@Kabam Miike I’ve read the comments here but I can’t find an answer to this question : What will happen for the treasury in global ? We run full AQ6, we had 26M gold left for example, what will happen for this ? It’s especially unfair for those running AQ5...
We hope you’ll send a refund !
They will, in terms of tickets.
Only excess donations from the last 5 months. Unless they saved up 26m gold over the last 5 months their hard earned gold will go down the drain.
Hello, as we all know is kabam converting a company based problem to our/player problem, well knowing that it is bad for us. But they don't have any idea how to make it work good for both sides...if they had, they just made it directly.
Let's just look on an other example: you are at home and your friends are here. your best friend is in your only toilet. and you need to go to toilet very quick...now you have a problem...how you're gonna solve this? in our case it goes like that: you go to your neighbors front door and put a brown pile directly in front of it, well knowing that it is not a good thing! and NOT knowing how to clean it afterwards, but! you made it not longer your problem and you just accept that it may stink in the neighborhood
My question is: with wich reason is it correct to cause problems for thousands of players and cover it as a good thing? neither is it ok to just let it go like that nor to try to find a solution after the change
No matter from which side you look at this problem, bringing this change without a solution is nothing more than in the previous example.
and NO it is not the same if a few members of the alliance are carrying the whole cost of everybody, or if the whole TEAM carries the cost TOGETHER
My ally has always ran 1 BG of map 6 and 2 BG of map 5. This works well as we have the map 6 players that hate 5 and won’t run it and then some map 5 players who don’t want 6. We have get some decent rewards from doing this and it works well. We share the donations out between all 30 members so it’s fair 100%. However the changes you are bringing in with these tickets are simply not fair for mixed map allies who run 6&5. Why should the map 6 group be expected to only pay for tickets yet the whole ally gets the rewards? Not fair Kabam and you need to look at this and address this with a solution before starting this on 10th June ,half arsed, when it’s clearly not been thought through. It will just upset loyal players.
I understand the change and actually like the idea - but it’s simply not fair for allies running mixed maps. Please can you advise if this will be addressed? Some sort of response would be appreciated ASAP so we can work our where to go from here. Thanks
Better idea: Make it a "Ticket treasury" only available for each individual day of AQ. Alliance starts aq on day1, 766. For all 30members to participate, 600 tickets would need to be donated to that day's "Ticket Treasury". Now, each member can donate their share of 20, or one member donate all 600, or anything in-between. You can only join a BG if at least 20 tickets are in the treasury. This allows alliance members to equally share the cost as they equally share the rewards, and also allows you to cover entry for a friend until they can get you back. Max out the treasury capacity based on what map combinations are run that day and lower it each time a player enters a BG. So for the above example it would be 600 max and lower it by 20 each time a player joins. This way no unnecessary tickets would be donated.
Worse idea actually. The main reason they introduced the tickets is to stop loaders. Your method above allows that to continue.
Think about it again. It actually doesnt. You can only load tickets after the AQ day started and only for 1day. Nobody starts AQ with the loaders still in the alliance.
Better idea: Make it a "Ticket treasury" only available for each individual day of AQ. Alliance starts aq on day1, 766. For all 30members to participate, 600 tickets would need to be donated to that day's "Ticket Treasury". Now, each member can donate their share of 20, or one member donate all 600, or anything in-between. You can only join a BG if at least 20 tickets are in the treasury. This allows alliance members to equally share the cost as they equally share the rewards, and also allows you to cover entry for a friend until they can get you back. Max out the treasury capacity based on what map combinations are run that day and lower it each time a player enters a BG. So for the above example it would be 600 max and lower it by 20 each time a player joins. This way no unnecessary tickets would be donated.
Worse idea actually. The main reason they introduced the tickets is to stop loaders. Your method above allows that to continue.
Think about it again. It actually doesnt. You can only load tickets after the AQ day started and only for 1day. Nobody starts AQ with the loaders still in the alliance.
This idea isn't as good. It doesn't address arena botters/mercs from selling to their alliance.
Free maps period would make sense the ticket system is going to destroy my alliance we have been running since the start we run 655 and split the donations to help everyone. Now all the burden is on the map six guys.
One problem i see with free maps is everyone would then play map 7 and they have no obligation to clear the map, since a map 5 alliance playing map 7 can earn more by just reaching the second mini boss. AQ is meant to be explored.
Make the final boss kill give a ton more points. “Issue” fixed.
Free maps period would make sense the ticket system is going to destroy my alliance we have been running since the start we run 655 and split the donations to help everyone. Now all the burden is on the map six guys.
