Design Fireside Chat Edition

CG says:

Do nothing Example: The game stays at R9.

Result: Players eventually have enough resources to take the entire roster to R9. There is no new level of progression, no new challenging content that players can strive to overcome. As players don't have upward progression to pursue (in a primarily vertical progression game), there is no longer a reason to engage with the core gameplay loop of Play > Get Rewards > Invest > Get Stronger > Play. Rewards don't matter and there is nowhere to invest. The core of the game ceases to function and the player experience is ruined.

This is actually a problem, but adding new relic levels and then adding relic delta isn't going to make more people willing to spend, or even upgrade characters. New players will be significantly overwhelmed. Besides, many of these issues can be addressed simply by adding characters on a regular basis and making it easier to farm them early on, rather than forcing them to spend or wait a year for double drops. Or if that's not enough, release entire teams.

CG says:

Change relic stats on existing relic levels Example: R9 is updated to add an additional 50 Mastery and 100 Speed.

Result: The value that players receive from their prior investment and upcoming investment goals changes. Some characters probably come out "winners", but many would certainly be "losers". Different characters are impacted to differing degrees, which results in a fractured solution rather than a solidified one. The meta still shifts, potentially drastically, especially if Mastery constituent stats are touched. Relic levels beyond R9 aren't directly supported, and this doesn't address the core problem of scalability.

It actually does address it, without destroying the game. Different characters naturally are affected differently due to kits, synergy, ect. A very good team with low relics beating high relics means the kit is good, which means people are more likely to invest in said team if they need to. Changing mastery stats doesn't necessarily change the meta, it could actually enforce it depending how it's effected, and simply make good teams stay good teams WITHOUT neutering return on investment. It also addresses scalability because if relic levels simply had better ROI the higher they got, more people would use them. I don't see the logic of how this can't be done.

CG says:

Introduce R10 Example: Add R10 by itself.

Result: R10 exists with no new content to support it. With R9 being difficult to acquire, many wouldn't have any R10 characters. The top end would invest as much as necessary for any new requirements and also updating GL teams, and then R10 would be in the exact same state as R9. It plays into and exacerbates the existing problem rather than solving it.

The issue is again return on investment, which modifying the stat boosts each level does would naturally solve or simply making the materials easier to get, or just cutting the cost of higher relics without changing them would be better solutions than relic delta.

CG says:

Add the damage increase/decrease on the top few relic levels

Example: R7 deals 10% more damage to and receives 10% less damage from R6 and below. R8 deals 20% more damage to and receives 20% less damage from R7 and below. R9 deals 30% more damage to and receives 30% less damage from R8 and below.

Result: This is honestly the closest these possible solutions came to solving the problem before Relic Delta was chosen. Unfortunately, this does nothing to help players below R7. It even creates a bit of a wall at R7, or wherever the value is introduced. Additionally, it would need to be removed and shifted up as new relic levels were introduced, since increasing to +/- 40% and beyond isn't scalable (eventually a single relic level is unbeatable by any relic level below it). And removing value from players' investment feels terrible. Sometimes it has to be done for the greater good of the game's health, but it's never something we relish doing, and we avoid it whenever possible.

The problem is there isn't any need to help players below relic 7 since said relics provide decent return on investment, and generally relic 5 is where a lot of people stop at since the team performs just fine at it. However this isn't really necessary as again, this issue can be solved by just modifying relics or reducing their cost, which then people will invest more. Whole applying this would nonetheless function as making higher relics have higher ROI, which may actually lead to more people investing in this, but may have a similar but reduced effect as just adding relic delta. It would cause too many issues. Furtherly it would make more sense to not do relic delta for the "greater good" of the health of the game.

I would address the reasons they chose delta, but TLDR: CG still doesn't believe this curve is as bad as the community says (even though it is)

I will address the variations however, because I think they need to be addressed too.

CG says:

Kick in later Example: Relic Delta doesn't take effect until you're at R7 or R9; lower relic levels are unaffected.

