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

#21
nihilus28

nihilus28
  • 13 posts

There is just a problem with viable targets in general. On my high level account and on my low level one I have serious problems finding someone that is both 1) not in protection or flagged and 2) worth more than a couple of points. There really is no one answer that will fix the problem but a combination of things are needed.

The system is broken in it's current form.

- Only 10 people in the winning alliances get anything but to win it takes quality participation from more than 10 people so you have people that work hard to help their alliance win but miss out on any kind of reward. For these people it's much more profitable to raid the lower ranked alliances that run their genny and get fuel that way. Maybe a fix here is that winning alliance rewards are given based on percentage of total alliance points earned.

- The raid return times at high levels are too long at 4 hours. There are multiple options to fix this that have been discussed already so I'll move on.

- The rewards for warring are honestly not the best way to get fuel at high levels unless you are in the top 10 of the #1 alliance. A level 50 account can get a max of 420 fuel every 14 days from missions alone without a peak book (30/day x 14 days = 420). Combine this with a genny and possibly even further by using a peak and you get higher fuel rewards by not participating in the war. Nerf peaks (again)? Nerf fuel from missions? Increase fuel rewards on winning alliances? Give more than just fuel as rewards? The fixes for this one are varied and thinking about all the possibilities could create it's own thread so moving on.

- Outside of the top 4 alliances in a round the targets just aren't worth the time if you're in one of those top alliances. Grinding 2 point targets makes me not want to participate in the war. Make each flag taken worth fuel and get rid of the points system all together? No more fuel rewards for the winner, you win based on how many flags you can get because each one is worth a set amount (this can vary depending on level to keep balance and prevent low levels alts from abusing)? Have point values for a raid based on defenders killed or give bonus points as such so that empty pounds don't give 0?


Edited by nihilus28, 09 April 2014 - 06:23 AM.

  • 0

#22
Njaelic

Njaelic
  • 185 posts

I like the idea with increasing war points per lvl, e.g. 5 war points base and than a multiplier for your current lvl ... raiding target is lvl 10, you get 5 x 1,0 (5) war points, target is 25 you get 5 x 2,5 (12,5 >> 13) war points and so on ... this would consider the higher return times with higher levels.


  • 0

#23
annallia

annallia
  • 121 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. 

 

This may be true for some people but not everyone, and the level 4 injuries start happening fairly early (level 14?)  Furthermore the alt farming isn't all that great either. Yeah there are a lot of people who defend poorly, hell there are some who just flat out give up and put their flag out on the corner undefended hoping you will just take it and go, but it is still fairly difficult to find targets, I will admit this is mainly due to so many people using alts.

That said, I cannot speak for everyone, but the reason I use my alts rather than my higher level mains come down to a few basic things. 

 

1) Time.  I don't like sitting around all day waiting for my people to get back, this is why I have the UCS 50% book for all of my accounts, even at the lower levels (lets say 15-16 you are looking at 2 hour returns from raids (because you won't always find level 10's worth points).

2) Firepower. I was not around for the M24s so I have no vintage M24's. This litterally sucks thefun out of raiding for me when my lowest level possible target gets to be around 19 because I will be sitting here with sportshots and maybe a fal or two going up against people with your max craft M24s, it just doesn't work.

3) Defense (while raiding). Maybe I am doing it wrong, maybe I just didn't give mid-level pvp a fair shake, I don't know. What I do know is I reach a point where my enemy can drop any of my people,e ven those wearing max hp vests in 1 or 2 shots. The obvious solution to this is to wear the armors that have projectile resist and such, problem is you get to the point of uber squishyness long before you get to those armors. 

4) Time. Did I mention time? yes but it is a big one for me. I cannot sit here all day waiting for people to return, I have crap to do. Now you could say do a raid and leave the rest home, but that doesn't appeal to me at all. I like my survivors to be as busy as I am. This means they are always out raiding, or out farming items, not sitting on their thumbs waiting for someone to come by and attack them. 