One problem i see with free maps is everyone would then play map 7 and they have no obligation to clear the map, since a map 5 alliance playing map 7 can earn more by just reaching the second mini boss. AQ is meant to be explored.
Make the final boss kill give a ton more points. “Issue” fixed.
I admit that I don't know how the points for boss are decided, but if the Boss is given "a ton more points" just encourage alliances to clear only Miniboss and Boss from a single path or take down only some links and leave out everything else? That's what happens in aw sometimes. The point is to encourage aq exploration and putting a price encourages that.
Here is an excellent solution to the problem of mercs and mods and bots dumping resources into treasuries, while still being fair to alliances that run mixed maps: Make Alliance Quest FREE. An entire game mode should not be locked behind needing a certain amount of resources. Alliance War is free, so why shouldn't Alliance Quest be free as well?
Better idea: Make it a "Ticket treasury" only available for each individual day of AQ. Alliance starts aq on day1, 766. For all 30members to participate, 600 tickets would need to be donated to that day's "Ticket Treasury". Now, each member can donate their share of 20, or one member donate all 600, or anything in-between. You can only join a BG if at least 20 tickets are in the treasury. This allows alliance members to equally share the cost as they equally share the rewards, and also allows you to cover entry for a friend until they can get you back. Max out the treasury capacity based on what map combinations are run that day and lower it each time a player enters a BG. So for the above example it would be 600 max and lower it by 20 each time a player joins. This way no unnecessary tickets would be donated.
Worse idea actually. The main reason they introduced the tickets is to stop loaders. Your method above allows that to continue.
Think about it again. It actually doesnt. You can only load tickets after the AQ day started and only for 1day. Nobody starts AQ with the loaders still in the alliance.
This idea isn't as good. It doesn't address arena botters/mercs from selling to their alliance.
Oh my god, you really don't get it. The ticket treasury is only available after you start AQ, after you start the map/maps. And the treasury is capped at the total value for that day's maps cost. So, maximum would be 900 tickets for a 777 day. You don't start AQ with a treasury loader in the alliance. Even if you do, he donates and kick him out, your old member cant join the aq map after. Map6 and 7 require full 10 member BG to 100%. After day ends, treasury resets. Or it doesn't. It wont matter, as treasury will be empty if all battle groups fill up. Once AQ ends, treasury becomes unavailable. So, only active members can put tickets in, as many as they want, if they want to cover the entry for someone else. Also, costs should be 12 tickets for map6 and 24 for map7, so if an alliance runs just 2 bgs, with mixed map7 and 6, the average per player is 18.0 ( and not 22.5 as per current costs).
I still like the idea of map 5 rewards including tickets to open map 6. Maybe even add tickets to map 6 rewards to open map 7. This is a win/win for alliances running split maps. The lower maps get the shared rewards while “paying” for the harder maps for the members running them.
No matter what this company does, no matter how this company does something, there will always be a bunch of idiots, who will complain, complain, complain and complain.
What's the problem in running different maps in different BGs with all this ticket system? 10 players are capable of doing Map 6 - they are doing Map 6. 10 other players are capable only doing Map 5 - they, oh what a surprise, are doing Map 5. Rewards are shared in between all the 30 players. What are you afraid of? I'll take a shot, and say that you're afraid of the fact, that the players, who are doing Map 5, will remain at that position no matter what, and still get Map 6 rewards for free. Simple solution - kick that sons of **** out of the alliance, when you get the feeling, that they are using other 10 people who do Map 6. That's what alliance leader, and officers are for, to detect that kind of players, and get rid of them.
This ticket system also will simplify the leadership and officership, no need for calculation, no need for chasing a couple of cheating players who avoided treasury for the long time. It's a huge improvement. You want AQ - pay for the AQ. You don't want AQ - don't pay for it. It's that simple.
Also, if you give a competent look at the excel sheet of the donation system for the tickets, you will see, that price for the tickets is much much much lower than it was with the treasury donation system.
So I'll ask one more time: What are you complaining for?
@Kabam Miike I’ve read the comments here but I can’t find an answer to this question : What will happen for the treasury in global ? We run full AQ6, we had 26M gold left for example, what will happen for this ? It’s especially unfair for those running AQ5...
We hope you’ll send a refund !
They will, in terms of tickets.
Only excess donations from the last 5 months. Unless they saved up 26m gold over the last 5 months their hard earned gold will go down the drain.
Well what do you suggest?
A full refund of all ressources either as an equivalent amount of tickets or directly as those ressources.
Easy as that.
Exactly. In tickets. I have a thing against Kabam refunding the donations in Gold, BCs, and Loyalty.
