Jump to content

Photo

Alliance Wars - Individual War Rewards


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
253 replies to this topic

#21
DJfriede

DJfriede
  • 888 posts

better idea to count captured flags. 5/15/30 maybe more balanced to all ally

 

In that case every poor schmuck who is in a random (low ranked) alliance would be targeted daily, with no challenge for the raider at all.


  • 1

#22
fusurugi

fusurugi
  • 168 posts

If you introduce "war" items that are suited for PvP, they'll have to better than the current items or pv players won't use them.

If you have to participate in wars to craft these items, you'll create a catch 22 and just end up raising the entry bar for wars, locking people out instead of encouraging them.

 

 

Also, to the nay sayers, personal rewards are just counting your score, I see no relation to the performance of other players.


Edited by fusurugi, 13 November 2014 - 11:17 AM.

  • 2

#23
JCBecks

JCBecks
  • 271 posts

I'm torn between Flag Captures and Points Scored... on one hand, I can see that scoring 200 points in a top alliance may be a challenge... on the other hand, to DJ's point, if 15 flags is the target, you just go to the last page of War Targets and load up with 1-man raids.

 

Last week, at The Resistance (ranked 2nd page) I took 15 flags for over 200 points. This week, at LXS, the same account has 14 flags for only 126 points. The Top Alliances are definitely handicapped with points.

 

Con, is it possible to adjust so that the Top 3 alliances are all for the same amount of points? If #1 raids #3, you can score the same points just as if #3 raids #1. 


  • 0

#24
Max1144

Max1144
  • 416 posts

In that case every poor schmuck who is in a random (low ranked) alliance would be targeted daily, with no challenge for the raider at all.

 

Good point. Then again - those targets would get taken fast so only harder openents would remain ( just as now the best points are always taken in current war).

 

On another note- how about we add minus points for loosing flags? This would somewhat motivate ppl to work on their defences.


  • 0

#25
Njaelic

Njaelic
  • 185 posts

First, thank you con for the individual rewards. I really think this will bring more people into raiding :-) But I don't think this will change alliance war at all. For all those raiding alliance members here, including us as DA1. We have to decide whether we go for Top3 place with a loss in individual rewards or we don't score any warpoints in the first 1-2 days and start raiding then for the inidividual reward. Even I don't like it to say, but in my opinion we can not expect to get highest tier of ind-reward AND top3 place with fuel reward. The main reason of the rewards afaik are to bring more people into raiding, not rewarding active raiders more.

 

---------

 

I like the idea of JCBecks to even out the points for scoring within the first 3 places or at least lower the difference between them.

 

Greetings Nja


  • 1

#26
Furryicecubes

Furryicecubes
  • 144 posts

For all those worrying about it being harder to get to the amount in higher ranked alliances you need to consider the fact that hopefully all alliances (well, most) will start scoring points, it's probably more relevant on Kong, but rounds have been won with less than 2k points in the current set up.

 

All it takes is 3 other alliances to have 10 members that want the middle reward, and boom. that's 3 other alliances on 1500 points. Points will be easier to get to as alliances are scoring more points due to members wanting to hit the reward tiers. Hell. on Kong even alliances wanting to hit the first reward amount would improve things.


  • 0

#27
Kutai

Kutai
  • 25 posts

Hey Con, very interesting stuff here; However, I really fear the impact that alt accs and alt alliances will have in this new system.

 

Your thoughts on that?


  • 0

#28
frijolito

frijolito
  • 233 posts

Hopefully there will be some targets worth points on Kong :) Its a neat idea, I hope it encourages higher levels to participate more..


  • 0

#29
Ivan

Ivan
  • 571 posts

Exactly as furry said.

You all need to count in the fact that there will be more people scoring. I d say 100% more is not an overestimate.

 

Last round i got 500 with only 2 alliances worth of targets. Thats Kong (so worst case scenario).Was the only one scoring in that lvl range (almost) though but considering it could be done before this..it will surely be doable when people start scoring.

If you do 10 raids per day,you will get top tier reward.

5 point flags will be abundant for any alliance.

Raiders hunting mid tier will definitely be able to do it.

Low tier..a joke.

Those are just estimates but i think they might be something more then just a shot in the dark :)

 

We can only thank Con that he decided to give away even more fuel to make this game more alive in its pvp aspect.

 

 


  • 0

#30
Thee_Aj

Thee_Aj
  • 31 posts

dudes ummm what 1000 FUEL FOR NEXT ROUND..UGHHHHHHH alliance


  • -1

#31
Takata

Takata
  • 464 posts

I personnaly don't think that it will work for the following reasons, but I can be wrong.

First issue: unlimited allowed attacks for a limited target pool.

Adding more raiders won't solve the recurrent problem with Alliance War which is to find a target worth points without spending plenty of hours simply scrolling and scrolling the target list.

=> Unless there is no protection system and no people hanging all day (and night) behind their computer (or having robots clicking for them), the issue about the target pool will never be solved by Increasing the number of raiders, considering that all of them would be desperatly looking for targets in order to reach their next tier.

