[TERA PC & Console] En Masse is closing, but TERA lives on! We will continue to support TERA PC (NA) and TERA Console until service is transferred. Stay tuned for more information.
[TERA Console] The Grotto of Lost Souls update (v85) is now live! Read the patch notes here: https://bit.ly/TERACon_v85
[TERA PC] The 64-bit update (v97) is now live. Check out all the changes delivered on August 11 here: https://bit.ly/tera64_patchnotes
[TERA PC & CONSOLE] Summerfest Part 2: The Beach Bash is on from August 11 until September 1! Participate in event activities to earn tokens redeemable for costumes, consumables, mounts, and more! Details: https://bit.ly/tera_sf20
BuddyUp Friendship Circle rewards update needed.
The buddyup system has been around now for a long time, it's great.
However, the items you get from a Friendship Circle ( that token you get when a buddy reaches 65 ) really are a bit outdated.
a gold loot pet.. when gold drops have almost been reduced to 0
a mount that looks amazing but gives no stats and cant fly
and costume box that produces a very old costume.
my humble recommendation:
a normal loot pet
a newer mount (not asking for dragons)
a newer costume perhaps for male and female chars.
the stamina items were updated and some of them came from the buddyup system, let's update the rest
However, the items you get from a Friendship Circle ( that token you get when a buddy reaches 65 ) really are a bit outdated.
a gold loot pet.. when gold drops have almost been reduced to 0
a mount that looks amazing but gives no stats and cant fly
and costume box that produces a very old costume.
my humble recommendation:
a normal loot pet
a newer mount (not asking for dragons)
a newer costume perhaps for male and female chars.
the stamina items were updated and some of them came from the buddyup system, let's update the rest
8
Comments
Only problem I see with changing the rewards is that players who have already traded their Friendship Circles will deem it unfair, as they are stuck with the old items, while new players get the upgraded items. Put yourself in their shoes and you'll understand why this was probably not implemented.
The items provided by the boxes are actually battle solutions now; the descriptions just aren't updated,
Imo your argument makes even less sense. The Friendship Circle exchange store isn't just a normal store that provides you with gear that makes your character stronger in any sense, so comparing it to other TERA in-game stores makes no sense.
Stores in the real world? Those are managed by individual parties that are out to make profits for themselves, so obviously they have to adapt to market changes. This isn't the case for TERA in-game stores, where they're just manned by NPCs, doing what the programmers want.
Gold pet: you mentioned that gold drops have almost been reduced to 0, but there's still drops, so I won't say it is useless.
Mount: it's not meant to give stats since it's free, and you get a flying mount for free from a lvl 65 quest anyway so I don't see what's the problem.
Costume box: just cuz it's old for you doesn't mean it's old for everyone else. There will always be others who don't have it yet.
Small group's desires? Not sure if you actually did a survey to come to that conclusion, but coming up with a claim like that will require some evidence if you actually want to make your argument more convincing. I'm just speaking in terms of fairness and equality for the different groups of people, regardless of group size. I personally won't ever agree to the "do things for the majority just cuz it's the majority" idea, unless there are very compelling reasons to do so. Just because you have bigger numbers in your group doesn't make your needs immediately more important than the minority.
I agree that items change all the time, and so do their prices. But what causes these changes? Newer content/gear etc. This again doesn't apply to BuddyUp rewards, since the rewards did not even give any bonuses for your character/content before. It's just a bonus that players don't actually "need".
From what I see, your views are extremely biased due to your discontent that the rewards don't change to something different, since it's either been there for some time, or you already own those rewards and want something more due to an insatiable desire (don't worry everyone has it).
I just prefer to provide a more unbiased point of view so that people can understand why certain things aren't changed.
Not relevant, you were using the "unfair" excuse. Profit or not, the point was, every shop in games or in the real world has changed to meet the desires of people in game or in the real world. Items have been added, removed, or even systems added and removed that had direct changes on NPC shops that had nothing to do with gear. Following your argument, these shops might as well never be updated because they aren't gear related, which makes no sense. If it's not something you care about, why does it matter to you? Would also like to note, not all shops are from NPCs, some tokens, FCs, etc are all shops that appear when you click them.