How/when does the ticket store (don’t know what to call it) reset?
Is 450 units worth of tickets for 1 week of map 7 accurate?
How can the alliance ensure players have tickets on hand to pay for the week? There is potential for players bad at accounting to leave the other players high and dry for the week.
The price of tickets will reset on the same schedule as the Glory Store!
450 Tickets is the price of 150 Tickets, which is 5 days of Alliance Quests.
It's not really possible to know what each of your members has on hand, but that's why we wanted to make costs more flexible. If you don't have a lot of Loyalty to use, you can use Gold or Battle Chips, etc.
My suggestion - turn the stuff in the treasury into AQ tickets. Make the tickets buyable for individuals like you’re doing but make them donate tickets to the treasury instead off Resources. Same purpose of tickets but the alliance can split the cost evenly like before.
If you run map 6 in 1 bg and 5 in 2 you need 75 tickets per week/150 per 2 weeks so 30 people can each donate 5 tickets every 2 weeks or something
That defeats the goal of fighting Treasury Loaders and actually makes it much easier for them.
You could easily overcome this by capping the amount of tickets that can be purchased each cycle so that one person can only effectively buy one full entry to map 7 each week.
No matter what this company does, no matter how this company does something, there will always be a bunch of idiots, who will complain, complain, complain and complain.
What's the problem in running different maps in different BGs with all this ticket system? 10 players are capable of doing Map 6 - they are doing Map 6. 10 other players are capable only doing Map 5 - they, oh what a surprise, are doing Map 5. Rewards are shared in between all the 30 players. What are you afraid of? I'll take a shot, and say that you're afraid of the fact, that the players, who are doing Map 5, will remain at that position no matter what, and still get Map 6 rewards for free. Simple solution - kick that sons of **** out of the alliance, when you get the feeling, that they are using other 10 people who do Map 6. That's what alliance leader, and officers are for, to detect that kind of players, and get rid of them.
This ticket system also will simplify the leadership and officership, no need for calculation, no need for chasing a couple of cheating players who avoided treasury for the long time. It's a huge improvement. You want AQ - pay for the AQ. You don't want AQ - don't pay for it. It's that simple.
Also, if you give a competent look at the excel sheet of the donation system for the tickets, you will see, that price for the tickets is much much much lower than it was with the treasury donation system.
So I'll ask one more time: What are you complaining for?
No matter what this company does, no matter how this company does something, there will always be a bunch of idiots, who will complain, complain, complain and complain.
What's the problem in running different maps in different BGs with all this ticket system? 10 players are capable of doing Map 6 - they are doing Map 6. 10 other players are capable only doing Map 5 - they, oh what a surprise, are doing Map 5. Rewards are shared in between all the 30 players. What are you afraid of? I'll take a shot, and say that you're afraid of the fact, that the players, who are doing Map 5, will remain at that position no matter what, and still get Map 6 rewards for free. Simple solution - kick that sons of **** out of the alliance, when you get the feeling, that they are using other 10 people who do Map 6. That's what alliance leader, and officers are for, to detect that kind of players, and get rid of them.
This ticket system also will simplify the leadership and officership, no need for calculation, no need for chasing a couple of cheating players who avoided treasury for the long time. It's a huge improvement. You want AQ - pay for the AQ. You don't want AQ - don't pay for it. It's that simple.
Also, if you give a competent look at the excel sheet of the donation system for the tickets, you will see, that price for the tickets is much much much lower than it was with the treasury donation system.
So I'll ask one more time: What are you complaining for?
Well said. I agree.
Noone is afraid that people doing Map 5 are just doing Map 5 to use others. That's an ignorant thought process. But there's a reason those 10/20 are doing Map 5 or below. Perhaps they're weaker. Perhaps they don't have the time or skill to run it. Or even that they just don't want to. It didn't matter before because the Map 6 people didn't have an issue. They got to run higher Maps, donations were split and all got good rewards. But now, why should they pay the donations and use items and everyone get the rewards? This forces the Map 5 players to either step up, or leave. Which can break long term alliances apart. You can't just say that folks should be kicked. Not as easy to get members as you think. Secondly, I agree that it helps remove the possibility of people shirking donations, which is good but still feel that there should be a way for officers to monitor that people have bought the tickets. If they wanted to reduce the donations, that was possible even without tickets. It's just change in numbers. Tickets may or may not be good, but can't say that we have reduced donation amount just due to tickets.
