Jump to content

Photo

Too Little Targets At Lvl 50

Kong Kongregate targets alliance wars war points white flag

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1
justinsr316

justinsr316
  • 854 posts

An issue that is really turning me off of alliance war outside of the raiding mechanics is the war itself on the Kong server. AG/FB might not have this issue but on  Kong a lvl 50 raider has 5 or less targets total worth points before anyone else hits them. I have gone through my targets list every 5 minutes for the last hour and haven't been able to raid a single person for points. The major problems causing this is;

 

A) the kong server has a much smaller player base 

B: not enough people are worth points due to the points gap between alliances

and the biggest reason

C) Alts are so rampant on the kong server that most of the "raiders" now choose the scared tactic and WF anybody that goes over lvl 35 and just make another alt and raid with the alt for points. 

 

Problem A is an issue that can't just be solved by any game solutions outside of combining servers and this would never happen so skip problem A. 

 

Problem B could be helped if any alliance that has any amount of warpoints was at least worth 1 or 2. I'd rather do a raid that's worth at least something than sit here and stare at my screen until 1 of the 5 brave raiders come out of protection from the last time myself or one of the few others raided them for points. God forbid your adobe crashes or you get a game crash or just very poor AI and have to refresh out of one of these super few targets.

 

C is where the assistance is needed. I don't know what the solution to this issue would be as there are many possible solutions but it would change the set ups to current war points system and many of the White Flaggers would be upset with some of the proposals.

 

Option 1) Possibly, if there is x % of an alliance with war points then that alliance is deemed a "war alliance" and they can't just throw on a WF. 

Option 2) Set up a different sort of points system where the level of the defender will fetch you more points so a lvl 13 who goes up against piss poor defenses can't net the same amount of points of a lvl 50 raider who goes up against 46 range weapons that deal over 200 damage. 

It's just wrong that a lvl 10 can do 4 raids worth 14 points each every single hour. A level 50 has to wait 4 hours in between his and they're both worth the same amount of points? No wonder everyone on Kong decided to flag their high lvl's and just keep making alts to kill the war system. There are guys that have well over a dozen alts all under the lvl 20 range and they just pick apart the wars because of the ease of low lvl raiding, the unfair return times, and the lack of point differential. 

 

Edit: I am not against alts in the least bit. I have 3 accounts total on the kong server, I'm simply against the current points system and the fact that these people use alts to abuse the points system. 

 

Other different options for a cure is welcomed


Edited by justinsr316, 08 April 2014 - 07:33 PM.

  • 8

#2
Cybertraxx

Cybertraxx
  • 281 posts

There is a issue with targets on AG/FB server too...from being in the top alliance here it takes up to an hour to just find anything worth points...very boring and a waste of time.


  • 3

#3
Maruse

Maruse
  • 816 posts

There is a issue with targets on AG/FB server too...from being in the top alliance here it takes up to an hour to just find anything worth points...very boring and a waste of time.

 

Yeah the war as become an alt account war.


  • 1

#4
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

A third option is to break the war into 2 tiers.  An amateur rank from lvls 10-30 and pro rank from lvls 31-50. So the low-mid levels raiders don't dominate all the points, and the high levels, with their limited targets are only fighting amongst themselves.  Maybe instead of the top 10 winners from each winning alliance getting fuel, you could do the top 5 winners so the same number of people win fuel.  Offer high fuel prizes to the pro-ranks to encourage more participation instead of white flags.


  • 0

#5
justinsr316

justinsr316
  • 854 posts

A third option is to break the war into 2 tiers.  An amateur rank from lvls 10-30 and pro rank from lvls 31-50. So the low-mid levels raiders don't dominate all the points, and the high levels, with their limited targets are only fighting amongst themselves.  Maybe instead of the top 10 winners from each winning alliance getting fuel, you could do the top 5 winners so the same number of people win fuel.  Offer high fuel prizes to the pro-ranks to encourage more participation instead of white flags.

This could work but it doesn't really keep people from just WF their high account and only warring with their alts. In fact, it would still encourage them to do so because of the level of difficulty to just make a new low lvl alt, feed him some weapons and gear and then farm the low level war. 


