**UPDATE - iPAD STUCK FLICKERING SCREEN**
The 47.0.1 hotfix to address the issue of freezing & flashing lights on loading screens when trying to enter a fight, along with other smaller issues, is now ready to be downloaded through the App Store on IOS.
More information here.

Alliance Tickets [Merged Threads]

145791023

Comments

  • KnightZeroKnightZero Member Posts: 1,437 ★★★★★
    edited May 2020

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    He's getting the 1,000,000 gold in the form of tickets. Getting it in the form of gold when suddenly a better conversion rate for units-resources has been offered is fair. Before, you would have to spend over 450 units to get 1.3 mill gold if I'm not mistaken. Now that the conversion rate is improved, you get the opportunity to save the old resources that you couldn't previously.
    Also, another option would be to give us the gold but only allow us to spend it on tickets. Due to the increase in cost for each ticket increasing when you use the same resource, getting 150 tickets at once for 1.3 mill gold is a loss. You can get more than that if you're willing to stagger it out over 3 weeks.

    Another flaw is the timing. This should have been announced in advance. Someone might have donated to help others in their gold donations. Getting the extra tickets refunded is pointless for him if he has other resources to use for his personal ticket purchase, and the gold could have been used for rankups.
  • Notsavage19Notsavage19 Member Posts: 2,817 ★★★★★

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    He's getting the 1,000,000 gold in the form of tickets. Getting it in the form of gold when suddenly a better conversion rate for units-resources has been offered is fair. Before, you would have to spend over 450 units to get 1.3 mill gold if I'm not mistaken. Now that the conversion rate is improved, you get the opportunity to save the old resources that you couldn't previously.
    Also, another option would be to give us the gold but only allow us to spend it on tickets. Due to the increase in cost for each ticket increasing when you use the same resource, getting 150 tickets at once for 1.3 mill gold is a loss. You can get more than that if you're willing to stagger it out over 3 weeks.
    No, I get that he's getting the 1,000,000 in tickets. I was responding to the people who want resources instead of tickets. I don't think that Kabam should give out resources, such as gold, that could be used in other ways rather than AQ.
  • Notsavage19Notsavage19 Member Posts: 2,817 ★★★★★

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    Another flaw is the timing. This should have been announced in advance. Someone might have donated to help others in their gold donations. Getting the extra tickets refunded is pointless for him if he has other resources to use for his personal ticket purchase, and the gold could have been used for rankups.
    That's on him. He CHOSE to help out his teammate. He could've just saved that extra gold, but he didn't. He signed it over to the alliance.
  • CurtisisGod1971CurtisisGod1971 Member Posts: 76
    My main issue is it should be tit for tat. Not 5 months worth. The TOTAL alliance treasury should be re-compensated with the tickets. We’ve been storing for years. Had over 20 million total. 5 months isn’t the correct equivalent. Total for total. That’s fair.
    Sure, I’d like the resources back myself; nevertheless, I realize they were donated for alliance quests etc, so, the sum total of all donations that were in the coffers when Kabam just took them, is the ethical thing to do.
    Ban the cheaters and refund the alliance coffers with equivalent tickets for the entire sum.
    @Kabam Mike
  • Notsavage19Notsavage19 Member Posts: 2,817 ★★★★★

    My main issue is it should be tit for tat. Not 5 months worth. The TOTAL alliance treasury should be re-compensated with the tickets. We’ve been storing for years. Had over 20 million total. 5 months isn’t the correct equivalent. Total for total. That’s fair.
    Sure, I’d like the resources back myself; nevertheless, I realize they were donated for alliance quests etc, so, the sum total of all donations that were in the coffers when Kabam just took them, is the ethical thing to do.
    Ban the cheaters and refund the alliance coffers with equivalent tickets for the entire sum.
    @Kabam Mike

    I completely agree. Alliances with loads of resources in their Treasury are being cheated out of their hard work.
  • KnightZeroKnightZero Member Posts: 1,437 ★★★★★
    edited May 2020