This is why I WF my higher levels.  For not having to worry about someone coming by and needlessly trashing all my stuff I give up a book slot, and that makes a much larger differnce than people give credit for.
 

I do like the idea of shorter return times at higher levels, I also like the idea of scaled points, making them worth more at higher levels, and being able to attack any alliance with war points even if it is only a pittance (or at least extend the range that they are worth something). If all of those things were in play, I would likely take that flag off here and there and participate. 

As it stands now however I will continue to hide behind my flag and moon you peeps passing by on your way to attack someone else.


  • 0

#24
spikeyspike

spikeyspike
  • 87 posts

as suggested before

points awarded to levl would seem fairer

 

a level 50 = 50 points

40= 40 points and so on

 

also time for raids to be eual ie 1 hour 30 across the board or 2 hours

 

if you are in the top 15 teams and equip a wf then times revert to 4  standard mission times


  • 0

#25
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,180 posts

as suggested before

points awarded to levl would seem fairer

 

a level 50 = 50 points

40= 40 points and so on

 

Yes lets go back to how it worked in the first couple rounds, where the top alliances didn't actually fight each other, but instead ganked the "weaker" alliances as much as they could.

 

No.

 

Nobody liked that.   Non-raiders hated it for obvious reasons, but raiders hated it as well, because it wasn't a true metric of who was the best raider.   The alliances that won those rounds didn't win because they were the best raiders, but because it was only a metric of who could grind the most, and was willing to spend the most fuel, etc.

 

---

 

There is no simple easy solution.   To get more viable targets (in war) for level 50 players you need to get more people raiding at those levels, and that takes a comprehensive, multifaceted, approach.

 

You need:

 

 

  • Greater incentives for raiding over looting in general; and

  • Greater incentives for actively participating in the war (i.e. scoring points).

 

 

Simply decreasing the raid times to a flat rate (bad idea) will not get more people raiding.   Even my idea with dynamic raid times (which starts with even lower raid times than you suggest) will not by itself get more people raiding.   At level 50, the only thing you can currently gain out of a raid that matters is... fuel.   That, by itself, is not enough to draw many people away from potentially looting that ├╝ber awesome unique.   What the reward needs to be to get more people raiding, I'm unsure.  (I do have the seed of an idea though, stay tuned).

 

As it stands right now, there is little to no incentive to participate actively in the war unless you have a chance of finishing in the top 10 members of the top 3 alliances.   That's a fairly short list.   As part of another idea, I had suggested increasing the number of positions that win fuel.   If you don't like the rest of that idea, that's fine, but there should be something to offset the significant increase of fuel.


  • 0

#26
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

.1% chance to find uniques in banners! 


  • 0

#27
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

Your dynamic raid idea is complete garbage. Decreasing the raid time to a flat rate based on Alliance rank will help encourage more raiding since there's less time wasted watching a clock tick. I know what prevents me from raiding a lot is the fact that every raid costs me 3 hours of my time. 

So you're punishing the people who actively raid even further? 


  • 0

#28
dead account here

dead account here
  • 333 posts

Your dynamic raid idea is complete garbage. Decreasing the raid time to a flat rate based on Alliance rank will help encourage more raiding since there's less time wasted watching a clock tick. I know what prevents me from raiding a lot is the fact that every raid costs me 3 hours of my time. 

 

I'm pretty sure that Zing's idea isn't garbage. I don't see how a flat timer would help in any way...if anything, it'll encourage griefing! Anyone who knows me well on Kong likely knows of the EXTREMELY heated stance between me and another player on there who LOVES to empty-trash my compound. The dynamic raid time idea of Zing's would certainly give him a couple of reasons to stop being such a dick.

 

 

.1% chance to find uniques in banners! 

 

No...just...no...I know you're better than that, jock...


  • 0

#29
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

We're looking for ideas to get lvl 40+ out from behind their flags...since they only appear interested in farming unis...why not make finding unis part of raiding?