  • 0

#6
Maruse

Maruse
  • 816 posts

A third option is to break the war into 2 tiers.  An amateur rank from lvls 10-30 and pro rank from lvls 31-50. So the low-mid levels raiders don't dominate all the points, and the high levels, with their limited targets are only fighting amongst themselves.  Maybe instead of the top 10 winners from each winning alliance getting fuel, you could do the top 5 winners so the same number of people win fuel.  Offer high fuel prizes to the pro-ranks to encourage more participation instead of white flags.

 

I can see where this is going.


  • 0

#7
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

This could work but it doesn't really keep people from just WF their high account and only warring with their alts. In fact, it would still encourage them to do so because of the level of difficulty to just make a new low lvl alt, feed him some weapons and gear and then farm the low level war. 

You can't make high level people want to raid.  The lure of the item boost is too great.  You can farm low levels weapons with a high level character, but you can't farm high level weapons with a low character so it makes sense to opt out of pvp with the high levels and raid with the lower ones.  The opportunity cost of raiding at high levels is much greater. The only solution is just hope more people make it to 50 and a percentage of them want to raid, or nerf the white flag which has been violently shot down on the idea's board.

 

Edit:  I do like the idea of everyone being worth something, even if not much.  4 hours for 2 points seems like a waste, but 4 hours for 2 points and 30 fuel seems like a lot less of a waste.


Edited by dumbjock123, 08 April 2014 - 07:59 PM.

  • 2

#8
justinsr316

justinsr316
  • 854 posts

30 minutes later and I still don't have a single target from level 41-50 that is worth points. So now it's been over an hour and a half without a viable points target. 

 

snip

It wouldn't need an overall nerf but possibly inside of an alliance that is warring then I would be open to it. I'm not against the WF either just against those that are taking the easy route. I guess what is getting to me is that I don't feel like making another alt just to abuse the alliance wars for the fuel. The challenge of raids is at the higher levels which I like. I have an account on AG that is in the 20's and one on Yahoo in the teens, I don't get on them much cuz it's just boring at that level in all honesty and easy. I guess what gets to me is that the current war set up actually encourages players to take the easy way out and just farm low level's if they want to win. 


  • 0

#9
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

If you really want to encourage people to take off their white flags...don't allow people with white flag to get any war related boosts.  They can still opt out of the pvp, but they don't get the benefits of the war.


  • -3

#10
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

The downvoting is precisely the reaction I was looking for.   There should be costs associated with white flagging.  The cost of opting out of war would be you don't get to participate in war. The op was looking for ways to encourage more high levels to take off the white flag. and it's clear from the negative reaction it would do just that.


  • 0

#11
Hatchford

Hatchford
  • 920 posts

when I look at the "Alliance Wars" I see 2 distinct parts. you have "alliance" and then there is the "wars". alliance is the donations and war is the raiding. the  truth is, when it comes to point raiding, only 30 people win. your asking thousands of players to strive for a goal that only a very few will accomplish. not only that, but as someone has already pointed out, Alliance wars is more appropriately named Alt wars. new players cant hold a flame to what a veteran player with 3, 4 or many more profiles some players have. to thrust everyone into the war would be unfair to these people.

 

moreover, when this game was first made, there was no pvp side of the game. the fact that it maintained a player base long enough for the game to expand coupled with the popularity of WF as evidenced by the OPs thread shows how many ppl completely loathe the pvp side of this game. personally, since the last couple updates I have all but ceased to raid. its no longer fun and in fact seems like a chore and a royal pain in the ass.


  • 1

#12
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

That's dumb and wouldn't work. Good design comes from incentives and not punishment. If there was more for level 50's to do then I'm certain they would be less likely to throw up the white flag. 

 

You can do this by reducing the amount of time it takes to come back from high level raids. Maybe instead of level based raid timers, increase the time based on the position on the scoreboard. Any recommendations like this to help encourage high level players to participate? 

Good design comes from choices.  You don't get punished for white flagging out of WAR, you get rewarded for NOT white flagging out of war.


  • 1

#13
Hatchford

Hatchford
  • 920 posts

WF users are punished in multiple ways already. you don't think losing a book slot hurts? also what a lot of WF nerfers seem to ignore the fact that disabling PvP prevents a WF user from raiding gennys and claiming bounties. they are giving up the opportunity to earn hundreds of fuel a week by using that book. the book is balanced as it is. no nerfs needed. besides, even if you disabled boosts, all the farmers would do is take it off for the item boost and put it back on the next round. so instead of always having a shortage, raiders would only have a shortage every other week..... not a very elegant solution


Edited by Hatchford, 08 April 2014 - 09:22 PM.

