Leagues changes and New Rewards

[DvDivXXX]

I'm curious as well, didn't really think that far ahead about the league girl rotation so far.

My guess is that if the change is automated (as it seems to be for PoP girls), then the instant the league resets on the day that the girl changes, the rewards will be updated to give shards of the new girl. It might be a little bit short for some with Dolly as it's the first one (and some received shards already, others not). But as long as it's reliable it should be just fine from the next girl onward.

If the change has to be made manually, on the other hand, then we'll most likely have some people getting shards for the previous girl if they claim early enough, and most getting shards for the new girl.

Unless the recent problems have a positive influence on Kinkoid and they decide that from now on, they'll change rewards for a feature on a different day than the one on which said rewards are distributed. Here's hoping to that.

[NathBleedda]

From what I see, most of the positive opinions regarding the change in rewards are from players who never competed to win a league (if they did, they would know that it is necessary to spend approximately 3k of kbs in boost), that the rewards improve in the low positions seems fair to me, but for the top 4 they no longer leave a margin between what is obtained and what is lost. (practically the leagues lost the sense of competing in them, it is more beneficial to fight without boost and to be in position 45 than to fight for 1st place spending kbs)

Out of every 10k active players, only 100-400 finish in the top 4 (of all leagues) and those who constantly win D3 or D2 often meet others who can compete (it is understood that only 1 wins 1st place reward).

It is not the first time that I have disagreed with an update. In fact, many of the changes they have implemented were for the worse. for example the new PoPs (which are supposed to have a good and a bad item), that ironically the worst prize (ymens) ends up being more beneficial than the epic gifts they drop (to compensate for this they could put mystical items, since even the legendary you can buy them in the store). This also affected the likelihood of you getting fewer PoPs of Epic Orbs that were already hard to get. The only good change was the new PvP with blessings that makes all the girls useful.

In summary, considering that the rewards only increased a little or stayed the same in the lower positions, it seems that players be happy, not because they get more, but because others get less. They sure don't know how difficult it is to win or finish in the top 4.

[jelom]

1 hour ago, NathBleedda said:

it seems that players be happy, not because they get more, but because others get less

This a really sad truth

[Kenrae]

I'm happy because others get more, even if I get less.

[DvDivXXX]

1 hour ago, jelom said:

2 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

it seems that players be happy, not because they get more, but because others get less





This a really sad truth

 No, it's not.

First of all, no one is exactly "happy" with this update; most of the positive responses are more along the lines of "it's a (small) step in the right direction" in terms of balance. I'm certainly not jumping around out of joy about this change, and most definitely not "because others get less". That would be mean and it would require not caring about the overall game's economy and balance.

For competitive players and on its own, this rewards update is mostly a nerf of the top end, for those competing for top 4 from now on. That's way too little and way too late. The damage is done. Some players have already benefited from this complete imbalance for years, and many of them have obscene stashes of orbs, kobans, and all the other good resources thanks to it that they'll keep getting everything every month even as pure F2P. Now those who started too late to get in on that action won't ever truly catch up (unless more and more in-depth balance changes to both the economy and PVP system follow).

All the nerfs the devs have been pushing to all the best resources for months now, along with the inflation of events and koban sinks (Edit: and now also their new "exclusive!" fad), all of that is largely cushioned by the massive personal reserves the 1% most active of the most veteran players have amassed by now. Competitive players who started too late for that and were still paaaaatiently farming their diiiistant future place in the sun are the ones hit the hardest by most of the nerfs, except for this particular one (which instead hits the destination of that years-long grind ^^).

It doesn't really hit the casuals and/or very new players, as they're so far away from the long-playing competitive players' goals and meta game that the short-term benefits at their own level are probably just a good thing for most them. So maybe some players who were barely touching the leagues before enjoy this change for the extra rewards it gives them. I don't think anyone is glad that parts of the game they have no realistic access to have been nerfed.

