Jump to content

Photo

More Incentive For Completing War Tasks With Haste

fuel war tasks deadline top five alliance contributing incentive competition reward

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1
Nathaneil

Nathaneil
  • 24 posts

I believe this game needs more competition despite the new additions relating to Alliances. How do we introduce even more competition? By rewarding players and their alliances with fuel for completing any war task within X amount of days as an additional incentive. If an alliance can complete a war task within the first couple days, all contributing players will be rewarded 10 fuel, by default, plus 5 more fuel per day they have left over until the deadline. The top 5 contributors, for that task, would be rewarded an additional 5 fuel plus an additional 1 fuel per percent they contributed towards the final amount. Enlisting and neglectful members wouldn't get any fuel reward.

 

This system would ensure that every player will want to contribute as much as they can in order to get as much fuel as possible from the war tasks. Players with lots of time can aim for the top 5, while players with not as much time can still contribute and be rewarded for it when their alliance finishes their war tasks early. This will also give alliances that can't compete in the raid wars an alternative to earn fuel, while the top three raider alliances still earn the majority of the fuel.

 

*EDIT: Perhaps the top three raider alliances wouldn't get as great of a reward from war tasks so they don't get an unfair advantage. Perhaps contributing players should only get 10 fuel each for completing each war task within the deadline despite how much they contributed or how fast they completed it.

 

Please leave a comment and a thumbs up if you liked the idea :) Criticism is welcome


Edited by Nathaneil, 16 October 2013 - 11:58 PM.

  • 0

#2
Nathaneil

Nathaneil
  • 24 posts

In an ideal situation an alliance will complete all four war tasks within the deadline, with at least one extra day remaining. This alliance would have 50 members and every single one of them would contribute in the four war tasks. If you do the math, that means for every war task that alliance will earn between {50 members * [10 fuel + 5(1) more fuel] +25 fuel for the top 5 + the % they contributed} 775 - 875 fuel per war task. Multiply that by four and that equals 3100 - 3500 total fuel for the alliance. But in reality, not all alliances have 50 members, not all members will contribute, and not all alliances will complete all four war tasks by the deadline, let alone finish them with any days left over. So let's make a new scenario.

 

An alliance has 40 member, 30 of them contribute to each war task, and only manage to finish three of the four war tasks, with no days left over. That means the alliance, as a whole, would earn {30 * [10 + 5(0)] + 25 + the % they contributed} 325 - 425 fuel per war task. Multiply that by three and that equals 975 - 1275 total fuel for the alliance that week. I think that seems fair :)


  • 0

#3
MelissaO

MelissaO
  • 817 posts

As much as I would love yet another way to earn fuel I do not agree with rewarding completion of alliance tasks with fuel. There is no risk involved in completeing the tasks as there is in being involved in war. The rewards for completeting the tasks are already nice enough, the tokens and being able to purchase the bonus'. Any members who dont do their fair share of donating should be removed by the leader so they dont get to share in the benefits with those who do the work in earning the tokens.

Anyway, thats just what I think.


  • 4

#4
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,179 posts

The rewards for completeting the tasks are already nice enough,

 

This.  Couldn't have said it better myself


  • 2

#5
Pog Mo Thoin

Pog Mo Thoin
  • 196 posts

Being in a raiding alliance I'd agree with the 2 above as well, even though most of our members concentrate on raiding and pay little attention to completing tasks, we still manage to do most of them in a few days. Only the collection tasks take longer because we run less played missions and the gun task is the only one we've not managed to complete a couple of times. As stated the boosts are already reward enough.

I don't really agree with removing people from an alliance for not contributing, some people can contribute far easier than others, and some play the game far more than others, but then our alliance doesn't place a priority on completing them. On Kong I could see how it could be difficult (I don't know if they have a lower quota or not) but on FB/AG with a DMU most of the tasks are easy to do, add in spoils looted from raiding and the contribution tasks are very easy.


  • 1

#6
Rose Mantis

Rose Mantis
  • 1,009 posts

Shouldn't your reward for Alliance tasks be their boosts and such that help give you more of an edge, helping you further secure a spot in the top 3?


  • 0

#7
MelissaO

MelissaO
  • 817 posts

Being in a raiding alliance I'd agree with the 2 above as well, even though most of our members concentrate on raiding and pay little attention to completing tasks, we still manage to do most of them in a few days. Only the collection tasks take longer because we run less played missions and the gun task is the only one we've not managed to complete a couple of times. As stated the boosts are already reward enough.