Auto loot picks those up, and I literally haven't seen the pet in a dungeon. In fact, it was even part of the Elite box but they removed it and brought back Felicity for a very good reason.
Mounts are cosmetic, and neither of us mentioned wanting mounts with stats. Stats wise only the Dragon is useful due to no Stamina, and the OP specifically said he wasn't asking for Dragons.
It's old for most people. Tera is an old game, and MMOs don't have a trend of attracting large numbers of new players after a few years.
"Equality" does not exist, in fact equality is the definition of unfairness. You yourself haven't provided a single reason to not change it, a bit hypocritical don't you think? Saying your stance is about "fairness" with no real argument behind it doesn't make it true.
Players don't "need" anything, now do they? I specifically said desire, changes are made to meet desires, not just "needs". Desires are often put before needs anyways. If a system is useless, it might as well be removed.
From what I see, all you've done assume is things. Beyond enchanting or crafting materials I have nothing I "desire", because simply put, I already own (or have owned) every single piece of cosmetic in the game, and majority of the mounts that I even cared about. I very rarely post my personal opinions on forums, and if I do I will always state "I think" or "in my opinion". Whether these rewards change or not have absolutely zero impact on me.
Not sure how I was gonna make a point if I didn't bring that topic about gear up, so idk what you're trying to say here.
I was saying that if the shops do not affect gear progression in any sense, then whether they change or not shouldn't be determined by "outdated-ness" like the point OP is trying to make.
I don't know how using the "unfair" excuse makes it irrelevant, but that's irrelevant too. Now to the main points.
See here, you're just giving generalising statements that don't even show me, or anyone who doesn't really access those novelty stores, how those novelty shops have changed over time to meet the desires of players. I personally don't care about cosmetics in the in-game stores, so I have never noticed what has been changed.
Secondly, if I'm not wrong, those stores require you to work on quests to get items to exchange for those cosmetics (eg. fashion coupons). That isn't the case for BuddyUp codes, where you can just give your code to someone and THEY do the work leveling up to 65 and YOU get the Friendship Circle. Obviously if you have to work to get something, you'll want to see different items inside. This is pretty much human behaviour.
So again, it doesn't make sense to compare the Friendship Circle shop to those other shops in-game.
Clearly irrelevant to the topic and an attempt to digress. How does what controls the shop make a difference to my point? They are still controlled by the programmers either way, NPC controlled or not. Note you just made an assumption here that I don't know that certain tokens can access shops, when in fact, I didn't mention it because it made no difference to the argument either way. (1)
I was referring to the fact that the word "almost" means there are still gold drops, not saying that the pet loots normal drops.
Not seeing a pet in dungeon means no one uses it? Clearly an assumption without evidence here. (2)
No one knows why EME actually changed the Elite box from giving Nugget to Felicity, unless I missed out that information somewhere. Regardless, another assumption made here. (3)
OP did indeed mention that the free mount didn't give stats and doesn't fly, so it's a fair assumption that he wants it to have stats. Specifying that he wasn't asking for a dragon doesn't weaken my point in any way.
A costume being old has no correlation to whether someone would want it. The use of the word "old" in "it's old for everyone else" was used figuratively to say that some people might still want the costume. Maybe I should have used a better word so my bad.
Ok, so here, you are the one who thinks equality doesn't exist and is the definition of unfairness, while I do not think so. Therefore, I don't know how it's hypocritical when I actually don't view equality as being unfair. Hypocrites speak one thing and mean another, which I clearly wasn't doing. Note another assumption made by you here. (4)
Next, how have I not provided a single reason to not change it? My point was on fairness, which is already a reason why I would vote not to change it.
Call me ignorant, but I will continue to fight for fairness regardless of what others say, unless someone can convince me that it is indeed unfair to do so.
In fact, players actually need gear if they want to play the game and do end-game content. Saying otherwise is just being ignorant, since you can't complete hard mode dungeons with a full +0 gear party, unless you can prove to me otherwise.