I would rather have seen a PvP balance change (and UI rework) before a rewards make over (and I have some reservations about "worship" candles being introduced, period, let alone taking the spot of kisses in league). And I don't think changing the rewards is anywhere near enough to make the PvP parts fairer and less central to the game economy. I'm hoping for a lot more and better changes to complete this one.

Edit:

3 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

They sure don't know how difficult it is to win or finish in the top 4.

Please don't provoke people with this kind of futile bravado. Making a top 4 with a near-max level account in a system grossly imbalanced to favor high-levels is nowhere near as impressive as you and a few other active veterans sometimes make it out to be. The HH leagues aren't exactly rocket science in terms of strategy, even with all the extra colored gems and random blessings (that benefit active veterans too, more often than not, because of their larger and more upgraded collections, and ability to catch all the now-exclusive mythics).

All reasonably competitive league players largely do the same thing, except that the longer you've been active, the more buffs you get just for that. It would be an interesting thought experiment for you to try and put yourself in the shoes of someone who's trying their best and doing all the coolest moves just like you are, but they have a massive handicap that you don't.

Don't get me wrong, winning a D3 does require skill, work, knowledge, planning, and availability to seize opportunities. It's just that it also requires something that should be completely irrelevant, yet is still the biggest requirement: having an older account than most of your opponents (and often competitors). Take that away, and you might see achievements that you're not really appreciating now. I'm much prouder of my first top 15 at level 394 than I am of my now somewhat routine top 15 at level 439, is what I'm getting at. The same rank doesn't mean the same thing depending on your account's age, and getting the top spot in and of itself isn't necessarily the hardest thing to achieve, in this imbalanced system.

Edited November 2, 2021 by DvDivXXX
updated

[Methos2]

Competing in leagues is mostly how often you play and finding your opponents unboosted. Wouldn't it be easier to solve the imbalance by increasing the available booster slots to 5 or 6? Not talking about mythic boosters. A low 400 player with 5 legendary boosters can certainly take on a 500 player. We headed the wrong direction by reducing from 4 to 3. All of these gimmicks with BDSM and new changes do little to balancing.

[NathBleedda]

5 hours ago, DvDivXXX said:

All reasonably competitive league players largely do the same thing, except that the longer you've been active, the more buffs you get just for that. It would be an interesting thought experiment for you to try and put yourself in the shoes of someone who's trying their best and doing all the coolest moves just like you are, but they have a massive handicap that you don't.

Don't get me wrong, winning a D3 does require skill, work, knowledge, planning, and availability to seize opportunities. It's just that it also requires something that should be completely irrelevant, yet is still the biggest requirement: having an older account than most of your opponents (and often competitors)

This is not a shooter or similar game where the player depends on his skill. It is a game with an ordinal system where clearly the one with the highest level (therefore more time playing) will have more benefits or ease to obtain some things. Perhaps your idea is that a veteran who has been playing for more than 2 years costs the same as someone who is just starting out? I don't want to be misunderstood, I'm just saying that there are several ways to encourage new players to keep playing, such as this increase in the amount of kbs in the low positions (which could even be higher) or in PoA events instead of giving Green orbs could give event orbs (to those who have many girls without taking out in pachinko epic / or -300lvl) ... or double the drop in events to players of -300lvl (ex: normal event, up to 8 shards / - 300lvl up to 16).

For those of us who compete in D1,2 or 3 leagues for first place now there is no incentive to do so, it is easier and more efficient to get a 16-30 place than to spend kbs to get a 1st place. Because when you finished between 2-4th, you barely recovered the kbs you spent.

The purpose of competing in leagues is to earn kbs, and kbs are to get more girls ... if you lower the amount of kbs that are obtained so suddenly you are only going to get the players frustrated. In my opinion, that's why they put the leagues in the beginning ... to get more kbs, and they put the orbs because they realized that very few used pachinko.