Better idea: Make it a "Ticket treasury" only available for each individual day of AQ. Alliance starts aq on day1, 766. For all 30members to participate, 600 tickets would need to be donated to that day's "Ticket Treasury". Now, each member can donate their share of 20, or one member donate all 600, or anything in-between. You can only join a BG if at least 20 tickets are in the treasury. This allows alliance members to equally share the cost as they equally share the rewards, and also allows you to cover entry for a friend until they can get you back. Max out the treasury capacity based on what map combinations are run that day and lower it each time a player enters a BG. So for the above example it would be 600 max and lower it by 20 each time a player joins. This way no unnecessary tickets would be donated.
Worse idea actually. The main reason they introduced the tickets is to stop loaders. Your method above allows that to continue.
Think about it again. It actually doesnt. You can only load tickets after the AQ day started and only for 1day. Nobody starts AQ with the loaders still in the alliance.
This idea isn't as good. It doesn't address arena botters/mercs from selling to their alliance.
Oh my god, you really don't get it. The ticket treasury is only available after you start AQ, after you start the map/maps. And the treasury is capped at the total value for that day's maps cost. So, maximum would be 900 tickets for a 777 day. You don't start AQ with a treasury loader in the alliance. Even if you do, he donates and kick him out, your old member cant join the aq map after. Map6 and 7 require full 10 member BG to 100%. After day ends, treasury resets. Or it doesn't. It wont matter, as treasury will be empty if all battle groups fill up. Once AQ ends, treasury becomes unavailable. So, only active members can put tickets in, as many as they want, if they want to cover the entry for someone else. Also, costs should be 12 tickets for map6 and 24 for map7, so if an alliance runs just 2 bgs, with mixed map7 and 6, the average per player is 18.0 ( and not 22.5 as per current costs).
First, I only replied to you once, I'm not the other guy.
I like your idea in general of pooling ticket count for leadership to see, and the reset of the treasury, but it has one big flaw. A high level bot account can still pay for everyone (in your system, one person can "donate all 600 tickets").
When I said it doesn't prevent botters/arena mercs from selling to people within their high bot account alliance. I wasn't talking about those low level bot accounts that dumped resources and left, but the ones with decent roster size.
They can leave their decent 5*r5 roster bots running in arena. Use past and said resources to stock up on tickets (and the ones they get from kabam's excess treasury donation return). Have said high level bot accounts (the ones purchased off retired players) that can handle map 7 decently well (they only need to be able to handle a path per section, give the bot accounts priority to pick the one best suited) to join their customer's (or their own) alliance and pay for everyone's map cost. Having a small dip in prestige would be the tradeoff, but free map cost for 29 members! Or if they want to risk botting with their higher prestige accounts, they probably would because that is their source of income. Minimal drop in prestige, with all the upside of avoiding to pay for map 7. Where this value would compound.
Yes, Kabam could lower the price of a ticket even further- if it's current price isn't making the botters go out of business.
Another way is to get rid of donation costs altogether- but it would remove one of Kabam's methods of controlling the resource economy.
That defeats the goal of fighting Treasury Loaders and actually makes it much easier for them.
That’s your problem, not ours! Sort it out in a way that the rest of us aren’t affected. Anything else is absolutely a ridiculous way to run a company.
Would you be so callous if it was your credit card info being stolen I wonder, Cheating in game is a problem for everyone. Explaining why you are upset and what would a solution be would be more constructive.
Here is an excellent solution to the problem of mercs and mods and bots dumping resources into treasuries, while still being fair to alliances that run mixed maps: Make Alliance Quest FREE. An entire game mode should not be locked behind needing a certain amount of resources. Alliance War is free, so why shouldn't Alliance Quest be free as well?
Make AQ free. The donations are not worth the headache. Only about what a couple thousand play map 7 each week? Not worth it
I have a question. Which maps do you guys run? @RKO_me@TheTalents . I am asking this because they made aq free for maps 5 and below already. So, you guys are running map 6 or 7 I assume.
So when the system resets and stuff can we get the stuff from the treasury back. I remember donating some stuff for when we were thinking of doing higher AQ maps only for us to scrap the idea. We literally had 20 mil gold in there in the end. Can we get that refunded or just sent back to us. Divide it equally or something, I’d hate for al those resources to go to waste
Comments
as we all know is kabam converting a company based problem to our/player problem, well knowing that it is bad for us. But they don't have any idea how to make it work good for both sides...if they had, they just made it directly.
