**UPDATES TO ENLISTMENT GIFTING EVENT:**
To prevent exploitation, we will prevent new Accounts from being able to Gift enlistment crystals. We will also be taking action on those who are using 3rd Party Sellers, Bots and other farms to gift themselves mass amounts of Enlistment Crystals. Lastly, we will be adding an expiration timer to Enlistment Crystals. All unopened Enlistment Crystals will expire on Oct 18 @ 17:00 UTC. For more information, please see this post: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/346104/updates-to-enlistment-gifting-event
**KNOWN ISSUE**
We have adjusted the node placement of the new AW maps to better allow path traversal. As a result, defender placements have been reset. Please, take a moment to re-place your defender setup. We will be pushing out a message in-game shortly.

Battlegrounds Rewards Revealed! Solo/Alliance Events, Victory Track, Gladiator’s Circuit and More!

12467…19

Comments

  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 9,117 ★★★★★
    Eb0ny-O-M4w said:

    BitterSteel said:

    Eb0ny-O-M4w said:

    BitterSteel said:

    Eb0ny-O-M4w said:

    BitterSteel said:

    Eb0ny-O-M4w said:

    Honestly just sounds terrifying.

    Rewards aside. How much time you expect us to play this mode on a single day, across multiple days in a row for an entire month? Player's don't have time for yet another one of these, unless you want us to be spending on every game mode to get it done quickly (which you do) and be able to get it immediately without actually having to play the game, working, farming for it for hours and hours. I was hoping this was more of a chill mode like incursions where rewards would just refresh every once in a while and were not rank dependant. Not this trash with rank focus rewards.

    And were's the cap at the number of matches per day? Where's the cap of poins gained per a limited timeframe? Funny that you even say we can buy an "unlimited amount of entries for Units". What were the betas for? What was all the feedback for? Who even asked for this?

    As someone else said, this is just arena all over again. Just another P2W money grabbing game mode.
    This better just be another beta in disguise, cause this is just riddiculous


    I mean, let’s say that they cut every milestone in half. So there’s only half as much content. That might be a good amount for you, so you go that far. But what about someone who wants to play more? What about someone who loves the mode?

    That could easily be solved with a similar system to incursions. Play as much as you want, but the rewards (at least the decent ones) are capped per week/month.

    This current system is unrealistic to someone who plays the game as a whole. You either dedicate your life to this single game mode and get the mid brackets of it, or spend on it to get the top rewards, as well as spending on everything else to accomodate the time missed on the other game modes.

    This is like arena heavy grind, but for an entire month and always constantly spending units.
    So would you think it was bad for incursions to make the top zone bonuses reset every 2 weeks instead of every month?
    Dont really know. I dont play incursions because of how boring and unrewarded it is. And I dont like that the milestone rewards reset every 5 days.
    For the other rewards resetting monthly, I think thats fine. Every 2 weeks? Might be fine as well, but less than that it starts becoming a bother
    But you don’t have to do it at all? If it reset once a week you could just do it every 2 weeks if once a week is a bother. That’s an issue you have with your own view on the game, where if the rewards are on offer you feel the need to get them all.

    If there are 20k 6* shards on offer for 10 hours of gameplay in a week, you are well within your right to only do 5 hours of gameplay for 10k shards. You don’t have to do it all.

    Why limit everyone to 10k shards a week just because you think it’s too much? Just do your 5 hours of gameplay and let others do 10 if they want. Don’t feel forced into a grind and doing more than you feel comfortable with.
    That is nice and all, but you're forgetting this is heavily focused on RANK rewards rather than milestones or either a peak milestone system.

    Its the same as arena. Theres no middle. You either achieve the goal or fail miserably and get nothing worth for your time invested.
    Maybe, I think that depends on how many players go for it. You might end up ranking quite decently without doing all milestones. The cut off here depends entirely on the player base - same with arena.

    There’s a great amount in the alliance milestones, to the point where the rank rewards aren’t really as impactful.

    The solo event may be as you say, and if so, then I’d probably agree that tweaks can be made. I’m not arguing it’s perfect by any stretch. Just that certain aspects will need people to try it out before giving accurate feedback. If it doesn’t feel like it’s worth my time, or not very fun then I’ll give my feedback there.