As I said before, out of 10k players only 100 could get the biggest reward and this was the way to cope (at least for the F2p) the events to get the most girls, which in the end is the great goal of the game ( follow the story, and as it says in the intro of it if I'm not mistaken "get as many girls as you can").

[DvDivXXX]

4 hours ago, Methos2 said:

Wouldn't it be easier to solve the imbalance by increasing the available booster slots to 5 or 6? Not talking about mythic boosters.

Absolutely not. Why would you even think that?

4 hours ago, Methos2 said:

A low 400 player with 5 legendary boosters can certainly take on a 500 player. We headed the wrong direction by reducing from 4 to 3.

Oh, I see. You stopped there, then? Because let me tell you, the level 500 player would have 5 legendary boosters too, in that scenario. Not just that, they'll be able to afford them more consistently. And no, reducing the regular booster slots from 4 to 3 was absolutely not a bad thing for balancing, just the opposite. Actually a great move, because it reduces the power gap slightly, and the maintenance costs significantly.

4 hours ago, Methos2 said:

All of these gimmicks with BDSM and new changes do little to balancing.

Yes and no. These changed the dynamic a little bit by benefiting the most to players who have really big harems, instead of straight up players who have the highest account level. There's so much overlap between the two groups that this distinction isn't relevant for most of the regular D3 winners. However, there are very high level casuals who have shockingly small harems, and some competitive lower-level players (as in, low among the 401-500 group) who have pretty large collections for their account's age. So in at least some cases, this can actually help players who didn't happen to start before 2019 (or "punish" players who did but for whatever reason didn't collect half the girls they could have during that time).

It's nowhere near enough, and we're very far from anything resembling PvP balance still. We agree on that.

-------------

3 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

I don't want to be misunderstood

Me neither.

3 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

This is not a [...] game where the player depends on his skill. It is a game [...] where clearly the one with the highest level (therefore more time playing) will have more benefits or ease to obtain some things.

It goes way beyond that. Active veterans getting more benefits and obtaining stuff more easily than newer players would be okay in terms of general game progression, mostly PvE. That's the case in most long-term games like this one, and that's fair enough. But Kinkoid somehow decided to not only add PvP to this game that's clearly solo PvE at its core, but also to make it completely imbalanced, and straight up give extra power in PvP proportional to how long you've been active, which is just grossly unfair.

There's no need for PvP to even exist in this game, let alone be the main engine of the entire game economy, and be completely unfair and imbalanced. We could have a lot more meaningful progression and even performance in PvE instead, and have PvP be a little extra on the side for those feeling competitive. We could have a PvP mode in which everyone entering the competition has the same base combat stats as everyone else for the purpose of the PvP mode. And then skill and wits would have a lot more impact, and it would be a lot more fun and fair. We could also have something like draft or arena or other limited modes that put all contestants on an equal footing. But no, we have basically a ladder pseudo-tournament system in which we compete with our PvE account stats and collection. That's just wrong.

To be clear, I don't disagree with you on this:

3 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

For those of us who compete in D1,2 or 3 leagues for first place now there is no incentive to do so, it is easier and more efficient to get a 16-30 place than to spend kbs to get a 1st place. Because when you finished between 2-4th, you barely recovered the kbs you spent.

 

[jelom]

15 hours ago, DvDivXXX said:

16 hours ago, jelom said:

18 hours ago, NathBleedda said:

it seems that players be happy, not because they get more, but because others get less





This a really sad truth

 No, it's not.

 

I don't usually counter-reply when someone contradicts me, but this time I have to do it.

 

In real life and in this game too, there are people that just want some other people to fail, to loss or worst things, even if they don't benefit from it.

 

Don't think that I am pessimistic about people in general, many people are good or at least neutral, but if you think that all people are angels then you are too naive.

 

The rest of your post don't argument to this sentence, so I won't include nor comment it.