  • 0

#30
dead account here

dead account here
  • 333 posts

We're looking for ideas to get lvl 40+ out from behind their flags...since they only appear interested in farming unis...why not make finding unis part of raiding?

 

I know that, jock, but people have mentioned that on the forums before...it's been shot down lots of times by people citing "hackers changing the rarity" among other things...


  • 0

#31
dumbjock123

dumbjock123
  • 929 posts

I know that, jock, but people have mentioned that on the forums before...it's been shot down lots of times by people citing "hackers changing the rarity" among other things...

Well hackers are hackers...they'll cheat no matter what.  But for those of us who don't cheat, and who are mostly playing this game for the pvp...why do i have to run missions to find pvp gear, when pve'rs don't need to run raids to find pve gear?


  • 0

#32
dead account here

dead account here
  • 333 posts

Buy a white flag then you pussy.

 

Wow...did you even read what I said?

 

-snip- ...LOVES to empty-trash my compound. -snip-

 

And calling me a pussy? No wonder people seem to think you're an arrogant little prick who loves to wave around his wallet...

 

Having to wait 18 hours because I've been raiding all day without retaliation is full retard.

 

What's retarded is the guy's determination to burn my compound to the ground.

 

Either:

 

A. Buy the white flag book

 

Already have.

 

B. Get better weapons/defenses

 

He raids with PP-19s and AE-50s. I defend with max-craft M24s in a parking lot defense that has kicked ass in the past and will likely continue to do so.

 

C. Stop playing

 

...are you joking?


  • 0

#33
ruawizard

ruawizard
  • 426 posts

Yes lets go back to how it worked in the first couple rounds, where the top alliances didn't actually fight each other, but instead ganked the "weaker" alliances as much as they could.

 

No.

 

Nobody liked that.   Non-raiders hated it for obvious reasons, but raiders hated it as well, because it wasn't a true metric of who was the best raider.   The alliances that won those rounds didn't win because they were the best raiders, but because it was only a metric of who could grind the most, and was willing to spend the most fuel, etc.

 

There's no reason that you can't scale points based both on (1) level, and (2) alliance rank. 


Edited by ruawizard, 09 April 2014 - 06:53 PM.

  • 0

#34
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,180 posts

Spartan do yourself a favor and ignore Sgt Jonny's new persona, I already have.

 

There's no reason that you can't scale points based both on (1) level, and (2) alliance rank. 

 

That's how it's supposed to work now.   However it may be that the alliance ranking is not being weighted correctly, or that due to the paucity of players/alliances actually participating in the war that the calculations are being thrown off.

 

Ideal situation as I see it:

 

Attacking a level "n" player in the top alliance should earn "y" points (does not have to be the same as the players level but should be a constant like 2/3 player level etc).

 

Attacking the same level player in 5th place alliance should earn around 80%  ( y * 0.8 )

 

Attacking the same level player in the 10th place alliance should earn around 60%  ( y * 0.7 )

 

Attacking the same level player in the 100th place alliance should earn around 10%  ( y * 0.1 )

 

Con could easily set up a formula for the levels in between those.  (It already works that way to some degree).


Edited by Zingman, 09 April 2014 - 08:07 PM.

  • 0

#35
ironmaidenxp

ironmaidenxp
  • 105 posts

almost 2 month ago, i dont had the problem of target in lvl 50, always i has 10 or more targets of top 3 alliances in war all the time, but now not, find targets of lvl45+ is very hard , so you cant do much war points with level45+ account, so i put wf i decide to loot. and fight with low alts. is sad but true.

 

 

edit: the problem begin when con decide up level to 50 in kong


Edited by ironmaidenxp, 09 April 2014 - 08:32 PM.

  • 0

#36
ruawizard

ruawizard
  • 426 posts

Spartan do yourself a favor and ignore Sgt Jonny's new persona, I already have.

 

 

That's how it's supposed to work now.   However it may be that the alliance ranking is not being weighted correctly, or that due to the paucity of players/alliances actually participating in the war that the calculations are being thrown off.