I understand that desires are put before needs more often than not, but if you just think of it in such a myopic manner, then let me show you a bigger picture.
Why doesn't the game change significantly just due to the player's desires? If someone desires the game to be able to let players 1 shot bosses, why won't it get implemented? Quite obvious if you think about it this way. Desires have to be reasonable before things will be changed to have them met. I'm making a stand here saying that it's unreasonable (due to unfairness) to change the Friendship Circle shop as of right now.
Nothing more needs to be said here. I've already bolded statements where you actually made assumptions yourself. As you can see, arguments require assumptions to work. So trying to use that to weaken my argument is futile.
Plus, from your first post in this thread, it appeared that you actually cared about whether the shop changed or not.
Using statements like "If someone gets upset over it, then that's their own issue", it is reasonable for me to assume that you actually care about your argument and therefore what happens to the shop. Maybe it was a wrong assumption, since you have only just stated that you do not care, but no one knows. It is safe to assume people can lie, since this is a forum, not a mind reader.
In conclusion, I still feel that the shop shouldn't be changed, since there's not much reason to change it as yet.
It was changed back to Felicity due to popular demand. When Nugget was added to the elite box (and there was never any other way to obtain it, until Buddy-Up was introduced later on), the prices on the trade broker rapidly fell, even going below 1k on some servers. This generally means no-one wants the pet, and as with Yamazuki, I have never seen anyone use it anywhere other than while afk in Highwatch. Comparatively, even with Felicity being in the elite box, the prices on the trade broker range from 30k to 50k on all servers, as this is a pet with multiple functions and as such a very high degree of usefulness.
In regards to the shop being changed, I feel like there could at least be more options, as people who have been playing for a long time have more than likely already got the costume and may not want the mount or pet.
I am not just talking about just novelty stores... Even this last patch made major changes that made many things you had obsolete and replaced by superior versions, crafting was killed and even materials that had to be gathered are even in shops now... According to your argument, none of these changes should have been done because "it's not fair". See how silly of an argument that is? How about the change made to Slaughter and all past mid tiers being made to be easier to enchant, MW and cheaper to re-roll, according to you, that shouldn't happen because it's not fair to the people who spent thousands improving their Slaughter. Change is necessary whether fair or not. It is up to the individual to adjust and accept change.
Fashion Coupons are not from quests, they are from BAMs, Bosses, NPC Stores, Events, Calendar, or FC Boxes, previously 20 was from per IMS run. Also, why are assuming someone else used the buddy-up code? Many people have several accounts with more than 1 buddy-up code used on them... In addition to the fact the buddy-up is more beneficial to the person using the code anyways. One other thing is, what if a person leveled the person using the code through power leveling? Or leveled another character with them? It means they did something. Either way, this is still all largely irrelevant...
What does that have anything to do with what I said? Auto-loot pets pick up gold AND items, and Nugget was apart of Elite Boxes and was shortly removed and replaced once again by Felicity for a GOOD reason.
Never said "no one uses it". I have only seen the pet 4 times this year, and it was in town. That means it's not popular. There's also the fact despite the low supply of the pet it still costs nearly no gold on the broker.
Actually, we, as in anyone who's been around long enough, knows why it was changed... It was posted on forums. Elite has been updated more than once to meet the demands of the community. rewards changed on several occasions, nostrums, etc.
Dragons are still the only mounts that provide stats at level 65... Stamina was removed and HP/MP Regen only work out of combat and most boss rooms don't allow mounts. Whether the mounts fly or not is largely irrelevant. Beyond Dragons, mounts are cosmetic. Getting a free flying mount means nothing when people get a different one because wait for it... it looks better. You're also wrong about free mounts not giving "stats" anyways... You cac get an inferior dragon for "free" that provides the crit damage modifier, in addition to past events handing out Stamina/Noble mounts for free, and the reward shops doing the same thing too.
If it was something people wanted, then there wouldn't be a request to change it... In addition to the fact that particular cosmetic isn't used often for either genders. I know, I know, "assumptions", I'm sure I'm wrong which is why you can walk into HW/Trading/Velika and post screenshots with all the people wearing it.