[isonitro]

I think what you are referring to is envy. A concept as old as dirt. Is likely to occur in a system where great value is placed on possessing things. It is a typical [*cough*boomer*cough*] behavior to aggressively defend a system that expertly and deliberately breeds envy, but constantly lecture chastise those who feel envy within that system.

[Observer_X]

5 minutes ago, isonitro said:

I think what you are referring to is envy.

Maybe, but if you ask me @jelom also refers to what I usually call "destructive play". Simply (and unluckily, if you ask me, but alas, nothing can be done about it) there are players that gives to pvp an interpretation where it is better to not only win against other players, but also, for example, play in a way that makes other players waste their resources, or, more in general, exploit without hesitation particular situations that allow them to slow other players progress. I am aware that there are people that consider such destructive play a normal and legit thing. Obviously, I am not of that number, although I know well that, where more, where less, such players can be found practically anywhere. I know also that many members of the category often deem as stupid those who, like me, have different things in their book... and the thing leaves me completely indifferent.

Obviously @jelom, my friend, you are free to scold me if I understood you wrong.

Once more I realize that following a theme I have quite at heart I continued an off-topic tranche, so once more my apologies to fellow players.

[Methos2]

12 hours ago, DvDivXXX said:

Oh, I see. You stopped there, then? Because let me tell you, the level 500 player would have 5 legendary boosters too, in that scenario.

Let me explain my reasoning then. High level players are winning because they can score higher from each fight. When a lower level player get more boosted, they can hit just as hard. Sure, 500 players can get more boosted but they are capped at 25 points per win. So 5 boosters can close the gap between 400 and 500 players. Regardless how many boosters allowed, fighting a boosted opponent should be avoided anyway. So, giving 5 boosters to 500 player makes no difference.

12 hours ago, DvDivXXX said:

We could have a PvP mode in which everyone entering the competition has the same base combat stats as everyone else for the purpose of the PvP mode.

More boosters would accomplish what you said about same base combat stats. When we had 4 boosters and I was below 400, I could win fight with 490+ players and even scored 18+. Now with 3 boosters and 20 levels higher, I rarely beat a 490 even when I caught them unboosted.

12 hours ago, DvDivXXX said:

Not just that, they'll be able to afford them more consistently. And no, reducing the regular booster slots from 4 to 3 was absolutely not a bad thing for balancing, just the opposite. Actually a great move, because it reduces the power gap slightly, and the maintenance costs significantly.

We get plenty of boosters from mythic orbs. I see this as a 'free' resource. I have never had to buy boosters in HH. The reason why competitive players buy them is because they want particular boosters (cordyceps or ginsengs). We get plenty of chlorella, especially now with PoP, but it is undesirable to the competitive players. If we can use 5 boosters, we can start using chlorella as well. Remember the most point you can get is 25 so the booster combination doesn't have to be optimal all the time. We can have days with less optimal boosters fighting lower level opponents. Doing so would not drain our resource. Even if a player still want to buy boosters, that is part of the overhead of winning league just like using refills.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Methos2

[DvDivXXX]

4 minutes ago, Methos2 said:

So 5 boosters can close the gap between 400 and 500 players.

It's the exact opposite. Going from 4 to 3 actually reduced the stat gap significantly. Legendary boosters give a bonus in percentage of the player's stats. A Level 500 player has a TON more stats than a level 400, even assuming similar harem size: +3k to each of the three base stats, +100 level on each member of their battle team, and above all + a gazillion from level 500 equipment pieces, compared to the best ones the level 400 player can equip. The Level 500 player would easily win the fight is neither were boosted. And each booster gives a bigger bonus to them than it does to their Level 400 opponent.

The more booster slots, the more exacerbated the existing gap in stats becomes. So no, again, I'm sure you have the best intentions, but what you're suggesting would actually have the opposite impact of what you seem to expect.

9 minutes ago, Methos2 said:

Regardless how many boosters allowed, fighting a boosted opponent should be avoided anyway.