  • 5

#14
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

WF users are punished in multiple ways already. you don't think losing a book slot hurts? also what a lot of WF nerfers seem to ignore the fact that disabling PvP prevents a WF user from raiding gennys and claiming bounties. they are giving up the opportunity to earn hundreds of fuel a week by using that book. the book is balanced as it is. no nerfs needed. besides, even if you disabled boosts, all the farmers would do is take it off for the item boost and put it back on the next round. so instead of always having a shortage, raiders would only have a shortage every other week..... not a very elegant solution

So take it off...what i'm proposing isn't a nerf to white flag.  it's a reward to people who participate.  White flag will still do exactly what it does now.  No nerf.  None at all.  Just a choice.


  • 0

#15
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

moreover, when this game was first made, there was no pvp side of the game. the fact that it maintained a player base long enough for the game to expand coupled with the popularity of WF as evidenced by the OPs thread shows how many ppl completely loathe the pvp side of this game. personally, since the last couple updates I have all but ceased to raid. its no longer fun and in fact seems like a chore and a royal pain in the ass.

Moreover, when the game was made there were no alliance boosts either.  So you can't call not giving them to WFers a punishment using that logic either.  Furthermore, that's not what the OPs point was at all.  He didn't say people loathed pvp, his point was that high levels of supposedly 'raiding' alliances opted out of pvp because it was more difficult than raiding at low level, but they made alts in the same alliance because they liked raiding. 

 

A fair compromise might be that alliances with members who white flag can't win wars, and I believe that was one of the OP's suggestions.  If you're in a 'raiding' alliance, you don't get to white flag.


  • 0

#16
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,180 posts

As somebody who uses the White Flag on a semi-permanent basis (because I think raiding is, and always has been, a broken glitched mess) I can tell you that, at least for me, if you were to take away the alliance boosts to players using the White Flag I wouldn't take the White Flag off -- I'd just quit my alliance.   Staying out of that cluster[CENSORED] is worth more to me than the alliance boosts.  But that's just my personal opinion,  other players opinions my vary.

 

---

 

As far as making it more viable for Level 50 players to raid, I had suggested dynamic raid times awhile back, but that kinda fell flat.   Seemed like players didn't want it, or didn't get the concept of it.


  • 2

#17
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

As far as making it more viable for Level 50 players to raid, I had suggested dynamic raid times awhile back, but that kinda fell flat.   Seemed like players didn't want it, or didn't get the concept of it.

Sounds ok to me, but how does it solve the problem of high levels opting out and making raiding alts?


  • 0

#18
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,180 posts

Sounds ok to me, but how does it solve the problem of high levels opting out and making raiding alts?

 

By itself it doesn't however....

 

It's just wrong that a lvl 10 can do 4 raids worth 14 points each every single hour. A level 50 has to wait 4 hours in between his and they're both worth the same amount of points?

 

If a Level 10 and a Level 50 have identical raid times, then the Level 10 account cannot raid more often (and theoretically score more points) in the same timeframe as the Level 50. 

 

Furthermore, with raid times lower than mission times for high level players (for non-DMU players anyway), there would be a much greater impetus for those players to raid.  If a player could raid four times, or run a mission once, more players would raid. 

 

So it's not a cure-all, but it does address "some" of the problems going on.  


  • 0

#19
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

The real reason people create raiding alts is to feed them gear so they can beat on weaker players.  You make a lvl 19 and give him max craft m-24s, and he's unbeatable to anyone below him.  You can 1 man raid every compound (except for traps).  Also if you're injured at low level, instead of using expensive meds that require fuel to craft or time to farm, you use lvl 2 bandages.  The incentives all around are to raid low and flag out high. 


  • 0

#20
Maruse

Maruse
  • 816 posts

The real reason people create raiding alts is to feed them gear so they can beat on weaker players.  You make a lvl 19 and give him max craft m-24s, and he's unbeatable to anyone below him.  You can 1 man raid every compound (except for traps).  Also if you're injured at low level, instead of using expensive meds that require fuel to craft or time to farm, you use lvl 2 bandages.  The incentives all around are to raid low and flag out high. 

 

Yeah and this might be a reason why new players seems to quit quite early.


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Kong, Kongregate, targets, alliance wars, war points, white flag