I don't really agree with removing people from an alliance for not contributing, some people can contribute far easier than others, and some play the game far more than others, but then our alliance doesn't place a priority on completing them. On Kong I could see how it could be difficult (I don't know if they have a lower quota or not) but on FB/AG with a DMU most of the tasks are easy to do, add in spoils looted from raiding and the contribution tasks are very easy.

 

I didnt mean for it to sound like anyone who doesnt contribute/contribute a certain amount should just be booted..period and no questions asked. As an alliance leader I take into consideration that some people have jobs, school, families, get sick..etc. The main thing is that this is a game and should be here for fun and not something to stress about. As for DMU players I do believe Con stated before that there are only about 1-2% of active players who have the DMU so most of the players do not.

But it is really up to each alliance leader or group of alliance leaders to decide on how they want to run their alliance. Strict rules..lax rules..no rules.


  • 0

#8
Rose Mantis

Rose Mantis
  • 1,009 posts

Con stated before that there are only about 1-2% of active players who have the DMU so most of the players do not.

He really needs to stop selling that for now and slowly shut down that service. Its Beta, people should expect that some things will go for the sake of Balance, and that Wallet Warrioring during a Beta is silly.


  • 0

#9
warbrand2

warbrand2
  • 1,289 posts

Rose there is one problem with that even though it is beta, if con did remove it, some a-hole can get upset and sue con. Sad to say but its something that can happen, even if something was given to people as a balance for taking something they spend money on away. While removing the sell of it would be a ok idea, it has a bigger problem it will give some people a undeserved upper hand.



#10
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,179 posts

Booting someone from the alliance is situational, case by case.

 

Last round my alliance struggled to finish the ammo task, finishing it with just under 24-hours to spare.   So at the end of the round, seven players who failed to contribute anything substantial were given the boot.   They were players who made no attempt to contact me or one other officers, and ignored my attempts to contact them.   Some sort of interaction would have saved (some of) them, but the complete lack of interaction meant the ax had to fall.

 

This round, with only one new recruit we're on track to finish all tasks with over a week to spare.


  • 0

#11
Rose Mantis

Rose Mantis
  • 1,009 posts

Rose there is one problem with that even though it is beta, if con did remove it, some a-hole can get upset and sue con. 

Sue him for what? He owns nothing, all game items, access, and purchases are merely rented to the user, and all ToS states that said use can be terminated at owner's whim at any time for any reason whatsoever.

Let him sue, then have con turn around and counter due for Damages (Lost Developement Time)  and Legal Fees.

 

 

Last round my alliance struggled to finish the ammo task, finishing it with just under 24-hours to spare.   So at the end of the round, seven players who failed to contribute anything substantial were given the boot.  

And that is okay, PvP is competative, keep competative or get out of the way when it comes to PvP.


  • 0

#12
LLiquid

LLiquid
  • 2,533 posts

Rose there is one problem with that even though it is beta, if con did remove it, some a-hole can get upset and sue con. Sad to say but its something that can happen, even if something was given to people as a balance for taking something they spend money on away. While removing the sell of it would be a ok idea, it has a bigger problem it will give some people a undeserved upper hand.

 

Woah there Nelly. I thought the other day was your final post?

 

I'm pretty sure Rose said;

 

 

He really needs to stop selling that for now and slowly shut down that service. Its Beta, people should expect that some things will go for the sake of Balance, and that Wallet Warrioring during a Beta is silly.

 

To point out the important bits, I have put them in bold.

 

As Rose says, the terms of service include the fact that changes can be made at the Developers choice. Just like when the upgrade doubled in price overnight.


  • 0

#13
Nathaneil

Nathaneil
  • 24 posts

I'm just worried that once an alliance starts winning, the extra fuel they earned for that round is going to help them win the next round and the next. I'm afraid the fuel reward will cause a snowball effect that will cause the top alliances to become even better and better at raiding until no one can touch them so I suggested a solution that would help level the playing field. The top alliances could use their fuel to endlessly craft supplies, speed up return times, buy items, gear and resources, upgrade equipment, and so on. Maybe this isn't the best solution and maybe this won't actually happen, but I think this needs to be thought about and/or acted upon.

 

Also, like I already mentioned, I believe this system would encourage players, even more, to contribute whatever they can no matter how much they can get on. This way, all players would benefit unlike the system now. Some of the bonuses don't apply to everybody. Just my opinion.


Edited by Nathaneil, 18 October 2013 - 02:21 AM.

  • 0

#14
Nathaneil

Nathaneil
  • 24 posts

Woops. Repeat post. Not sure how to delete so I just edited instead


Edited by Nathaneil, 18 October 2013 - 02:22 AM.