People aren't equal, and being treated equal isn't fair to the individual receiving treatment. Our differences prevent equality from being a thing. Also, being "fair" means not favoring a side. Not changing things is unfair to those who want change, and changing it is unfair to those who don't want it. Know what that means? Fairness is an impossibility. There's a reason why compromising is a thing. Your view point is only fair to you and anyone with a similar view.
It is hypocritical because you claim to be arguing for "fairness" when you are providing the least fair option, in addition to the fact being biased means you aren't being fair. You're simply arguing your view point, and not what's fair, otherwise you would provide a compromise as that's the most fair option possible.
Content can be done in mid tier gear, you can get mid tier gear MW, +12, 3%, and perf rolls with 0 feedstock and 0 alkahest. Meaning, you don't need a single thing from any NPC in the game. Calling me ignorant multiple times isn't going to make you right. Honestly, buying gear from NPCs is a trap anyways unless you're rich.
The game has had significant changes... Our rewards are double compared to Korea. We have shops that are vastly more rewarding and our grind isn't as bad as other regions. Are you intentionally ignoring how broken Sorc, soon archer, then soon Warrior is going to be due to major changes? Elite being changed multiple times, and so on. All that is big changes based on what the community asks.
Assumption: a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.
I used past events in majority of my snippets. Dismissing history doesn't mean it didn't happen. Patch notes are available on the site free of charge, in addition to the fact you can search both the new and old forums for free.
My role is gathering and responding to feedback, whether I care or benefit from something isn't going to mean much. I will generally comment on anything that isn't pvp related with a few exceptions. There are other Council members that handle pvp.
Reasons to change:
-Out dated pet
-Lack of items in general
-Low demand and old cosmetic
-Low demand and old mount
-Shop can be updated without removing items, simply add more (A compromise)
-It's not "fair" to not change
Reasons not to:
-It's not "fair" to change
Doesn't seem complicated to me.
If you aren't aware of the history of Tera or differences between KR and NA it's typically not best to enter a discussion without knowing the necessary information all while claiming the other person is the ignorant one over and over.
That is all I have to say regarding the whole fairness discussion. If anyone has any items they would like to see added, changed, replaced, etc. Feel free to post them and I will take note of them. People are also more than welcome to message me if they aren't the type to post.
If the individual is expected to adapt to changes, then he should also be reasonably expected to be able to accept the fact if change does not happen. This is the fairness I mean. I find it unreasonable for someone to preach about change and tell people to accept it, when they themselves cannot accept it when the opposite outcome occurs. This may be a paradoxical argument, but it is what I will stand for.
My argument of things being "not fair" only applies to when change has not yet been implemented. This is the basis of my entire argument. If you have noticed, I have never once argued against any changes made in the past, and have only done so for threads like this. If change has already been made, and even if it is "not fair", nothing much can be done (since it has already been made) other than to suck it up and move on, which I do. In other words, I am arguing against future changes, not against past changes.
All this while you have been bringing up past changes (that have obviously already occurred) which I have already accepted, agreed to, and moved on. That is why I don't understand what you are even arguing against me about.
Secondly, I find it fair for the changes to making older mid-tier gear (e.g. slaughter) easier to enchant, since that older strong gear has been downgraded to being the newer low-tier gear (like how dreadnaught was weaker than slaughter).
Also, I have already mentioned before that I have never seen a problem with stores relating to gear progression changing, and this obviously implies that this view will extend to the change to mw rate and enchant rate, so why are you even arguing against that? Makes me wonder what you're even arguing for.
Yes, I made a mistake in stating that fashion coupons were gotten from quests. Was going to state some other item but forgot. In any case, correcting that mistake does not even change my view on my argument. Correcting my typos doesn't convince me that your idea is more solid; challenging the main point of my statements will.
Back to the main point, players will still have to work to get fashion coupons OR do the quests that give specific tokens, which I have already said that I agree to them desiring change for those shops. This isn't the case for Friendship Circles. More elaboration in the paragraph below.