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    He's getting the 1,000,000 gold in the form of tickets. Getting it in the form of gold when suddenly a better conversion rate for units-resources has been offered is fair. Before, you would have to spend over 450 units to get 1.3 mill gold if I'm not mistaken. Now that the conversion rate is improved, you get the opportunity to save the old resources that you couldn't previously.
    Also, another option would be to give us the gold but only allow us to spend it on tickets. Due to the increase in cost for each ticket increasing when you use the same resource, getting 150 tickets at once for 1.3 mill gold is a loss. You can get more than that if you're willing to stagger it out over 3 weeks.
    No, I get that he's getting the 1,000,000 in tickets. I was responding to the people who want resources instead of tickets. I don't think that Kabam should give out resources, such as gold, that could be used in other ways rather than AQ.
    Yeah and I'm saying that giving it in the form of gold usable only to buy tickets is still better than giving me tickets. Because I can buy more if I stagger the way I buy it. Also, as I said, the conversion for units-gold(tickets) is more profitable than it was before. Refunding in tickets doesn't take that into account.

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    Another flaw is the timing. This should have been announced in advance. Someone might have donated to help others in their gold donations. Getting the extra tickets refunded is pointless for him if he has other resources to use for his personal ticket purchase, and the gold could have been used for rankups.
    That's on him. He CHOSE to help out his teammate. He could've just saved that extra gold, but he didn't. He signed it over to the alliance.
    That's silly. IF I donated 5 mill gold an hour before the announcement was made to help out in donations, it was because at that point in time, the only way to help out was by donating for others. But had I known that this was to occur in a ln hour, I wouldn't have donated.
    Because I don't need the 5 mill as refund in the form of tickets when I can use other resources or units to buy them. I would have signed it over to help the ALLIANCE. But where is the Alliance being helped now with the ticket refund?
    It's all about communication.
  • Eric987Eric987 Member Posts: 78
    Every time Kabam tries to fix an issue it seems like the main focus is Kabam's bottom dollar. With this new AQ change they are primarily stopping donation dumps. That is completely reasonable but they have obviously not taken the time to see the other issues their new system will have on the game. It's disappointing to see a company so clearly not care about the players and only care about profits. Kabam needs to find a better balance between encouraging spending (which is necessary to keep the game running) and letting players have fun and enjoy the game. It's so obvious how profit sensitive 99% of their actions are.
  • NinjAlanNinjAlan Member Posts: 358 ★★★
    You know what could have prevented this whole situation? Scaling resource acquisition appropriately. I'm sure @DNA3000 could put together a lovely presentation about gold bc and loyalty needs vs availability
  • Notsavage19Notsavage19 Member Posts: 2,817 ★★★★★

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    He's getting the 1,000,000 gold in the form of tickets. Getting it in the form of gold when suddenly a better conversion rate for units-resources has been offered is fair. Before, you would have to spend over 450 units to get 1.3 mill gold if I'm not mistaken. Now that the conversion rate is improved, you get the opportunity to save the old resources that you couldn't previously.
    Also, another option would be to give us the gold but only allow us to spend it on tickets. Due to the increase in cost for each ticket increasing when you use the same resource, getting 150 tickets at once for 1.3 mill gold is a loss. You can get more than that if you're willing to stagger it out over 3 weeks.
    No, I get that he's getting the 1,000,000 in tickets. I was responding to the people who want resources instead of tickets. I don't think that Kabam should give out resources, such as gold, that could be used in other ways rather than AQ.
    Yeah and I'm saying that giving it in the form of gold usable only to buy tickets is still better than giving me tickets. Because I can buy more if I stagger the way I buy it. Also, as I said, the conversion for units-gold(tickets) is more profitable than it was before. Refunding in tickets doesn't take that into account.

    Think about it this way.
    Player A has 1,000,000 gold.
    Player B has 2,000,000 gold. He donates 1,000,000 to his alliance. He no longer owns the 1,000,000 gold he donated.

    Player A and Player B both rank up their champs using the gold they have.