  • 0

#15
Pog Mo Thoin

Pog Mo Thoin
  • 196 posts

I'm just worried that once an alliance starts winning, the extra fuel they earned for that round is going to help them win the next round and the next. I'm afraid the fuel reward will cause a snowball effect that will cause the top alliances to become even better and better at raiding until no one can touch them. They could use their fuel to endlessly craft supplies, speed up return times, buy items, gear and resources, upgrade equipment, and so on. Maybe this isn't the best solution and maybe this won't actually happen, but I think this needs to be thought about and/or acted upon.


You realise that the alliances who win the wars, generally spend more fuel than is earnt? Not to mention that they lose fuel because they can't selectively raid targets for full fuel generators like anyone who isn't in a warring alliance.


  • 0

#16
Rose Mantis

Rose Mantis
  • 1,009 posts

I'm just worried that once an alliance starts winning, the extra fuel they earned for that round is going to help them win the next round and the next. I'm afraid the fuel reward will cause a snowball effect that will cause the top alliances to become even better and better at raiding until no one can touch them so I suggested a solution that would help level the playing field. The top alliances could use their fuel to endlessly craft supplies, speed up return times, buy items, gear and resources, upgrade equipment, and so on. Maybe this isn't the best solution and maybe this won't actually happen, but I think this needs to be thought about and/or acted upon.

 

Also, like I already mentioned, I believe this system would encourage players, even more, to contribute whatever they can no matter how much they can get on. This way, all players would benefit unlike the system now. Some of the bonuses don't apply to everybody. Just my opinion.

To sum up WHY Alliances won't stay #1 too long upon release...

Combat fatigue means your shits destroyed at the end of each round, and also means people will get bored over time and bow out of PvP for awhile or go on break indefinetly.

Besides, fuel is not hard to get, so war fuel prizes mean damn near nothing.


  • 0

#17
MelissaO

MelissaO
  • 817 posts

He really needs to stop selling that for now and slowly shut down that service. Its Beta, people should expect that some things will go for the sake of Balance, and that Wallet Warrioring during a Beta is silly.

 

As for taking the DMU out of the game from this(or some point) forward..neither here nor there to me (as I said before-most players 98-99% do not have it anyway) and from what I understand Con himself regrets adding it and/or feels it is too much. Many would most likely quit the game if the DMU were taken that they had already purchased. I know I would. That is like buying fuel and then having it taken out of the game all of the sudden.


  • 0

#18
Pog Mo Thoin

Pog Mo Thoin
  • 196 posts

Without the DMU I wouldn't be playing, imo it makes the game playable. Return times are too long, it's bad enough with 4 hours raid returns. The DMU is a one time purchase that allows you to play the game constantly, without it, I doubt I'd log into the the game more than once a day.


  • 0

#19
MelissaO

MelissaO
  • 817 posts

I'm just worried that once an alliance starts winning, the extra fuel they earned for that round is going to help them win the next round and the next. I'm afraid the fuel reward will cause a snowball effect that will cause the top alliances to become even better and better at raiding until no one can touch them so I suggested a solution that would help level the playing field. The top alliances could use their fuel to endlessly craft supplies, speed up return times, buy items, gear and resources, upgrade equipment, and so on. Maybe this isn't the best solution and maybe this won't actually happen, but I think this needs to be thought about and/or acted upon.

 

Also, like I already mentioned, I believe this system would encourage players, even more, to contribute whatever they can no matter how much they can get on. This way, all players would benefit unlike the system now. Some of the bonuses don't apply to everybody. Just my opinion.

 

The fuel an alliance wins should go towards helping them. Isnt that part of the point of winning something? To benefit from it.

I see your point but the top alliances are at the top because they contain some of the best raiders who are dedicated to the game and to pvp.

Yes, they will use the fuel for crafting, speeding up and buying stuff to help themselves- that is their reward for doing well but that fuel goes faster than you realize. I spent a little chunk of money a couple of months ago and learned myself how quickly the fuel goes.

 

Its good you put your idea out there. I might not agree with it but you took the initiative to voice your opinion and your reasons :)


  • 0

#20
MelissaO

MelissaO
  • 817 posts

Without the DMU I wouldn't be playing, imo it makes the game playable. Return times are too long, it's bad enough with 4 hours raid returns. The DMU is a one time purchase that allows you to play the game constantly, without it, I doubt I'd log into the the game more than once a day.

 

Yeah, I would have quit the game without the DMU. For me it is because of the time I spend in game. I am here hours (upon hours) at a time and I want something to do besides chat and wait. I want to play the game. Without the DMU I would not bother to log in just for a few missions and check back for another few missions.


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: fuel, war, tasks, deadline, top five, alliance, contributing, incentive, competition, reward