    Are you arguing for more rewards in the milestones? So you have more guaranteed value?
  • Tx_Quack_Attack6589Tx_Quack_Attack6589 Posts: 533 ★★★
    If you scroll through the war leaderboard you’ll see all the usual suspects up top. What happened to boycott this season blah blah blah? Y’all will play this game mode and continue to complain and maybe it’ll be like EOp and there will be changes made after the first cycle. Treat season one as a “beta” for the reward structure and if you’re hell bent on not giving in then enjoy friendly matches for fun as the game is intended to be anyways.
  • Lovejoy72Lovejoy72 Posts: 1,754 ★★★★
    BitterSteel said:

    I definitely have reservations about how this is going to work, I don’t think the events should only be contributed for by elders marks since you have to buy them or do the milestones in the alliance event to get them. Energy should be fine to contribute.

    I think winning should contribute to points in the events, we should definitely be encouraged to try and win not just participate. I’m fine with it being different ratios, but it shouldn’t be purely contribution.

    I’m fine with there being a lot of milestones, more than most players can do. That way it provides enough content to keep it rewarding. Incursions is something I do once a month because of top zone bonuses, I’d do it more if they reset quicker. Better to have too much to do than not enough in my opinion.

    Ultimately, I’m going to wait before I give any extremely strong opinions and call it a failure. I’d rather have experience with how it’s going to work to back up my opinion than demand change right now. But if it sucks then I will definitely be giving feedback on that.

    I can’t quite see how someone like me would meaningfully participate, as I don’t have an alliance (and likely never will again). But, that’s just me and my choice. With that, I do feel folks are getting awfully heated, awfully early.
  • YoMovesYoMoves Posts: 1,268 ★★★★
    Wicket329 said:

    The rewards all look great, although I am worried about time commitment to this mode. As I understand it (and I could absolutely be wrong), it requires 45 wins just get onto the Gladiator’s Circuit, and that will reset seasonally? If it takes 8 minutes on average from starting matchmaking to completion of a match, that’s 6 hours of game time assuming you win every single match. And that’s just the grind to access the grind of the leaderboard and ranked rewards.

    It’s okay if this is a grind-heavy mode. That’s not new to the game, and I’m sure a lot of players are totally cool with that. But it’s worth highlighting that gold and units, the other materials that require time-intensive grinding to accumulate, are not present here. That means that a player looking to play this new mode remotely competitively will have to add this grind on top of the arena grind they likely participate in to pay for ranking the champions they use in Battlegrounds. It’s… it’s a lot.

    I love Battlegrounds and the rewards look great. I just hope that there are enough hours in the day to actually enjoy this mode and not feel like it’s a slog.

    It's actually worse than you think.

    You see that Victory Shield there?

    It's another lil' hidden mechanic...if you lose, you *lose* standings in the first circuit. So if you can't win most/all of your matches, you'll be stuck in there a long, long time.

    This is brutally bad.
  • EricZachary1977EricZachary1977 Posts: 37 ★
    Very disappointing that the mode was sold to the base as a solo competitive mode but as soon as it goes live it becomes pay-to-win and the only competition is to see how many matches one can complete rather than putting the valuation on winning. Very disappointing, but sadly not particularly surprising.
  • JerryJiverJerryJiver Posts: 97 ★
    how many elder’s marks are we issued at the start of the season? I’m hoping it’s at least 1000.

    In order for an alliance to hit all milestones (9MM points), each member needs to average ~160 matches per month (~1850 pts/match). You need ~2500 elder’s marks to run that many matches. You pick up 750 marks along the way from alliance milestones, and up to another 900 marks from victory track milestones (assuming you’re actually winning some of these matches). But how do you get started? And where do the remaining 850 marks come from?