Well, duh. Looking for good opportunities is a must, but you can't always get what you want, even if you're looking all week (and you're not the only one looking). Especially now that determining if someone is unboosted is more of a an hmm "educated wild guesstimate" than it used to be, (and fight sims from either script are far less reliable than with previous battle mechanics as well). It's rarely even possible to fight every last opponent when they happen to be at their weakest in stats, and even if it was, waiting for only the best opportunities to fight has a steep koban cost in refills, as you're forced to let plenty of league tokens go away at times, and then make lots of fights in a row at other times. And you can still end up having to shrug it off comes the final snapshot and fight whoever's left in unfavorable conditions for you anyway.

It's more crucial for balance (what little we kinda have) to avoid making the average scenario even worse than to optimize what's already the best case scenario (I really feel like "least worse" would be more accurate). It's a competitive meta game out there, and staying permanently boosted is easier than ever, and will always be easier to afford for the player who has the most resources and income. You'll fight boosted players every week, whether there are three, four, five, or a two dozen booster slots. The more booster slots, the harder those fights will be, and it will not make up for the few times you luck out and find an inattentive or absent high level unboosted, and you score more.

45 minutes ago, Methos2 said:

plenty of boosters from mythic orbs. I see this as a 'free' resource.

Then I guess you missed the memo: orbs are on their merry way to extinction as a realistic resource. They will only survive long after they're all gone from current players' rewards, in the massive stashes regular D3 winners of the past two years still have on hand. Oh, and those happen to be much closer to level 500 than level 400, by the way. Another reason your idea wouldn't work imho.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree on this. It can become its own separate suggestion in your own thread if you're still convinced it's worth suggesting. But this has very little to do with the original topic at this point.

--------------
Quick aside to @jelom and @Observer_Xhere: in some contexts like competing in leagues, actively making your opponents' experience fighting you as difficult as possible is to improve your own shot at getting a better rank than you would if everyone fighting you scored more points. It doesn't have to come along with vivid fantasies about your opponents' pain, though. And sure, I'm well aware that there's a certain type of players who would rather see the words "You Win" on their screen than actually having fun playing. But I wouldn't generalize that to any particular group in HH's community, and I don't think this game attracts this type more than a lot of other games do.

[Valgo]

Anyone got their dolly shard from league reward yet?

[DvDivXXX]

11 hours ago, Valgo said:

Anyone got their dolly shard from league reward yet?

Weird timing for this question... We already know that many players received Dolly shards a week ago. And you're over half an hour early for today's league rewards. ^^

[Kaitana]

Le 02/11/2021 à 00:21, DvDivXXX a dit :

most of the positive responses are more along the lines of "it's a (small) step in the right direction" in terms of balance. I'm certainly not jumping around out of joy about this change, and most definitely not "because others get less".

 

I agree. Weaken others for no reason is pointless. But if there's a reason it's different. It's logic.

What I like is not others in general to be weakened, but the players level 400+ who play in sexpert one or two (and maybe three but this one is not very clear) are near cheaters to me. And I totally support the loss of rewards for the winners in leagues, and the increase of rewards for non-winners (there's a same reason behind both), because half of these winners, minimum, are cheaters or something very alike.

Of course I don't speak about winners in dicktator leagues, I don't know them. Especially about d3, if there no highest league to come from, I don't see the logic in decreasing the rewards for the winners. Maybe it was done because it was easier than to create a special system especially for d3, and maybe it will not stay this way. But for the other leagues I'm sure it's good. Probably a too small move, because most of these near cheaters seem to be in sexpert because they want the win itself, and don't care about the rewards. But we'll see. And those who care about the rewards will go back in the highest leagues, that's concrete progress.