    Now, if Player B was compensated with his donations:
    Player B would get 1,000,000 gold. Now I understand that he earned that gold. But by choosing to donate it to his alliance and therefore surrendering his rights to his gold, he gains an advantage because in the normal setting, that gold would not be used to rank up his champs. Since he made the decision to contribute his resources towards AQ, his resources should not be able to be refunded and used for something that is not AQ related.

    Do you see why it's unfair to other players?

    Another flaw is the timing. This should have been announced in advance. Someone might have donated to help others in their gold donations. Getting the extra tickets refunded is pointless for him if he has other resources to use for his personal ticket purchase, and the gold could have been used for rankups.
    That's on him. He CHOSE to help out his teammate. He could've just saved that extra gold, but he didn't. He signed it over to the alliance.
    That's silly. IF I donated 5 mill gold an hour before the announcement was made to help out in donations, it was because at that point in time, the only way to help out was by donating for others. But had I known that this was to occur in a ln hour, I wouldn't have donated. Because I don't need the 5 mill as refund in the form of tickets when I can use other resources or units to buy them.
    It's all about communication.
    I agree that Kabam should've given a big heads up. That would've helped if they announced this a month ago and let us sort everything out in our alliances.
  • Eric987Eric987 Member Posts: 78
    I feel like this wouldn't this wouldn't be as big of a deal if there weren't so many other issues in the game. The developer team is just so out of touch with the player base it seems like an inopportune time to implement this. So much negative PR.
  • TyEdgeTyEdge Member Posts: 3,108 ★★★★★
    edited May 2020
    @Kabam Miike why can’t members who have been in the alliance 8 days buy tickets to put in a treasury-style setup? A 665 alliance needs 1500 tickets per week. It’s asinine that the players taking on the harder content and using more items near the full cost of 1500, while players coasting in easier content have no way to compensate them.

    Put an expiration date on them if it worries you so much. After all, y’all make everything else in the game expire.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Member Posts: 2,254 ★★★★★

    Hey Everybody,

    We've been kind of quiet regarding some of the concerns that have been brought up today, but that's because we've been discussing them. We will not be reaching a conclusion on anything today, but we want you all to know that we're not ignoring your feedback.

    We will have more information for you all next week, but need time to regroup, and look at your feedback on pain points, and have some discussions.

    I think the best solution is to remove all map costs. Would be the most player friendly thing you could do. I don't get why it is still necessary at this point.

    The biggest pain point I see is everyone asking to share donations and for me as an alliance leader it would go back to chasing donations and I'm not for that personally. I'm in a map 6/7 hybrid alliance for context.
  • NinjAlanNinjAlan Member Posts: 358 ★★★
    The fact that this took priority for the dev team and not fixing things like resource acquisition, 6* availability and the poor pool growth of bad Champs being added. People seek alternate solutions when something is inherently bad or flawed, I'm not saying donation dumping is good, but it's a symptom of a larger underlying problem, the lack of attention and focus of a very poorly managed dev team.
  • Eb0ny-O-M4wEb0ny-O-M4w Member Posts: 13,963 ★★★★★
    There are already posts on this subject. Do a quick search before creating a duplicated one, as that is not allowed
  • Wakandas_FinestWakandas_Finest Member Posts: 856 ★★★★

    I’ve read some of the comments and the counter comments. I have just 2 issues with this new “fix”.
    1. This is a “shot gun” method that punishes all alliances for the poor behavior of a minority of alliances at the top. You know who they are. Punish them and don’t force honest alliances like mine to suffer because of cheating at the top. Unfair.
    2. Many alliances only run map 5 and lower. Refunding our alliance coffers only 5 months back, with tickets we will never use is not an ethical business practice. We have much more resources than that.
    I understand that either way we wouldn’t be able to recoup them, so FAIR would be a total compensation for all resources in alliance coffers. Not just 5 months.
    Fair is fair. If this is about leveling the field then either punish the guilty and keep it how it is, or compensate alliances for the TOTAL amounts in the treasury.