    I’m really hoping the answer isn’t that you must buy with units.
  • designsodadesignsoda Posts: 118 ★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Ultimatheory said:

    Shame this information had to be released on the Friday before it starts. It almost ensures that there is zero time to get feedback and be able to tune how these rewards are implemented. Sort of deflates so much of the excitement I was feeling earlier about this. There seems to be less competitive nature now which seemed to central to what this mode was designed for

    We're always collecting feedback, but with this being the first season, unless something is egregious, it's unlikely to change anything until the next season starts. Keep the feedback coming, but just know that we want to try this out for at least one season.
    It IS egregious that's what we are trying to tell you.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 9,117 ★★★★★
    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    Ultimatheory said:

    Shame this information had to be released on the Friday before it starts. It almost ensures that there is zero time to get feedback and be able to tune how these rewards are implemented. Sort of deflates so much of the excitement I was feeling earlier about this. There seems to be less competitive nature now which seemed to central to what this mode was designed for

    We're always collecting feedback, but with this being the first season, unless something is egregious, it's unlikely to change anything until the next season starts. Keep the feedback coming, but just know that we want to try this out for at least one season.
    I think looking at the way the whole scoring works, the whole system comes across a little egregious. Honestly, the biggest rewards should be based on winning. Ranking higher should be the absolute goal of battlegrounds. I know you are the messenger, but the system is really poor. I think at this point most would advocate delaying BG and reworking the whole scoring system to one that actually favours winning.

    But if it stays as is, at least we have hand my guide on how to get the best out of the mode. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nucB3Ttxo-M
    Cheaters will not matter with this mode who cares if people cheat they only get points for two matches not 3.
    Oh nobody needs to cheat. It’s all about how to lose as quickly as possible to grind more games per hour. Winning takes far to long and doesn’t factor into the point of battle grounds anymore.
    But you only get a certain amount of elders marks, which is the only way you can rank in Alliance or Solo events. After that you’re using units for them, so you don’t want to waste matches where you could get extra points.

    You get more points in the alliance mode for placing extra champions in the third round (1950 vs 1750), so if you grinded out 100 matches in a week. you’d end up with 1,950,000 instead of 1,750,000. Stretch that over the 4 weeks of the season and you’d have 7.8m instead of 7m. So it can really make a difference.

    Tanking 2-0 is quicker yes, but it’s not as many points per elder mark (which is essentially points per unit if you’re grinding hard).

    For the solo event, if you’re pushing that, then yeah it’s quicker to go 2-0 and it doesn’t affect the points you get. So it depends on whether your alliance is pushing or not.
  • ShivacruxShivacrux Posts: 359 ★★
    what happens to me if i switch alliance in between the bg season?will there be a player cutoff to earn each milestones in alliance event
  • hermherm Posts: 414 ★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Ultimatheory said:

    Shame this information had to be released on the Friday before it starts. It almost ensures that there is zero time to get feedback and be able to tune how these rewards are implemented. Sort of deflates so much of the excitement I was feeling earlier about this. There seems to be less competitive nature now which seemed to central to what this mode was designed for

    We're always collecting feedback, but with this being the first season, unless something is egregious, it's unlikely to change anything until the next season starts. Keep the feedback coming, but just know that we want to try this out for at least one season.
    It's pretty apparent what's egregious about these rewards: you get better rewards for spamming matches than you do for winning, and elders marks are required to spam matches and get points effectively making it a unit manned game mode
  • Wozzle007Wozzle007 Posts: 784 ★★★★★
    BitterSteel said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    Ultimatheory said:

    Shame this information had to be released on the Friday before it starts. It almost ensures that there is zero time to get feedback and be able to tune how these rewards are implemented. Sort of deflates so much of the excitement I was feeling earlier about this. There seems to be less competitive nature now which seemed to central to what this mode was designed for

    We're always collecting feedback, but with this being the first season, unless something is egregious, it's unlikely to change anything until the next season starts. Keep the feedback coming, but just know that we want to try this out for at least one season.
    I think looking at the way the whole scoring works, the whole system comes across a little egregious. Honestly, the biggest rewards should be based on winning. Ranking higher should be the absolute goal of battlegrounds. I know you are the messenger, but the system is really poor. I think at this point most would advocate delaying BG and reworking the whole scoring system to one that actually favours winning.

    But if it stays as is, at least we have hand my guide on how to get the best out of the mode. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nucB3Ttxo-M
    Cheaters will not matter with this mode who cares if people cheat they only get points for two matches not 3.
    Oh nobody needs to cheat. It’s all about how to lose as quickly as possible to grind more games per hour. Winning takes far to long and doesn’t factor into the point of battle grounds anymore.
    But you only get a certain amount of elders marks, which is the only way you can rank in Alliance or Solo events. After that you’re using units for them, so you don’t want to waste matches where you could get extra points.

