Jump to content

Photo

Revealing Top Raiders Of The Week

raiding good inspiring

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1
proschultz

proschultz
  • 3 posts

Every week war is always on with one day to rest and the other days to raid .

 

Within the war the top alliances struggle to be in the top 3 alliances to get their top raiders a percentage of the reward.

Therefore , raiders do their best to get the best team and to be the best themselves to get a reward which makes the

Top 3 alliance the main target of all alliances , which is why people do their best to get fuel but in order to do that you

need to have a a good alliance and this is where this idea comes in.

 

Good raiders from weak alliances eventually will transfer to the top 3 best alliances which leaves behind the other alliances

instead of trying but they will transfer and look for good alliances . Their purpose for transferring is to get a percentage of

that top alliance's reward fuel for themselves to earn . But what if we add a new leader board of Top 10 best raiders of the

week and giving a bit of fuel reward of those who get in that list which makes good raiders from weak alliances lessen their

possibility of just transferring to the best alliances and try to get fuel from top 3 alliance's fuel distribution percentage .

Which makes more alliances to have good players instead of only 3 alliances always  taking the top 3 list which makes

other alliance just audience.

 

Making this so called "Top Raiders Of the week" leader board will have more pros than cons because of course there is no

such thing as a perfect decision .

 

I will only list down the pros of this idea because i know that there would be also some cons but it's up to you to consider them

 

Pros :

 

- Main good thing is that there will be more scattered good players which makes the top 3 a good competition instead of a cheer dance competition for the remaining alliances

 

- Players who created their own alliances but have problem in getting in top 3 alliances because of the lack of good players since almost 90% of the good players are in top 3 alliances which makes the list just strive for top 3 or top 4 which is sad for other alliances . But with this idea the leaders or the few players who love to stay in their alliance because of their friends but wants to earn fuel can now get fuel with their basic alliance by just raiding to be in top 10 best 

 

- With this idea the game can distribute more encouragement for players because of the new added reason to play even more and might even "pay" even more :)

 

- If this leader board is as updated as that alliance board which shows the progression of the players in top 10 which makes those who are or aren't in the top 10 board even try harder or in easier terms , it makes the tension and competition of players in game and makes it even more fun

 

- Players that gets in top 10 will gain fame for example the first raider goes in trade everyone would be like "deym , that guy is first raider last week... he good bruh .. he good" which benefits the good players of course and makes "fame" a  reason to strive for top 10 and again .. it increases the tension and competition of players in game.

 

-There are other good things about this idea and feel free to add in comments and support.

 

Cons

 

- I leave this to the people in comments which knows best about spotting Cons in ideas.. 

 

 

 

May this suggestion reach the minds of the developers


  • 1

#2
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

These Top 10 Raiders will most likely be people within the Top 3. Why give them extra fuel? Isn't 500-200 enough already? And that's not even considering what they get from a War Box. The Weekly War Point Leader Board by itself is nice idea, but something like it has already been suggested (http://forum.conarti...-leader-boards/). My guess why it hasn't gotten any attention is because people and Devs who saw the post either didn't care about it or felt that it wasn't a big concern


Edited by Fredswar1, 02 June 2017 - 11:45 AM.

  • 0

#3
BLACKDRAGON

BLACKDRAGON
  • 205 posts

any alliance still can get fuels from warbox atleast. If want more fuels need fight for top 3. What you need is an alliance and find a good raiders, or you also can be the one. 1st place is hard to get but 2nd place and 3rd is easy when your alliance all teamwork to raid.


  • 1

#4
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

Individual war boxes pretty much addressed this issue awhile ago and thank "con" for them!  The belief that only good raiders are in the top 3 alliances is a bit naive:  Many players chose to be in less competitive alliances and just raid for their personal war boxes to avoid alot of the "drama."  Moreover an additional 200, 350 or even 500 fuel for these individuals is not enough of an incentive considering those in the top 3 alliances usually burn way more fuel than they ever hope to recoupe with the mere alliance reward.  Imo, top 3 is more for glory and bragging right than anything else.


