Cost of +25 talis

[kleinbuchstabe]

To give some feedback:

+1 more atribute point (or 8 in total) is realy not a gamechanger for anyone, and therefore the intention appears more like an opportunity to sink some crest-stacks and gold. I wouldnt even call them "usefull", but when you are swiming in crests and gold anyways, and there is a way to sink some of it for a little bonus, ok, why not.

Since im an old player with old toons, I would like to use this opportunity.
But there is NO WAY that I will do 24 dungeon speedruns, or whatever kind of big time investment into PvE, with evey toon, only to upgrade some 24 talis to 25, for 8 more stat points. Its 100% not worth the efford and the time, wich i will rather spend in PvP with 8 stat points less.

I agree with the others here, that championsmarks are a bad decision. Even if its only about one point, it is BiS indeed! And the cost of Championsmarks, is locking the next BiS item behind PvE content. The community, unexceptional, criticises this direction since a long time now. So i realy dont understand why devs want to keep going this way. Especialy not when its about something, that i understood as an intended opportunity to sink tons of unused pvp crests and gold.

On the other side, if you dont want to make it a PvP-crest-only, how about to make just a second option?
One with Warcrests, gold and genesis crests, and another one with Wartokens, gold and chamiponsmarks, to give the same opportunity to PvE lovers?

[leftayparxoun]

One thing we do see a lot of, though, are people who join the discord as new users and ask: "What kind of PvE content does this game have?"

A big part of our focus on improving the PvE the last couple years has been to help give those players who want to join for a PvE experience more content, and also better content. We still don't have as much PvE content as Live did, so there's huge potential there for us to offer more for people, and in many of those cases, I think a lot of those PvE players will come to appreciate and dive into the PvP here once they see how good it is. There's few other games that do large-scale PvP as well as WAR, even decades later. This is why the team working on PvE believes really strongly in the potential for it to keep supporting the health of the game long-term.

First of all, thank your for the response. It's always nice to hear the Devs' side of things clearly.

From your reply it is clear to me that the Devs's priority lies in the health of the game in terms of player population, which is a correct approach in my opinion (compared to developing a Sandbox MMO according to some specific ideals and ignoring the population aspect). I would, however, like to inquire further on the reasoning behind your statement and specifically on how you came to the conclusion that PvE-oriented new players that eventually turn their interests towards PvP are the optimal targets (gamedesign-wise) to try and foster.

In your response the only reasoning provided is the fact that a lot of those potential players pop up on discord and ask questions, but there is no quantitative data provided alongside that information. Yes, the fact remains that the majority of MMOs nowdays revolve around PvE but, for a game as niche as ROR, its competitive edge (in the MMO market) is what sets it apart and not how well it can emulate the rest of the modern competition.

On that regard, have you conducted any statistical analyses in terms of new player retention as a function of their PvE and/or PvP proclivity? I'm talking about plotting various metrics such as Number of Quests completed, Dungeons completed at CR40, RR gain from Scenarios, RR gain from RvR, date of joining a Guild, etc against the time played for characters belonging to accounts less than e.g. half a year old.
Have you compiled the playerbase's data in a similar manner or are you just basing your development priorities on assumptions?

If you have, it also raises the question of how the data has been interpretted:
If, for example, the data shows that 20% of PvP-oriented new players end up playing for more than a year vs 10% for PvE oriented ones, would you/did you decide that improving the 10% figure would be easier (in terms of % per manhours spent) compared to trying to increase the 20% for PvP oriented new players? If so, I'd love to hear about what the data showed and how that decision was taken.

[Jajcek12]

Yes lets sum it up.
People who dont play game or declare that they do only pvp arguing about items that are not required to be BiS , available from pve. That they quit/ stop playing because of implementation of content that force them to not do it- to participate in pvp.
In content (pve) they dont play and will .
About milion meaningless warcrest that will disapear/or get value(mental value) because some not bis items requires to do content they dont do, requires them to do pve runs to spent curency without value that not leading into bis.
Because they lose value from curency that never had value.
The ending point of talismans is puting it into gear not spending curencies on it.

Arguing that pve will ruin pvp game ( that also dont play)when all pvp gear are still available to get by pvp curencies and still adequate to RR level and their pve eqvivalents.

Blocking either- or , also options for newcomers.

Did I miss something ?

[Hecksa]

One of the key goals of this design is to create something that requires skill from players across all parts of the game.

Really appreciate you communicating a bunch on this.

Can I possibly ask - why was it decided that this goal was something worth aiming for? What makes "requiring skills from all parts of the game" a good thing that we want the game to encourage? Who's game experience will be improved by this?

Players who are here just for PvP evidently don't like this pricing. I'd imagine those here just for PvE will also not like it. The only people for whom this design is fun will be people who already do a bit of both *by choice* - ie, they're doing both PvE and RvR for the fun of it, not just because they have to for gear. I don't know what percentage of the community that represents, but based on my time here, I'd estimate it's a pretty significant minority, and Bombling's info seems to support that.

Couldn't we just offer two different ways to buy these - one via Champion's Marks (6?) and one via Crests (2k)? Then PvE players can spend their time enjoying themselves, so can RvR players, and even those that enjoy a mix can get half of their stuff via crests and the other half via marks, and it would cost exactly the same as it did your way.

Requiring both just seems really bizzare to me. It seems to make the game experience more frustrating for a large majority of the players (ie, those who want to play one specific aspect of the game), and I can't see what benefits it brings - and haven't seen them explained anywhere yet.

Hence my question. If there's some motivation to the "key goal" you mentioned here that hasn't previously been explained or made obvious, can you please explain it?

[wonshot]

On the other side, if you dont want to make it a PvP-crest-only, how about to make just a second option?
One with Warcrests, gold and genesis crests, and another one with Wartokens, gold and chamiponsmarks, to give the same opportunity to PvE lovers?

Warcrest + genesis actually makes a whole lot of sense, and it would keep zonelocks still sorta worth chasing and increasing the bag color by contributing better and more to speed up the process.
+1

[Lescargo]

You don't get it guys, they want to force vets to do pve so the new players have mates to run dungeons.
I mean you are not forced actualy, this is just a +1 stat, at best +8.. no big deal, you can just ignore x)

[Nameless]

Add some scen/city currency and swap champion currency with it.
I like to do some pve from time to time but imo the pve got quite huge importance into the game already

[ravezaar]

just not gonna bother with them, no enough value for the effort

I can understand some of the rage but imho there is much more important issues to rage about

[gisborne]

With assumption that talismans are buy for curencies are requires some skills.
What pvp skills are required to get 1k warcrest other then time investment?
If investing into chempion marks requires some pve skills: speedrun , hard mode.
What skills are required to get 100 gold?

And what skills speedrunning gb/bb/bs (can't speak for LV speedruns because i never bothered with those) requires in a party full of BiS players that these talis are supposed to be for? Reading 1 page of wiki in case someone never did the boss before, is that this mystical skill? With geared players you just run from boss to boss and blow them up, it's just a time investment, same as getting gold or warcrests, no skills required either.

He's arguing against the PvE requirement using the logic of the dev and here you are trying to belittle the effort and skill required to do speedruns. Are you trying to say that they are so easy that 3 marks per talisman is no big deal?

[gisborne]

Crests = no effort/skill, acquired passively
Gold = no effort/skill, acquired passively
Marks = lots of time, organization, and some skill

These don't seem comparable.

Making them tradeable is even more baffling if they are designed to show some expression of skill in different areas of the game.