{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/2/2014 4:13:39 PM
4
Honestly, they should never have allowed the material for marks exchange, then no one would be dependent on it. They should enable vanguard marks to work for factions, but probably require more than crucible marks to at least create an incentive for PvP. Sure people should play how they want, but that shouldn't include getting 100% of the reward for playing 50% of the game.
English
-
100% reward for 50% of the game? Not even close.
-
Unfortunately your response is a little vague, so I'm going to have to make assumptions. My point was you should only be able to find the full rewards by playing the full game, my ratios were certainly exaggerated. I agree there is an imbalance with 4/5 vendors requiring crucible marks, and that is the thing they should look to fix, not allow people to circumvent the crucible entirely. I'm with you on preferring PvE, but considering most exotic bounties require PvP, there is some amount of it that you just have to deal with, or forgo the rewards from it.
-
Personally, I don't think PvP should be required if you don't want to do it. The sacrifice for not running it was exotic bounties. I don't see why they feel the need to punish players for sticking to the part of the game they enjoy most. Faction gear shouldn't be gated behind PvP seeing as your constantly running missions for them.
-
I definitely agree getting rep in PvE, but only paying through PvP is awkward, to say the least. I think they should still rethink the economy situation, but I don't have a perfect answer as to how without favoring one game mode.