Edited by lael, 03 June 2017 - 02:09 AM.

  • 0

#5
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

Individual war boxes pretty much addressed this issue awhile ago and thank "con" for them!  Your belief that only good raiders are in the top 3 alliances is a bit naive:  Many players chose to be in less competitive alliances and just raid for their personal war boxes to avoid alot of the "drama."  Moreover an additional 200, 350 or even 500 fuel for these individuals is not enough of an incentive considering those in the top 3 alliances usually burn way more fuel than they ever hope to recoupe with the mere alliance reward.  Imo, top 3 is more for glory and bragging right than anything else.

 

I never said that the only good raiders are in the Top 3. I'm just acknowledging the fact that the top 3 and sometimes top 4 is where a lot of the competition is. The people in these alliances usually  earn a lot more War Points, than people in lower ranked alliances.  Especially the top ten war point scorers in these alliances. As for the 200, 350, and 500 fuel, that's just the additional reward which they get from placing in the 3rd, 2nd, and 1st spots respectively. That's not even considering what they get from fuel generators, Missions, Bounty Boxes, Herc Boxes, War Boxes and lots of other things. Add all of these factors and you'll get a better of idea of how much fuel these people in the Top 3 are capable of earning by the end of a war round, which is somewhere between the high hundreds to the low thousands.


Edited by Fredswar1, 03 June 2017 - 12:55 AM.

  • 0

#6
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

Really? 1) I was responding to the original post 2) Do you even realize how much fuel it takes to be in the top 10 of the top 3? 3) There are plenty of 1-2 man alliances with "top raiders" who chose not to competitively participate in the top alliances and just raid for the actual fun of it and not game "fame."


  • 0

#7
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

Really? 1) I was responding to the original post 2) Do you even realize how much fuel it takes to be in the top 10 of the top 3? 3) There are plenty of 1-2 man alliances with "top raiders" who chose not to competitively participate in the top alliances and just raid for the actual fun of it and not game "fame."

It doesn't take fuel to place in the top 10 in the top 3. It simply takes hard work and dedication. As for " plenty of 1-2 man alliances with 'top raiders'", what do you mean by that. If they're not raiding than what makes them a "top raider", the possibility that they can? Any person can earn 2600 war points in six days, it's not that special, just a little over 440 War Points A day, which you'd have if you earned a little over 73 war points an hour for six hours, each of those days. Even if these people were to raid, common sense would tell you that it's highly unlikely that they'll  1), earn over 3,000 War Points, because once they reach 2,600, they'll most likely be satisfied with a Tier 3 War Box. 2) Earn More War Points than players in a Tier 1 Alliance, because once you reach Tier 1 and 2, you're on an entirely different League. The only way I see a chance for these "top raiders" to compete is during Mega week, when competition isn't too high anyway. And that's not even taking into account, alts. Lots of alliances in the Top 3 of have at least 1-2 players with an alternate account. Is it fair that players would have to compete against these alternate accounts hogging up the score board? At least if it's done in an alliance, the appropriate personnel can take disciplinary action against  them. 

 

Additionally, when responding to someone else's post, you quote him/her if you're reply wouldn't be directly under his/her post. This avoids the risk of confusion among the readers. When citing textual evidence from people you also do the same, as they can edit a post.


Edited by Fredswar1, 03 June 2017 - 08:50 AM.

  • -1

#8
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

1) The addition of the individual war statistic feature is tantamount to a personal leader board.  2) Disciplinary action against the top raiding alts in their own top raiding alliances. LOLOL.  It is these alts that help their alliance achieve top 3.  3)In my experience, during a very competitive war round, the top 10 accounts in the top 2 alliances do burn an enormous amount of fuel, not just to be in the top 10 but to raid to have their alliance place 1st.  4) It is when, such as in this current not-- too competitive round, the members in the alliance placing first also have their alts competitively raiding in the additional top 2 and top 3 alliances. respectively that I think Con should take disciplinary action to prevent the potential for alliance collusion and the manipulation/monopolization of alliance wars.  4) Personally, I usually burn fuel when raiding to speed up return times because I am impatient and do not like to leave my compound unguarded and no amount of reward could ever equal the amount I spend which again is my choice.