Why assume, you ask? Err... cuz fairness was what I was arguing for? If a player used his own BuddyUp code for himself, he is indeed working for it, so it is reasonable & fair for him to desire change. And I have already discussed that matter in my previous post that I agree that if you have to work for something, it is reasonable for you to desire change.
Also, it would be pointless for me to bring up those players who use their own BuddyUp codes for themselves since it is a BuddyUp code. Meaning it was meant to be used by others, not yourself. Unless you want to start arguing what the words "buddy up" actually means, this is the notion I'm going to stick by.
The last time I used a loot pet, they don't pick up gold. So if any changes were made to item loot pets to allow them to loot gold too, then obviously I wouldn't have even argued about it. Moving on.
You actually said you literally haven't seen it in dungeons, making the main point of that argument to be: you don't see a use for them, so they should be removed. Which I do not agree. If, however, that wasn't your main point, then please state it clearly. Moving on.
What is the point of this paragraph, may I ask? It does not matter if dragons are the only mounts that provide stats at 65. My point was that OP sounded as if he wanted the mount in the Friendship Circle shop to have stats.
If another flying mount looks better, so what? You have to work for it anyway, which, I will point out again, is not the same as how you get Friendship Circles.
As you can already see, many of the things that you argue about, I have already agreed to, so I really have no idea what you're arguing for. You have not even touched on many of the main ideas of my arguments, and I have bolded them for you, just so you or someone can actually refute them.
This is exactly how you should NOT argue. You can't just use the opposite truth of my statement and then claim that I am wrong.
EXAMPLE: It's like me saying "I'm not a thief", and then you come in and say "But I've not monitored you for 24/7 to know that you have not stolen anything". Does your statement make me a thief then? No, it certainly doesn't. You actually have to provide proof that I indeed have stolen something to prove that I am a thief, and not just saying that there's no evidence that I'm not a thief.
Next thing. You are assuming that by "wanting" something, it means that whoever "wants" it must outright show it off. I can just "want' an item for collection sake, but I don't like to wear it, so how does that make me not actually "want" that item? This is my point on assumptions.
You seem to have misunderstood what I meant by fairness. I have given a more elaborate explanation of my definition of fairness in the second paragraph, so please read it.
It doesn't matter if people aren't equal. Based on your argument, it would be saying that since people aren't equal, some people deserve more privileges than others. Why doesn't TERA give me more privileges than other players in game then? I think I'm better than the other players. WAAAAAA!!!! /s
Your argument already falls short on itself, since if TERA wasn't made equal like in the way I have described above, the game wouldn't even function properly. This is assuming there's no other factors that come into play, like paying cash or whatever.
Next thing, fairness does not equate to equality, if that's the argument you're trying to make. The fairness that I'm looking at, is when I look at the Friendship Circle shop as it is right now, without caring for whatever parties involved, and deem that there's no reason for it to change as yet, until EME decides it's time to do so. I fully support EME's decisions when they're made.
I would also like to add that in the context that we're discussing, your view of change could also be an impossibility. OP is targeting for a very SPECIFIC change to the shop: removing "outdated" items. Also note here that the word "outdated" has different meanings for everyone. Sure, I agree that change can happen. But what if EME decided to put even more outdated items in the shop? EME can also choose not to care about what happens to the Friendship Circle shop. What then?
The same way fairness is an impossibility to you, it is how that SPECIFIC change is an impossibility to me, so using that argument here has no meaning at all.
Another point to note is this. This is the IMPORTANT one. You say that I'm arguing for fairness, and that view is only fair for me and anyone with a similar view. Then I will have to boldly assume you are arguing FOR unfairness, which then leads me to question:
If you are arguing for unfairness, why even argue with me then?
If my "fairness" is indeed unfair, then it should be acceptable by you.
(At this point, I'll also have to let you know, no change is also considered a change in itself, since if things are expected to change, having no change is a change to this mindset.)
vv PLEASE READ THIS vv
The only thing I see here is that, within this "unfairness" that you propose, you are favouring the side that gets a benefit from change, and completely disregarding the side that loses out.