    You get more points in the alliance mode for placing extra champions in the third round (1950 vs 1750), so if you grinded out 100 matches in a week. you’d end up with 1,950,000 instead of 1,750,000. Stretch that over the 4 weeks of the season and you’d have 7.8m instead of 7m. So it can really make a difference.

    Tanking 2-0 is quicker yes, but it’s not as many points per elder mark (which is essentially points per unit if you’re grinding hard).

    For the solo event, if you’re pushing that, then yeah it’s quicker to go 2-0 and it doesn’t affect the points you get. So it depends on whether your alliance is pushing or not.
    Right. But 100 matches a week at 8 mins each (and that might be low if you’re trying to push it a third round) your looking at 800 minutes a week or 13.5 hours of battle ground grinding per week! But you could spend 8-10 mins and still win or lose 2-0 so the time spend could be a total waste. All the additional time and no extra points.

    If you’re going the tanking route and use units you only need to do and extra 15 rounds to make upto the 1.95m points. If you go in with the plan to lose every fight using 1/2* champs, and each round is 3minutes your 115 rounds is done in 5.5hours.

    The extra 200,000 points is not worth nearly 8 hours per week.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 9,117 ★★★★★
    Wozzle007 said:

    BitterSteel said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Kabam Miike said:

    Ultimatheory said:

    Shame this information had to be released on the Friday before it starts. It almost ensures that there is zero time to get feedback and be able to tune how these rewards are implemented. Sort of deflates so much of the excitement I was feeling earlier about this. There seems to be less competitive nature now which seemed to central to what this mode was designed for

    We're always collecting feedback, but with this being the first season, unless something is egregious, it's unlikely to change anything until the next season starts. Keep the feedback coming, but just know that we want to try this out for at least one season.
    I think looking at the way the whole scoring works, the whole system comes across a little egregious. Honestly, the biggest rewards should be based on winning. Ranking higher should be the absolute goal of battlegrounds. I know you are the messenger, but the system is really poor. I think at this point most would advocate delaying BG and reworking the whole scoring system to one that actually favours winning.

    But if it stays as is, at least we have hand my guide on how to get the best out of the mode. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nucB3Ttxo-M
    Cheaters will not matter with this mode who cares if people cheat they only get points for two matches not 3.
    Oh nobody needs to cheat. It’s all about how to lose as quickly as possible to grind more games per hour. Winning takes far to long and doesn’t factor into the point of battle grounds anymore.
    But you only get a certain amount of elders marks, which is the only way you can rank in Alliance or Solo events. After that you’re using units for them, so you don’t want to waste matches where you could get extra points.

    You get more points in the alliance mode for placing extra champions in the third round (1950 vs 1750), so if you grinded out 100 matches in a week. you’d end up with 1,950,000 instead of 1,750,000. Stretch that over the 4 weeks of the season and you’d have 7.8m instead of 7m. So it can really make a difference.

    Tanking 2-0 is quicker yes, but it’s not as many points per elder mark (which is essentially points per unit if you’re grinding hard).

    For the solo event, if you’re pushing that, then yeah it’s quicker to go 2-0 and it doesn’t affect the points you get. So it depends on whether your alliance is pushing or not.
    Right. But 100 matches a week at 8 mins each (and that might be low if you’re trying to push it a third round) your looking at 800 minutes a week or 13.5 hours of battle ground grinding per week! But you could spend 8-10 mins and still win or lose 2-0 so the time spend could be a total waste. All the additional time and no extra points.

    If you’re going the tanking route and use units you only need to do and extra 15 rounds to make upto the 1.95m points. If you go in with the plan to lose every fight using 1/2* champs, and each round is 3minutes your 115 rounds is done in 5.5hours.

    The extra 200,000 points is not worth nearly 8 hours per week.
    The number of matches was less about how much time spent, more just to highlight the difference in points and about points per unit, but I take your point.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 9,117 ★★★★★
    edited September 2022
    DrZola said:

    All I needed to hear was 100 matches a week…

    Dr. Zola

    Again mate, more a way to emphasise that difference between scores if you go 2-1 rather than 2-0.

    It was an easy round number to pluck out of the air to make the point, not what needs to be focussed on.

    Edited out maths mistake
Sign In or Register to comment.