  • 0

#9
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

1) The addition of the individual war statistic feature is tantamount to a personal leader board.  2) Disciplinary action against the top raiding alts in their own top raiding alliances. LOLOL.  It is these alts that help their alliance achieve top 3.  3)In my experience, during a very competitive war round, the top 10 accounts in the top 2 alliances do burn an enormous amount of fuel, not just to be in the top 10 but to raid to have their alliance place 1st.  4) It is when, such as in this current not-- too competitive round, the members in the alliance placing first also have their alts competitively raiding in the additional top 2 and top 3 alliances. respectively that I think Con should take disciplinary action to prevent the potential for alliance collusion and the manipulation/monopolization of alliance wars.  4) Personally, I usually burn fuel when raiding to speed up return times because I am impatient and do not like to leave my compound unguarded and no amount of reward could ever equal the amount I spend which again is my choice.

As far as I see it. This Leader board idea in its current form has too many flaws which have been pointed out. Perhaps, they could have a leader board for the Top War Point Contributor in each alliance, this is perhaps, a better alternative, as it further promotes competition within alliances.  As far as disciplinary action against alternate accounts in alliances goes... If the appropriate personnel feel as if these accounts are preventing other players from having a fair chance at the top, then they can take action against those accounts/people.   Perhaps give them a talk, telling them to give others a chance. As far as burning enormous amounts of fuel goes. It's important to understand that players are not forced to "burn fuel". It is entirely up them whether or not they spend fuel, and up to them alone. if they want to speed up return times, that's there decision, and the effects which will result in that decision is entirely their responsibility.  Which is why the Alliance War Rewards do not take into account the Amount of fuel "burned" by a player when they are given to a player. Earning War Points doesn't cost fuel. So  fuel spent  for whatever reason during a war round is not compensated for. 


  • 0

#10
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

There is a leader board in alliances that records all alliance members war points.  Moreover, there are statistics available within the alliances for the amount of flags a player has defended and mission completed etc.  I know of no top raider that makes hundreds or thousands of fuel each week in a top competitive raiding alliance as I have said before any fuel earned is negated by that players choice to burn fuel to achieve the maximum amount of war raiding results in the least amount of time.  The players that actually earn alot of fuel each week are "fuel raiders" who do not raid for war points perse but just raid the fuel generator to steal the fuel of other players, aligned and unaligned alike.  I find it curious that you, Fred, have made so many posts about so many dz topics without actually seeming to have ever been in a top war raiding alliance, let alone any alliance.  Not that you are not entitled to your opinion, you are, just that as in this particular instance some of your ideas are actually game features and therefore redundant and purposeless.


  • 0

#11
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

There is a leader board in alliances that records all alliance members war points.  Moreover, there are statistics available within the alliances for the amount of flags a player has defended and mission completed etc.  I know of no top raider that makes hundreds or thousands of fuel each week in a top competitive raiding alliance as I have said before any fuel earned is negated by that players choice to burn fuel to achieve the maximum amount of war raiding results in the least amount of time.  The players that actually earn alot of fuel each week are "fuel raiders" who do not raid for war points perse but just raid the fuel generator to steal the fuel of other players, aligned and unaligned alike.  I find it curious that you, Fred, have made so many posts about so many dz topics without actually seeming to have ever been in a top war raiding alliance, let alone any alliance.  Not that you are not entitled to your opinion, you are, just that as in this particular instance some of your ideas are actually game features and therefore redundant and purposeless.