 

Ideal situation as I see it:

 

Attacking a level "n" player in the top alliance should earn "y" points (does not have to be the same as the players level but should be a constant like 2/3 player level etc).

 

Attacking the same level player in 5th place alliance should earn around 80%  ( y * 0.8 )

 

Attacking the same level player in the 10th place alliance should earn around 60%  ( y * 0.7 )

 

Attacking the same level player in the 100th place alliance should earn around 10%  ( y * 0.1 )

 

Con could easily set up a formula for the levels in between those.  (It already works that way to some degree).

 

 

The points based on alliance rank is already aggressively scaled.  My alliance is in 1st right now.  Currently I earn 11 points for the second ranked alliance, 8 for the 3rd, 8 for 4th, 7 for 5th, 5 for 6th, 2 for 7th, and then it basically drops off a cliff into oblivion after the top 10.

 

There is no real scaling between levels though, maybe a point or two, which is dependent on whether you are attacking someone higher or lower relative to you, not level.

 

If you were to scale based on alliance rank and level, you'd need a two-factor equation.  I'm not sure what the current equation is for scaling based on alliance rank, but I'd imagine it could be a similar scaling, though maybe not as aggressive (i.e., more linear).


  • 0

#37
ruawizard

ruawizard
  • 426 posts

I'd also be in favor of a two-tier system (10-29 and 30-50), but I'm not sure Kong has the userbase for it.  It would definitely motivate people to stick with the game and level up.


  • 0

#38
Maruse

Maruse
  • 816 posts

Something has to be done and what ever it is just as long as it works.


  • 1

#39
Hatchford

Hatchford
  • 920 posts

as a few other people have already said, the main problem with raiding at high levels is the rewards for it. since high levels are almost never in need of resources, the only motivation outside of the wars to raid is fuel. as many have caught on to that, a lot of them have simply quit running or even dismantle the genny to avoid being targeted themselves. that leaves the wars. only 30 people win fuel in a given round. that is 30 out of how many thousands? as it stands, there really is not a motivation to participate in the wars for many people for the simple fact that only a very few that are usually from a very select group attain the reward for the wars. and both of these issues are coupled with the 4 hour return times that you have to go through multiple times. Nerfing WF or disabling alliance functions for WF users in any way would upset a very huge portion of the player base. this is a hornets nest you don't want to touch. so you really only have a couple options. one is reducing return times and the other is coming up with some type of other sought after target for raids aside from usually non-existent fuel and banners (which what is pointless to many).


Edited by Hatchford, 10 April 2014 - 09:22 PM.

  • 0

#40
spikeyspike

spikeyspike
  • 87 posts

lets just call it as it is

 

zing ya wf so ya points are nothing

2 raiding points to level is the way

3 folks who run a war clan remove  allowence to wf or they dont get full points half points for 205 WFS

4 encourage leveling up and limit alts to an ip max 3

 

i have more then 3 so yes id lose out but im not crying

 

if an alt has a clan and an alt clan tie them in so noone can farm an alt clans alt for points

 

my alts that raid are all in one clan i dont farm my lat loot clan

not many have the honour or that clain

 

none raiders opinions dont count ya wf and bitch at us either drop ya flag and raid or stfu

 

if you want to know whos beat man up we get beat from farmers of alts not raiders  there are poss 10 guys can challenge the best of my clan and none of the others clans can get near so  sort the points  or drop the wars  cos soon the best will say  no point lets farm the lows and prevent new players joining by greifing  cos we have the many level unis

 

it happens dont deny it no clan is innocent

 

so points for levels  alt restriction .I,P, based  and then lkets see who rises as the best (xerano) my opinion

 

be real dont hide use excuses or wf if ya raid raid dont wf  when exploits gone  fight  i do

or stop warring  raid for fuel as we did till goaded to war then get blindsided with alt clan farming we fight we take top 3 no alt farming we are that fking good

 

FKU  for life


Edited by spikeyspike, 10 April 2014 - 11:49 PM.

  • 0



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