bonuses of 30% or 50% in a given key slot.

5 Likes

A different interpretation of that could that odyssey difficulty scales with fame, so that doing even high skull adventures are easy when you have low fame, allowing players to get a jump start, but as you get high fame they get very difficult, so high fame players might have to select low skull adventures to pass.

1 Like

Probably the best pitch on odyssey enhancements thus far. The only issue I see is the longer term players still having huge values and those without large enhancements would have an even tougher time trying to catch-up.
I also think the GK penalty staying at 10% is optimal… increasing it will cause massive complications for lower leagues, but having it at 5% was just not a good option.

1 Like

Not discounting your idea here, but how would this work when harbor level determines the skulls? If I’m a new player and have a low harbor, my skull options are limited.

That could also work, but I think it would be much simpler to introduce scaling, so that the higher the bonus you have in a given slot, then the slower it will be to add to that bonus, with more resources and adventures/skulls needed for every additional percentage point. This change could also be implemented retroactively, with existing bonuses immediately being scaled down to fit the new system. It would have the dual effect of bringing the top and the bottom closer to each other and adjusting the motivations for bonus selection.

1 Like

but what about those who already have passed the e.g. 20% - flare will not take away anything from players as we have learned from the past. and those players will be harder to catch. so maybe raise the gains for the lower fields but do not make them smaller in the high fields. maybe would be the same of your idea. just a remark.

edit:

ok, did not get that first.

I agree right now i am forced to spend lots of furies in short amount of time which is too hectic.
I hope developers increase furies recharege time,
make it 3 hours :55 minutes and change furies max limit to six as they were before this change.

2 Likes

I don’t think it would really count as “taking something away from players”, since everyone would still maintain the same gains relative to each other in terms of time and resources invested. Of course top players would see their relative bonuses reduced, but I think for the most part they probably wouldn’t be terribly upset with where their bonuses ended up, since generally people focus their odyssey gains on whatever they consider to be the best or most important targets. However, they might be motivated to pursue something else in the future.

I really do hope devs give this idea serious consideration, I think it would do a lot to improve the balance of the game.

1 Like

Players have already reached 75% bonuses on nyxs towers so how do plan to reduce those already accumulated bonuses
There are some players with + 50% bonuses on barricades.
It will be a very bad thing to adjust those bonuses or to make changes to odysseys bonuses as it requires commitment to build such large bonuses ,resources and time.

I hope @CaptainMorgan do not implement negative return formula to odyssey as odyssey are only thing keeping this game alive.
Odysseys are fun and I love them way they are now(perfect).

The diminish returns are already there : 12-skull costs more than twice 8-skull, six times 7-skull.

Disclaimer : I am not an old elite player.

1 Like

I don’t really see the problem. Just make a formula on the basis of which those existing bonuses are scaled down. 75% might end up as 40%, or however the devs want it. The cap can stay the same, so if those who were previously at the cap want to keep raising those bonuses, they’re free to do so, but at a reduced rate.

Again, nobody would be losing the result of any of their invested resources, simply the value of it relative to players who have spent less would be changed from 1:1 to something lower.

1 Like

A very bad idea!!!

It’s not really the same. Those returns only diminish relative to resources spent, not time played. Playing 2 years vs playing 1 year gives you twice as many odysseys to play and twice the bonuses to gain. On top of that, as you approach, or indeed reach level cap, resources lose a lot of meaning and pushing odyssey becomes more and more of a priority.

And I’m saying this as someone who’s been playing odysseys pretty much since they launched and have already reached level cap.

1 Like

regarding to this:
Continuing the discussion from Q&A Questions January/February:
(see #8)
and
Continuing the discussion from Q&A Questions January/February:
taken from @Neptune and @Archimides questions

they answered:


and

1 Like

Hi guys.
well in all games and all sorta forums there are ppl who put more than 10 hours a day into the game and forum etc, ofc they see things differently than normal ppl with a normal life, they are hardcore players, nothing wrong with that, and it’s normal for them to see things differently and have different expectations from the game,

but those kinna ppl demanding other ppl to be like them to put their whole life into a game over 10 hours a day just to reach a point to be able to play and enjoy the game, this is a horrible joke they make on this topic, they can’t tell other ppl to waste their lives on a game as well just to be able to have a normal playing state in a game.

and developers following just their voice kills the game, game is supposed to be fit for majority not few,
------------------------------- for our developers :
so basically my idea and suggestion for developers is when they feel they want to make a game changing adjustment make a voting for it and hear the voice of majority of players not few who are on forums 24/7.

i for one i am totally against giving gate keepers anything more than 5% while there are more than 20 defense elements in there that we have been working on for 3 years, this change also doesn’t make a change for those who ignore the keeper at all they would still skip it and could care less but only favors those who want a broken game, we all know how to make those bugged items now, let’s not lie and be real. i will make my bugged keeper too, this is what you developers want? really? for players to make immortal keepers? ok i will. but majority won’t want this.

developers previous approach showed they want to balance keepers but this move will just lead to everyone in opposite direction make an immortal keeper.

thanks for always listening to our feedback @CaptainMorgan

edit: i forgot to mention another thing, this 10% keeper role change also favors those players who don’t rank their gates so basically gate falls sooner than keeper, i know i have to pull keeper back and kill it then, but why favor someone who’s abusing game like that in first place? and trouble other players for them?
i saw some of guys who suggested that keeper should be more than 5% in all these times and years are the ones who abuse game by not ranking the gate, and that’s like they are playing tricks on forum for other players so had to mention what some of them are doing basically

2 Likes

really? some have reached 75% on nyx? why can they even choose nyx that often? :thinking: (i am not saying i do not believe you)
to be sure - you do not mean mixed war and oddy buff and there is no bug of combining both … just from normally playing odyssey?

1 Like

Again, I don’t see it as “taking away”, it only constitutes a change to the way enhancements are awarded. No progress would be lost, only its value would change. Other players would still have to put in the exact same amount of work and resources to reach that level.

Obviously it would be better if the system had been like this since the start, but it’s much too late for that. Odyssey bonuses currently exist as a huge barrier for entry to new players, and they’ll only become more of one as time goes on. The sooner this change is made, the better.

1 Like

Retroactive scaling is something that may or may not be technically possible. I would lean towards “not” based on how other things in the game have functioned, but it’s only a guess. Assuming that something is “simple” or not to add to the game is a risky proposition.

It would also be fairly impolite to players who have put in a tremendous amount of work to earn that fame. I don’t see the devs seeing that as a viable alternative, as much as it might fuel some player revenge fantasies.

1 Like

dont get me wrong - personally i dont not have any problems with that. its just it has been askend and answered before. and i quarantee you that a lot of players would feel betrayed if their expensive boni are lowered.
imho if matchmaking would be better, we would not have this discussion.
and in addition as said they can make it the other way round and give higher possible raises to buffs that are lower so maybe they would also be choosen more often. (well maybe not all of them unless we cant decide anymore bc no other is there to be choosen if i understood the descirbed mechanism right.)