 

There is no leader board which publicly displays and records alliance  war point contributors. There is a private leader board for each alliance, and alliance members are able to see the leader board for their alliance. There is no leaderboard which displays alliance war point contributors to the public. As far as earning fuel goes, I'm not interested in the actual amount of fuel that is profited from these raiders. It's the amount of fuel which they obtain in a week, which I consider as fuel "earned". Which occasionally numbers in the hundreds, as is the case in Top 3 alliance wars, and sometimes, thousands. 

 

As far as your incorrect statements/assumptions about what I do in the actual game, I'll go ahead and tell you that I actually am apart of an alliance. Which actually places in the top 4. It is competitive, and from my experiences.. fuel does not allow players to earn  the most war points in the least amount of time. The player's skill and strategic tactics ultimately determine his/her effectiveness in obtaining war points. Those who know how to raid, with decent items to back up there knowledge, will be the one's capable of  achieving the " maximum amount of war raiding results in the least amount of time." With or without fuel. 

 

Now I don't know what dead zone game you play where fuel ultimately determines how much your able to do, but in the one I, and the rest of community play, It's the player's personal desire/will that does. 

 

Additionally, I feel as if you don't know anything about a person on the forums, you shouldn't start assuming random nonsense about them that isn't true, or at the very least, keep it to yourself


Edited by Fredswar1, 04 June 2017 - 04:32 AM.

  • 0

#12
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

A top 4 alliance is not equivalent to a top 3 alliance:  nuff said.  You , yourself, in other posts admitted to being relatively new to the game,so I assumed nothing.  As for "random nonsense" I believe that best describes the majority of the posts you have recently flooded the forums with:  all you ideas and proposed game changes are in my opinion impractical and not constructive to the game as it presently exists.  Any change requires time and money on the part of the game developers so for the sake of real practicality, perhaps, you should consider the feasibility of any game change you suggest i.e. is it worth their time and money to implement any of your suggestions.  Ideas are great, until they become unnecessary, impractical and just a "distraction."  


  • 0

#13
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

A top 4 alliance is not equivalent to a top 3 alliance:  nuff said.  You , yourself, in other posts admitted to being relatively new to the game,so I assumed nothing.  As for "random nonsense" I believe that best describes the majority of the posts you have recently flooded the forums with:  all you ideas and proposed game changes are in my opinion impractical and not constructive to the game as it presently exists.  Any change requires time and money on the part of the game developers so for the sake of real practicality, perhaps, you should consider the feasibility of any game change you suggest i.e. is it worth their time and money to implement any of your suggestions.  Ideas are great, until they become unnecessary, impractical and just a "distraction."  

Any alliance can place in the top 3 so long as they've got the will, and personnel to do so. Alliances aren't born in the top 3. In takes a lot of work and dedication to get to the top, and a lot more to stay there. My "top 4 alliance" actually offers competition to a "top 3 alliance". We've even beaten a "top 3 alliance" and placed in the "top 3" ourselves. As far as being "relatively new to the game", I've played long enough to become apart of an alliance in "top 4", and rise through the ranks to earn the rank of commander. I've got a nice experience of the game so far. 

 

As far as your opinion  of my ideas being "impractical and not constructive to the game as it currently exists", I will go ahead and tell you that each idea of mine has a  reason for being implemented, and adds something positive to the game. Furthermore, Con and his team of developers can determine whether or not it's "feasible" to implement them.  If they can't implement the idea, for whatever reason, then they won't. If you don't like reading my ideas which you claim are "impractical and not constructive",  please note that you don't have to read them. The creator of each topic on the forums is displayed by the topic title. 

 

Also, if any moderator has a problem with the amount of topics I post. He/she will take appropriate action at his/her discretion 

 

 

Additionally, you might want to read  http://forum.conarti...rum-guidelines/

 

before making any more replies. 

 

a3iXODW.png


Edited by Fredswar1, 05 June 2017 - 08:39 PM.