It certainly won't make it works better contrary to what many people think around.

Scoring 300 pts in 6 days is 50 pts per day, which is an average of 4-5 successful attacks. Unless the system would allow 4-5 successful attacks per day at anyone compound every 24 hrs, this simply can't work. Also, a lot of players will have to hit many more targets in order to score 50 pts daily, when one is including many 'failed' raids (with no looted banner) but having made enough damages for triggering a protection time.

Then, if one is adding playing time online + protection time (or lockout), many targets would be simply closed for attack 90-100% of the day.

Moreover, it is no secret that top scorers are buying return times for doing many more raids, hence, in order to score more points for themselves, they are simply closing many more targets for other players due to the resulting protections and lockouts applied.

Finally, the 300 pts tier would be only reached by people already able to score as much in the current War, while others won't be able simply by lack of valid targets... if, like most of the mortals, they are not able to spend their whole day and night at scrolling their target list.

But there is other tiers much more achievable, right?
Other tiers might look easier for top scorers but there would also be a considerable ammount of people trying to find targets worth some points in their range.
If they are not correctly geared, it would take many more raids in order to succeed 2-3 times per day for the second tier, or simply once a day for the first tier.

But in order to achieve (or try) that, a lot of people would have to actually remove their White Flag. And here, the ammount of damage recieved in order to try at scoring some points might simply make it not worth the reward.


- Then, the second issue: White Flagging in DZ for making fuel peacefully.
People using a WF can simply run their fuel batch every couple of days and get 90-105 fuel per War round (at higher levels).
trying to score in War would certainly imply to face compound destruction on a daily basis --at least, having their ressources and fuel looted once or twice per day, then they would give up with fuel production during those rounds-- added to the fact that it would make it difficult for completing their alliance tasks.

All they might win from participating into the War would be to get (if lucky) as much fuel... or less.
So, basically, I can't really see those guys trying more than a couple of rounds before going back to do whatever they are doing now.


- Third issue: huge PvP gear disparity between players of the same level.
There is such a difference between players gear level for PvP that many just won't change their habit and disregard the whole system as being fully pay to win. Those won't even try, whatever the end reward would be... including an exclusive new untradable infamous Con & Sev bi-face hat with 10% suppression resistance (or less).


 



#32
Frozenstorm

Frozenstorm
  • 187 posts

This is excellent news, Con. I also like the current 300 points for highest reward tier as it's low enough that reduces to need to "farm the weak". It would have been a lot worse with 500 point being highest tier.

 

However, I have a two question, which I'm surprised that no one had asked yet, though I guess all are just exited about individual rewards.

 

1. Reward boxes will give some sort of boosts. But how exactly those boost works and how long they will last? Are they like Prem boxes boost, which works for an hour or are they longer?

 

2.

ALLIANCE CREATION PRICE CHANGE

Starting next round, Alliances will cost 1000 Fuel to create. So if you want to start an Alliance, now is the time to do it.

 

Really? Don't you think that that price is way too high.

 

I mean, I can understand why you're doing something like this as you want to prevent player abusing this new system by making a lot of small alliances and that way making point scoring easier.

 

However, you must realize that that kind of price will literally mean that pretty much no one will create new alliances in the future. This will pretty much mean that you just had to join in some existing one or you don't stay on alliance at all.

 

But it really ain't that simple. Not everyone joins alliances, because they want to raid or go to war. Some had created alliances because they want to do PvE gaming and some alliances are even created because of some sort of RGP playing. No, with this change, you're simply taking variety in alliances away, because only alliances for wars would be really worth the cost..... in the long run. 

 

Besides, there is a lot easier way to prevent one-man alliances abuse with this new system. Simply make it so that no one in alliance can get those rewards, if there ain't certain amount of people in the alliance. Something like 3-5 minimum member requirement for rewards would be good. You can keep the alliance small, but you would still need at least some other people.


  • 0

#33
Hatchford

Hatchford
  • 920 posts

yeah... not much was said about the alliance creation cost but I kinda agree. I can see a few good reasons for a price increase and I certainly agree with them, but I think 1k is a bit much... 100 was a bargain for everything you were potentially getting with an alliance.... but 1k would be a huge swing in the opposite direction.... too much. 500 sounds a bit more fair... 1k is just out of reach for many players for a long time... and that's IF they don't spend any along the way.

 

300 looks kinda hard for top ranks in AG/FB... but not undoable... especially if it brings in some more players... these war boxes sound like they might have some potential...


  • 4

#34
rfc63

rfc63
  • 2 posts

This is a nice addition. But if your goal is to bring people into the wars (players like me who don't raid) this isn't the way to go about it. The barrier for entry skillwise is too high given the many veteran players and their multiple accounts.

 

I'd like to see rewards for donating too. In some cases players fill 50% of quotas by themselves. That merits some bonus.