Let's just look on an other example:
you are at home and your friends are here. your best friend is in your only toilet. and you need to go to toilet very quick...now you have a problem...how you're gonna solve this? in our case it goes like that: you go to your neighbors front door and put a brown pile directly in front of it, well knowing that it is not a good thing! and NOT knowing how to clean it afterwards, but! you made it not longer your problem and you just accept that it may stink in the neighborhood
My question is: with wich reason is it correct to cause problems for thousands of players and cover it as a good thing? neither is it ok to just let it go like that nor to try to find a solution after the change
No matter from which side you look at this problem, bringing this change without a solution is nothing more than in the previous example.
and NO it is not the same if a few members of the alliance are carrying the whole cost of everybody, or if the whole TEAM carries the cost TOGETHER
Best regards
My ally has always ran 1 BG of map 6 and 2 BG of map 5. This works well as we have the map 6 players that hate 5 and won’t run it and then some map 5 players who don’t want 6. We have get some decent rewards from doing this and it works well. We share the donations out between all 30 members so it’s fair 100%. However the changes you are bringing in with these tickets are simply not fair for mixed map allies who run 6&5. Why should the map 6 group be expected to only pay for tickets yet the whole ally gets the rewards? Not fair Kabam and you need to look at this and address this with a solution before starting this on 10th June ,half arsed, when it’s clearly not been thought through. It will just upset loyal players.
I understand the change and actually like the idea - but it’s simply not fair for allies running mixed maps. Please can you advise if this will be addressed? Some sort of response would be appreciated ASAP so we can work our where to go from here. Thanks
Shell
An entire game mode should not be locked behind needing a certain amount of resources. Alliance War is free, so why shouldn't Alliance Quest be free as well?
You don't start AQ with a treasury loader in the alliance. Even if you do, he donates and kick him out, your old member cant join the aq map after. Map6 and 7 require full 10 member BG to 100%.
After day ends, treasury resets. Or it doesn't. It wont matter, as treasury will be empty if all battle groups fill up. Once AQ ends, treasury becomes unavailable. So, only active members can put tickets in, as many as they want, if they want to cover the entry for someone else.
Also, costs should be 12 tickets for map6 and 24 for map7, so if an alliance runs just 2 bgs, with mixed map7 and 6, the average per player is 18.0 ( and not 22.5 as per current costs).
What's the problem in running different maps in different BGs with all this ticket system? 10 players are capable of doing Map 6 - they are doing Map 6. 10 other players are capable only doing Map 5 - they, oh what a surprise, are doing Map 5. Rewards are shared in between all the 30 players. What are you afraid of? I'll take a shot, and say that you're afraid of the fact, that the players, who are doing Map 5, will remain at that position no matter what, and still get Map 6 rewards for free. Simple solution - kick that sons of **** out of the alliance, when you get the feeling, that they are using other 10 people who do Map 6. That's what alliance leader, and officers are for, to detect that kind of players, and get rid of them.
This ticket system also will simplify the leadership and officership, no need for calculation, no need for chasing a couple of cheating players who avoided treasury for the long time. It's a huge improvement. You want AQ - pay for the AQ. You don't want AQ - don't pay for it. It's that simple.
Also, if you give a competent look at the excel sheet of the donation system for the tickets, you will see, that price for the tickets is much much much lower than it was with the treasury donation system.
So I'll ask one more time: What are you complaining for?
Secondly, I agree that it helps remove the possibility of people shirking donations, which is good but still feel that there should be a way for officers to monitor that people have bought the tickets.
If they wanted to reduce the donations, that was possible even without tickets. It's just change in numbers. Tickets may or may not be good, but can't say that we have reduced donation amount just due to tickets.
I like your idea in general of pooling ticket count for leadership to see, and the reset of the treasury, but it has one big flaw. A high level bot account can still pay for everyone (in your system, one person can "donate all 600 tickets").
When I said it doesn't prevent botters/arena mercs from selling to people within their high bot account alliance. I wasn't talking about those low level bot accounts that dumped resources and left, but the ones with decent roster size.
They can leave their decent 5*r5 roster bots running in arena. Use past and said resources to stock up on tickets (and the ones they get from kabam's excess treasury donation return). Have said high level bot accounts (the ones purchased off retired players) that can handle map 7 decently well (they only need to be able to handle a path per section, give the bot accounts priority to pick the one best suited) to join their customer's (or their own) alliance and pay for everyone's map cost. Having a small dip in prestige would be the tradeoff, but free map cost for 29 members! Or if they want to risk botting with their higher prestige accounts, they probably would because that is their source of income. Minimal drop in prestige, with all the upside of avoiding to pay for map 7. Where this value would compound.
Yes, Kabam could lower the price of a ticket even further- if it's current price isn't making the botters go out of business.
Another way is to get rid of donation costs altogether- but it would remove one of Kabam's methods of controlling the resource economy.
That's more than enough payback .. + 2 weeks free AQ !