  • 0

#14
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

Well, in the dead zone game I play Fuel does ultimately determine how much one is able to do..and now you are extremely off topic as I never critiqued you personally just that your posts and ideas do reflect that you are indeed somewhat new to the game and perhaps unaware of all of the game features...i.e.  hot fixes do occur when needed, alliance members can chat with their alliance via the activity board if banned, etcetera.  There have been many additions and changes to the game over the last five years based on players Input.  Moreover as I said you are totally entitled to any of your many ideas and opinions, many of which I find to be redundant to existing game features and unnecessary  to enhance the game based on a cost-effective analysis and that is my opinion.  So "commander" , if you post and idea and opinion then be prepared to be challenged bases on that and not "take it personally."


  • 0

#15
Fredswar1

Fredswar1
  • 139 posts

Well, in the dead zone game I play Fuel does ultimately determine how much one is able to do..and now you are extremely off topic as I never critiqued you personally just that your posts and ideas do reflect that you are indeed somewhat new to the game and perhaps unaware of all of the game features...i.e.  hot fixes do occur when needed, alliance members can chat with their alliance via the activity board if banned, etcetera.  There have been many additions and changes to the game over the last five years based on players Input.  Moreover as I said you are totally entitled to any of your many ideas and opinions, many of which I find to be redundant to existing game features and unnecessary  to enhance the game based on a cost-effective analysis and that is my opinion.  So "commander" , if you post and idea and opinion then be prepared to be challenged bases on that and not "take it personally."

 

 By making comments directed at how long I've been playing the game , you critique me and not my ideas. By  I've taken nothing personal. However, I'd like it if people direct their criticism/comments on the idea itself and hold/keep all comments regarding the one posting the idea to his/herself, . How does me being "somewhat new to the game" as you say, relate to the need to fix a bug, which according to many players who've played the game, long before I have, has existed for months, Or, in this particular topic, relate to the need to have a leader board dedicated for the top war point contributors during a war round? 

 

I've no problem for people to criticize my ideas. It allows me to find faults in my ideas, and allows me to make better, more thought out ideas, without them being redundant or already suggested. However, people should not go off topic and make comments directed personally at me, and not my idea, which in my opinion you did do, by making comments on how long you think I've played the game. This is not the general discussion forum. This forum is for ideas, which may or may not end up sparking ideas for the developers. 

 

Now for the sake, of this topic, I shall digress this pointless argument and make any new replies for this topic, based on this topic. 


Edited by Fredswar1, 05 June 2017 - 11:49 PM.

  • 0

#16
lael

lael
  • 199 posts

No.  I was not criticizing you personally.  The amount of time you have been playing or lackthereof has been aptly demonstrated by your numerous posts ..that is and continues to be my observation based upon your continued comments here and elsewhere.  1)  Using fuel to speed up return time on raids ABSOLUTELY DOES help a player maximize their war points during any war round assuming equal skill sets of players.  Armor games has had much more competitive alliance war rounds than Kong.  Top raiders in very competitive war rounds at Armor Games do burn an insanely large amount  of fuel,,,way more than they ever win in alliance wars or by any other means. 2)  Why have more leaderboards when a players personal war statistics are readily available as well as the individual leaderboards in each alliances.  3) Saying you are a new player is not an insult or an attack but a fact yourself referred to in other posts.  4) players can achieve "game fame" in a variety of way and it seems that here in your forums you have found your niche:)


  • 0

#17
chris327

chris327
  • 68 posts
Fred you didn't beat a top 3 alliance. You beat me and 1 other raider with no alts 1 week.
  • 0

#18
Yolento

Yolento
  • 11 posts

I believe this is a good idea, not the part of give rewards to the top 10 raiders, or sort a reward between the top 50 raiders, but the part of create an statistic that show the top 100 raiders of the week.

 

That would be really nice to see. I'm sure it's not hard develop that, only consolidate what every alliance already has and create a top 100 raiders weekly statistic for the public. 


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: raiding, good, inspiring