If that is indeed the case, the main point of your argument is to support the side of the "unfairness" that gains an advantage. "Whether these rewards change or not have absolutely zero impact on me" was what you said. If the change of the Friendship Circle shop had zero impact on you, why argue to give one side an advantage over the other? Being a logical human being, your stance on this topic and the statements you make do not match. It actually makes more sense to agree with me, don't you think?
^^ PLEASE READ THIS ^^
(Dictionary meaning) The definition of a hypocrite is a person who pretends to have certain beliefs, attitudes or feelings when they really do not.
Please tell me how I'm PRETENDING to have a certain belief about fairness, when I indeed believe fully in the fairness that I am fighting for. Your assumptions about my beliefs do not make me a hypocrite, FYI. It has to be a fact.
Just because YOU don't view fairness like I do, doesn't make me a hypocrite, which is what I have said in my previous post.
Another way of putting this is that you are putting your views and words into my mouth, and then naming me a hypocrite when I wasn't even the one who had those ideas.
Note: Using big words without thought just makes people question if you even know what you're saying.
My definition of "need" actually has an innate time factor, you see. I know you can get mid tier gear MW, +12, 3%, and perf rolls with 0 feedstock and 0 alkahest, but here are the important questions. How long would it take? How much RNG would be required? Based on common sense, no player would WANT to waste their time doing the same low-end dungeon hundreds and thousands of times just to get their mid tier gear maxed for free, and then be allowed to do the real "end-game" content. Even worse, it would hypothetically take you the time of an entire patch to even gear yourself up for free per se, then what's the point of even playing then? Your views on this are just a complete pipe dream.
In this sense, yes, you are indeed ignorant. Using pipe dreams to challenge my arguments is an ignorant act. However, me calling you ignorant is meant to make you think twice about the impacts of what you say, not to make me right (just to clear that up).
If I were to go further using your train of thought, since everything in-game is a want (i.e. desire) instead of an actual "need", and changes are dependent on desires and are "expected" to happen, players would be wanting complete revamps of the game. Things like: "I want to one shot end-game bosses" won't be uncommon anymore, but would EME actually change the game just because they WANT it that way? NO! Because it would make completely no sense at all.
This boils down to my original argument in my previous post: being reasonable. I don't view the change of the Friendship Circle shop as reasonable, so I argue against it.
And what does this paragraph have to do with my argument you were referring to? I was arguing for reasonable-ness, and all I can see about this paragraph (mainly "All that is big changes based on what the community asks") is that EME decided to implement those changes because they were reasonable to do so, not just because the community wanted it, which is what I agree on. No argument required here.
How am I intentionally ignoring how broken sorc is? This change had to be implemented since it is BHS who develops the game, and EME is just a publisher that has to follow BHS's rules on class matters. Again, not sure how this actually impacts my argument (or even your argument, for that matter), since it is completely off topic.
Indeed, you have used past events in majority of your snippets, but my point there was that some of the things you state have 0 proof presented, not even historical evidence. Please for the love of god at least read what I have typed (and bolded specifically for you) completely before replying. Or would you rather I make it easier for you and actually post it here for you to see? It's kind of embarrassing for both of us, so that's why I don't do it.
Now I have to say. ^This! THIS! ^ This is the most important point that you have made in the entire post, and I absolutely will agree to. Why couldn't you just state this sooner? With this suggestion, I wouldn't even need to argue against OP's points, Since it would be pointless. We would both get what we want, and both sides are happy.
I would have to disagree wholeheartedly to this statement. Just because I wasn't here since the start of this game, doesn't mean I'm not entitled to speak up on the things that I see are unsatisfactory. There are always things that people can have views on regardless of their knowledge of past events.
If I indeed lack the necessary information, then it's very easy for you to refute my points.
However, I would like you to note that my arguments have absolutely nothing to do with past events, and I have explained in paragraphs above how and why.
My claims of you being ignorant also have no relation to past events if you read them correctly, so I do not see what's the issue.
Last but not least, I think I haven't made myself very clear on this. My stance on this topic is on being the devil's advocate, to make people think twice if a change to the Friendship Circle shop is indeed required (in terms of my own views of course). In the end, it's still down to EME whether they want to change it or not.
Need a code?