  • 1

#35
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,179 posts

This is a nice addition. But if your goal is to bring people into the wars (players like me who don't raid) this isn't the way to go about it. The barrier for entry skillwise is too high given the many veteran players and their multiple accounts.

 

I'd like to see rewards for donating too. In some cases players fill 50% of quotas by themselves. That merits some bonus.

 

Rewards for donating to tasks aren't needed.  People do that already and alliance leaders/officers should be kicking deadweight.

 

---

 

The numbers seem reasonable to me.  50 Points in six days is 8-9 points per day, so one raid per day.  To earn a reward for raiding, that seems about right to me.   LIkewise 150 points in six days is 25 points per day, so two to three raids per day, which is around the upper bounds of what a person can do without spending fuel.   Lastly 300 points (as mentioned previously) is 5-6 raids per day, so its reserved for the really hardcore players that spend fuel (or have a lot of time on their hands).


  • 0

#36
Harpago

Harpago
  • 1,741 posts

Looks interesting.

 

On a side note, my luck sucks epically opening these Premium boxes for the Woodland helm, are there any plans to put this most cool bit of gear in the store at some stage?

 

I've just spent twenty bucks basically on fuel :(


  • 0

#37
Con

Con
  • 4,216 posts

I'll quickly cover the main topics rather than respond to everyone individually.

 

Individual Rewards

The goal with the individual rewards is to encourage the people who are raiding at a moderate pace to step up their efforts. Looking at the scoreboards, we can see a whole bunch of people who are capable of raiding, but aren't doing a whole lot of it. The reason for that is that there's no incentive for them to do it after the first few days and the big boys have taken the top spots. 

 

What I'm expecting to see, based on previous raid incentivization, is that we'll get a rise out of these more casual raiders. That in turn will provide more competition and more potentially worthy targets. 

 

The point tiers, as I said in the original post might change, yes. Heck, the entire War Point system might change, we're currently reviewing a different system as we speak.

 

Again, this isn't for the top dogs, this isn't for the beginners, this is for the middle dogs. 

 

 

Alliance Creation Price

There's a couple of reasons for the price change. The first being to discourage smaller alliances that exist solely for the benefits and not for the competition and community that's created by being in an active Alliance. The second being that it will hopefully mean that we have more dedicated Alliance leaders, people who really want to run alliances and not everyone with some spare fuel in his or her pocket.

 

 

Rewards for Donating

You get rewards for donating, they're called Alliance Tokens with which you buy boosts...



#38
JCBecks

JCBecks
  • 271 posts

 Heck, the entire War Point system might change, we're currently reviewing a different system as we speak.

 

Oooooooh. tell us more :)

 

On a serious note though, not to derail the topic at hand, but the Top 3 or Top 5 alliances all being for similar points would be excellent.


  • 0

#39
Kutai

Kutai
  • 25 posts

Thanks Con for covering most issues. Though I'm still really concerned about alts... not only do those players already have the upper hand in matters of gear (unique transfers and so on) but now it'll be possible to create alts for the sole purpose of having point farms.

 

Thus, creating something that would be new to this game, a permanent, secure, fuel and item farm. Multiplied by the number of alts you can manage, or share, or whatever.


  • -1

#40
SMAM Man

SMAM Man
  • 95 posts

This is good news indeed, definitely incentivizes more raiding and actually adds some worth to the Alliance war points for Alliances not competing for the top spots.  

 

I agree with the others that the price rise is fine, perhaps even a good thing, but a 1000 is pretty steep, I think if you increase the price that much, perhaps enable a new option to change the name of the alliance? (similar to changing the Banner)

 

 

If you introduce "war" items that are suited for PvP, they'll have to better than the current items or pv players won't use them.

If you have to participate in wars to craft these items, you'll create a catch 22 and just end up raising the entry bar for wars, locking people out instead of encouraging them.

 

I share fusurugi's view, so the future plans for the Individual War rewards would be exclusive "War" items (by getting and crafting "War" components from War Boxes) however, will these be able to compete with the weapons already in circulation (107s, M60s, 417s etc.)?  I would guess, not likely, because worthy gear will become too accessible and cause an imbalance, but of course, if they can't compete, then why bother going for the "War" items thus said items lose their value very quickly.

 

I personally like the idea of Infamous items, but most players just use them to augment their existing arsenal (e.g. Deadeye/SwiftDraw) rather than replace weapons/gear (e.g. Sandman/Warlord), which is perfectly fine, but having another Infamous-like system dubbed "War" items would be cool, not practical.

 

Items have to be equal (thereabouts) in order to be competitive, and unless these "War" items are equal to the Unique "god" weapons, then they won't be much use.

I think Fuel is the easiest and probably best reward for this system, but that's just my opinion.

 

For the points, I think having the value of War points equal for groups of Alliances (#1-#3 all yield x-points, #4-#10 all yield y-points, etc.) is a great idea, but one that could perhaps extend throughout the entire list? 


  • 0