Results 1 to 10 of 15

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Player FenyxRising's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2023
    Posts
    234
    Character
    Fenyx Rising
    World
    Adamantoise
    Main Class
    White Mage Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by Eisi View Post
    No that's not evidence at all, that's just a cute anecdote about the highest tier ranks which doesn't even neccessarily have causal relationship. I'd argue the opposite, that overall top 100 timelimited rewards decrease interest in ranked.
    Ok, but I at least showed a correlation (not causation but it's at least a small piece of evidence pointing towards t100 motivating people), but you don't even have any correlation, so what evidence are you basing your argument on? Imagination?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eisi View Post
    I mean it's not really a motivating factor when shit just isn't there anymore it's the opposite!
    And I like having exclusive rewards that not many people can get. That newbie would either give up or hype himself and say "that's cool, I want an exclusive reward too" and start playing ranked PvP next season, and really do we want people who give up so easily playing ranked anyways? They will just give up after their first bronze match anyways...

    Quote Originally Posted by CidHeiral View Post
    The armor from one of the last seasons of the feast certainly motivated me to grind, but when I climbed high enough to start getting matched with top 100 players every other match had blatant scripters, win traders, or people having baby tantrums and throwing the match after the first death. I see no reason to give that cesspool more exclusive items.
    I agree but shouldn't the solution be more enforcement of the ToS, not changing the rewards. It's like saying we're going to stop providing free healthcare because 3 or 4 people go to ER every day for no reason. Do you really want to just remove free healthcare? Or more sensibly we can ban those people from going to ER every day or limit the number of ER visits you can get (which in this analogy translates to 1 t100 reward per account, alts don't get any)

    I also don't know which season you played in but I have never heard any datacenter having scripters win traders or griefers in 50% of the matches, it's more like 2-3% (also let's be real the win traders usually only play at 5am when no one can catch them anyways so idk how you're even seeing them so much). The biggest issue in Feast and now CC has always been alts, the leaderboard is like 30% alts sometimes. And those alts are not wintrading either, they are just from very bored veterans who want to show off they can get top 3 with their 3 characters or they enjoy smurfing in lower ranks... If people can only get one t100 reward per account, the alts will probably still exist but now more players can get the reward and not just the same 60 people with alts.
    (5)
    Last edited by FenyxRising; 08-29-2023 at 08:38 PM.

  2. #2
    Player
    CidHeiral's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    1,614
    Character
    Cid Heiral
    World
    Hyperion
    Main Class
    Dragoon Lv 100
    Quote Originally Posted by FenyxRising View Post
    I agree but shouldn't the solution be more enforcement of the ToS, not changing the rewards.
    There should definitely be more enforcement of ToS in PvP I agree with you there.

    Quote Originally Posted by FenyxRising View Post
    I also don't know which season you played in but I have never heard any datacenter having scripters win traders or griefers in 50% of the matches, it's more like 2-3% (also let's be real the win traders usually only play at 5am when no one can catch them anyways so idk how you're even seeing them so much).
    Yes the leaderboard crowd always loves to clutch their pearls and downplay the prevalence of those behaviors, as if anyone would ever say "yeah you got me I rob banks lol."

    I'm a huge fighting game fan so I'm no stranger to losing a lot, and I have no problem doing so as long as it was a fair fight and I can learn and improve. That's how I felt for most of the climb and I was having a lot of fun, but the nonsense I saw once I began closing in on the leaderboard was so pervasive and obnoxious I gave up the climb entirely. To be honest what annoyed me more than the cheating was the player behavior. What a bunch of emotionally unstable toxic crybabies. The microsecond something didn't go exactly how they wanted it to, often through their own fault, they would throw a fit and deliberately lose the match by going afk or walking down the middle of the arena. I was in the PvP discord at the time as well and the chat there was even worse.

    So no, I don't think people who engage in that behavior should be rewarded for it. If anything SE should do the opposite and make past Feast rewards available again to everyone else.
    (3)

  3. #3
    Player
    Eisi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    572
    Character
    Eiserne Sternschnuppe
    World
    Shiva
    Main Class
    Monk Lv 90
    Quote Originally Posted by FenyxRising View Post
    Ok, but I at least showed a correlation (not causation but it's at least a small piece of evidence pointing towards t100 motivating people), but you don't even have any correlation, so what evidence are you basing your argument on? Imagination?
    No, you didn't show anything, I just believed you. But you didn't even demonstrate the correlation you cutie.


    And I like having exclusive rewards that not many people can get. That newbie would either give up or hype himself and say "that's cool, I want an exclusive reward too" and start playing ranked PvP next season, and really do we want people who give up so easily playing ranked anyways? They will just give up after their first bronze match anyways...
    If it's about wanting to get exclusive stuff and not about finding the mounts and armor actually cool, then you have an argument. I think the vast majority of potential pvp enjoyers are people who wouldn't actually care about exclusivity and more about the rewards themselves though. And those two are mutually exclusive.
    (2)