[DvDivXXX]

1 hour ago, Kaitana said:

players level 400+ who play in sexpert one or two (and maybe three but this one is not very clear) are near cheaters to me

Those who do it on purpose definitely are—in spirit, they're not breaking any rule, technically— (let's not forget that if a D3 player quits the game for a couple of weeks, they start over at W1 when they return...), but if it's any consolation, they're shooting themselves in the foot so hard for the long game (because they get like a 10th of the XP they should be getting, not to mention worse rewards than if they chilled in D1 or D2 instead), that the low-level fish they prey upon now might very well end up stronger than them in a year or two. Instant karma... Kinkoid style. ^^

[Kaitana]

That's right, players who quit/unquit the game are descending and ascending. I forgot, thank you for the reminder ! I don't pay attention to their names, only to their levels, so I'm not sure they are the same every time. There are always some 400+ in medium leagues, however.

I can understand now that players who were ranked in D3 (it's written in their profile) could be in the first places in S1. In fact they are not too many, S1 should be boring for high level players. When I played in S2 they were many more (10 in the 15 first places). And they are not number one either (for now maybe ?), but if you want a top 4 it's hard to get. I will be more cautious next time I will speak about cheaters.

 

 

Edited November 6, 2021 by Kaitana

[Shaftiel]

Overall it seems like this is a big step in the right direction. Lvl 433 on Nutaku, and after camping at 16-30 in D2 for many, many months, it was finally worth it to make the leap to D3. Under the old system, unless I managed to get 30+ at D3 I got LESS than my easy win at 15-30 in D2... and unless I got 45+, it was a nearly 50% loss.

Now even if I tank and end up 60th, it's only a 25% loss, and anything above 46 is an increase.

The next 24 hours are going to be brutal, and I probably won't be able to hold onto my top 30, but man it's nice to be able to advance and play hard instead of only even attempting 2/3 of my fights to game a janky prize distribution.

[Bruno69]

If you do the math for geting the draws from the league then you MUST place in the top 15 and move up at least once to get enough shards, unless you are already sexpert 3 or above then you just need to be in the top 30 each week.

 

being in the wanker 3 league and placing in the middle I get 14 shards per week for placing 16-30th.

14 * 6 = 84  that is  still 16 short of getting a full draw.

if your sexpert 3 though its 20 shards per week for placing 16-30th in that league, and you woujld have it completed in just 5 out of the 6 weeks.  Slip to the 31-45th places and you would still get it completed in 6 weeks. as long as you place 30th or above 1 week of the 6

16 * 5 = 86  + 20 * 1 = 106.

the same would apply in dictator 1 but by dictator 2 its just rank 45 or above to get enough shards.

 

in short those under about level 300 or so have no chance to get enough shards without spending lots of tokens on extra turns each week.

[Alander]

to Bruno

Sorry to be boring, but this is

 16 * 5 = 80  + 20 * 1 = 100.

[Bruno69]

my bad.   comes from doing to many things at once.  The basic intent is still the same tho.

 

[FinderKeeper]

I'm unpinning this, @holymolly

[Brandino]

hmm, as this event is almost over I see a major issue with this event. obviously we want to do our best in leagues as its weekly for the rewards; however if you slaved away and barely got top 15 and promoted to the next bracket, you tend to be bottom of the barrel in the higher leagues, which is unfortunate if you are hunting the exclusive girl (75+ does not get ANY shards). to me the bottom of the barrel folks in the higher leagues tend to be WAY stronger than the ones in the lower leagues.

after reading the forum I see why folks just hover over the 25-50range comfortably to maintain some rewards and shards. But because I went ham for barely >rank 15, I suffer by not getting any kobans/shards in the next league. I think the optimal strat for everyone who isn't hardcore is to stay within the mid-range of the rank so you don't get promoted up into -zero- reward territory.

[Liliat]

Il y a 3 heures, Brandino a dit :

I think the optimal strat for everyone who isn't hardcore is to stay within the mid-range of the rank so you don't get promoted up into -zero- reward territory.

To be fair, this has always been the case: Kobans rewards are also best in the 16~30 range. You should only go to the next league when you're confident that you can reach at least top 45 in the upper league.

Promoting too early often means you'll get less rewards, and you will end up dropping again.