    I don’t understand this argument you were never gonna be able use those resources for anything other than AQ anyway. If kabam didn’t switch to tickets and still made map 5 free you still weren’t going to get those resources back. Those resources were lost to you the minute you made the donations.
  • Mcord11758Mcord11758 Member Posts: 1,249 ★★★★
    I am not sure what’s worse, when they make a change that harms players but don’t realize it or when they openly say they know this will negatively impact many but our goal (increasing revenue and eliminating donation dumps) out weighs the negative.
  • GOTGGOTG Member Posts: 1,040 ★★★★
    edited May 2020
    Lvernon15 said:

    The only negative I see in this change is for alliances that don’t run the same map for every bg, that’s quite a big issue though

    Not that simple.

    With treasury system alliances can run AQ smoothly without worrying about individual resources, but now if just one member runs short of resources it would affect whole alliance. And you can't be sure that 30 members will always be able to manage their resources properly, especially in map 7 which required resources are very high.
  • Mcord11758Mcord11758 Member Posts: 1,249 ★★★★
    I could be wrong but I think the population of alliances running a mixture of 5 and 6 or 6 and 7 is greater than the population that was having donation dumps.
  • Eric987Eric987 Member Posts: 78

    GOTG said:

    Lvernon15 said:

    The only negative I see in this change is for alliances that don’t run the same map for every bg, that’s quite a big issue though

    Not that simple.

    With treasury system alliances can run AQ smoothly without worrying about individual resources, but now if just one member runs short of resources it would affect whole alliance. And you can't be sure that 30 members will always be able to manage their resources properly, especially in map 7 which required resources are very high.
    Resource management is and always has been a major component of this game. That's pretty much MCOC 101
    I agree with you a decent amount of your posts but you are an all AQ and no AW player so your opinion is somewhat skewed just like mine is. Please don't act lie you speak for all end game players . You have an arrogance about you.
  • GOTGGOTG Member Posts: 1,040 ★★★★

    GOTG said:

    Lvernon15 said:

    The only negative I see in this change is for alliances that don’t run the same map for every bg, that’s quite a big issue though

    Not that simple.

    With treasury system alliances can run AQ smoothly without worrying about individual resources, but now if just one member runs short of resources it would affect whole alliance. And you can't be sure that 30 members will always be able to manage their resources properly, especially in map 7 which required resources are very high.
    Resource management is and always has been a major component of this game. That's pretty much MCOC 101
    Kind of. But throughout my time with MCOC I've never known a single alliance that everyone manage his resources properly every week. Always had some short of gold or bc or loyalty. And for many alliances there are always trading systems to make up for this.

    I believe many will have to drop out to lower map because of this. Not my concern though but it will definitely happen.
  • CurtisisGod1971CurtisisGod1971 Member Posts: 76

    I’ve read some of the comments and the counter comments. I have just 2 issues with this new “fix”.
    1. This is a “shot gun” method that punishes all alliances for the poor behavior of a minority of alliances at the top. You know who they are. Punish them and don’t force honest alliances like mine to suffer because of cheating at the top. Unfair.
    2. Many alliances only run map 5 and lower. Refunding our alliance coffers only 5 months back, with tickets we will never use is not an ethical business practice. We have much more resources than that.
    I understand that either way we wouldn’t be able to recoup them, so FAIR would be a total compensation for all resources in alliance coffers. Not just 5 months.
    Fair is fair. If this is about leveling the field then either punish the guilty and keep it how it is, or compensate alliances for the TOTAL amounts in the treasury.

    I don’t understand this argument you were never gonna be able use those resources for anything other than AQ anyway. If kabam didn’t switch to tickets and still made map 5 free you still weren’t going to get those resources back. Those resources were lost to you the minute you made the donations.
    You might want to re-read that and pay attention to the end of the post. Epic fail.
  • GreywardenGreywarden Member Posts: 843 ★★★★
    Not sure how even at this time something like this can be communicated with zero heads-up. Every so often when the community gets riled up we get the standard “we’re going to communicate better” line only to have things like this happen again and again. You can’t keep preaching open communication when it’s been anything but.

    What is even the point of charging an entry fee for aq.....you have 30 people in 3 bgs all coordinating with different timezones and daily global changes. The “cost” should be the difficulty plain and simple.
Sign In or Register to comment.