Result: This introduces inconsistency in how the system is applied. Messaging for a system that suddenly turns on after you've crossed a threshold is difficult. Additionally, how do you say "R9 has Relic Delta active" and not have that apply to R3 when they’re battling each other? A delta implies two different values. It requires the context of the other side, at which point the lower relic is inherently involved in the system and affected by it. Why shouldn’t lower invested units also benefit from having a higher relic level than units below them (whether PvE or PvP)? When adding new relic levels, should the threshold move up or stay the same? If it stays the same, eventually all relevant relic levels are affected anyway.

I still don't see the problems here? You cross a threashhold when you start relicing because you finally G13ed a character. I understand the issue here as it would effectively grant higher relics an advantage over lower relics, but then you can't make relic delta super OP to the point it nullifies teams. It would give some advantage but would really function similarly to a stat modification, which I would prefer. We could theoretically just burn through the GAS event with relic delta, but what's the point of using GAS when you have broken matchmaking that just forces you into fighting people with relic 7 squads and also happen to have GLs? Teams we see in the early game night just get neutered and people will have fewer, but high reliced teams, which may in the long run just mean fewer relic 9 characters overall.

CG says:

Only increase damage, don't decrease it Example: The higher relic character deals more damage to the lower relic character, but the lower relic character deals its normal damage to the higher relic character.

Result: This helps address the problem, but it doesn't protect the higher relic character. Think of a glass cannon build in an ARPG - you can add more damage, allowing you to kill things faster, but you still die to that 1 ground effect you step in. You're still susceptible to the same things, you just get more efficient in between dying to the same stuff. It's not holistic enough of an impact.

Thanks for admitting this does solve some issues. This is actually a strong middle ground, as by not reducing underdog damage, they can still deal heavy blows, which alleviates one of the arguments against it (partially), this means your solution is either mod your characters better, or use a dedicated counter. It would however basically make the lower relics glass cannons, which some teams still got hard but higher relics do already increase stats including health and protection. I still don't see why this could have been what we got.

CG says:

Use the average relic level of the team (or lowest level) Result: Both of these approaches have unintended effects on undersized squads. If an R9 SLKR gets weaker because a player brings in R5 General Hux, it feels bad to use Hux even though he synergizes well with SLKR. It negatively impacts a player who brings in weaker units, dropping the entire squad down rather than just the one character being affected. There's also a lot of gamification and cheesing of the system that can be done if the average is used.

If you're point is to push more players to relic 9, this would be one of the ways to do it (although this probably still kills the game). If delta scales based on team average, it would require you to put effort into said team to get the best out of it, rather than for example putting relic 9 poncho Bros on a G12 Kelleran Beq squad. Sure you can cheese it, but if you want the best return on investment, relic the entire team, don't relic 9 poncho Bros and put them on a KB team and expect the entire team to function at relic 9.

The Future: Where Does This Leave Us? With these changes, Relic 10 is being added to the game (though please see above as to why it doesn’t solve the core problem). It will use a new Signal Data, which will not be farmed with energy (so it doesn’t disrupt your current Signal Data farming). Instead, the new Signal Data will be available in both the Scavenger and other game modes.

Finally, there will be a new game mode, new events, and an update to Era-related Journey Guide events, ensuring that all players get to use new characters right away for valuable rewards. We want all players to be able to enjoy the latest characters and content being released to the game.

We hope this context helps our choices around Relic Delta make a bit more sense. We will monitor the impact of Relic Delta in PvP modes and make adjustments as needed. We are passionate about the game and care about you, our players. As always, we’d love to hear your feedback on this and your continued feedback on Relic Delta.

Relic 10 I believe would be a good thing, and if these statements about character farming are to be believed, this actually would massively improve the grinding aspect of the game, since this could mean easier time farming shards and gears, and generally the kyro crunch could be solved, and the Gear shortages fixed.

The context does explain things, but generally we still don't accept these changes. People offered some ways to reduce the damage and you gave flawed reasoning to say why it can't happen. The majority of the community (the portion that's active here), doesn't want the change which is why the reddit was flooded with people threatening to quit, which has spread to the forums, and spread to many swgoh content creators videos as a result.

If people don't want it, why keep pushing it on them?