I would not mind if it was on par, honestly I was shocked it was even considered a good option lol. However, that it was such a good option made me think that it was entirely intentional decision based on the fact there was value already in doing Bozja. Like if I gave you two choices- do fates in Bozja and two goodies or do FATEs not in Bozja and get only one goody..? Seems kind of silly. They're both FATEs and one clearly would give you way more value.
I agree with you about the disparity, I don't think it should be that large either.
I agree that there is something off in the balance (I technically say that too in the other post), I was just trying to explain that there is absolutely a situation where a lever that gives only one thing could and entirely logically give more of that 'one' thing that the lever that gives two things.
If we keep using the lever analogy lol:
Lever Bozja: 8 Apples 1 lemon
Lever HW FATEs: 9 or 10 Apples 0 lemons
I don't think such a situation would be unreasonable, given that HW FATEs are largely useless unless you reaaaaallly want to level your job that way (honestly just caused me shivers though lol, Bozja exp is way better exp than normal FATEs).
It wouldn't be awful if they were equal, it would mean however unequivocally the only reason to do HW FATEs is because you dislike Bozja and that it wasn't balanced for anything other than a concession for "not liking Bozja". That I don't think it's illogical to have made it not be a concession but fairly balanced (which I think we both agree right now the balance is off, but if HW ends with 8.5 9 apples and Bozja 8 apples I don't think it's entirely illogical so long as you accept that SE isn't making Bozja a strong requirement and would like to give people multiple valid, non-concession, options).
+1 and we definitely agree at least on 98% of what's going on (maybe 100%, I definitely think Bozja needs to be far more closer to HW FATEs I just don't think it 'has' to turn HW FATEs into a concession choice, just make them better balanced levers).



), I was just trying to explain that there is absolutely a situation where a lever that gives only one thing could and entirely logically give more of that 'one' thing that the lever that gives two things.
Reply With Quote

