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

1246719

Comments

  • Lovejoy72Lovejoy72 Member Posts: 1,858 ★★★★

    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 Member Posts: 1,283 ★★★★
    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 Member Posts: 38
    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 Member Posts: 108
    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 Member Posts: 118

    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 Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 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 Member Posts: 424 ★★★
    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 Member Posts: 415 ★★

    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 Member Posts: 1,005 ★★★★★

    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 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 Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Wozzle007 said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 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 Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    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
  • H3t3rH3t3r Member, Guardian Posts: 2,882 Guardian

    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.

    7.8m points is almost all of the alliance milestones on one players shoulders so it was an exaggeration to show the impact of points per unit.

    It was an easy round number to pluck out of the air to make the point, not what needs to be focussed on.
    Where are you getting the 7.8mill from? That would require 4000 matches played at 2-1. Getting 1950 per match. Seems really high.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    H3t3r said:

    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.

    7.8m points is almost all of the alliance milestones on one players shoulders so it was an exaggeration to show the impact of points per unit.

    It was an easy round number to pluck out of the air to make the point, not what needs to be focussed on.
    Where are you getting the 7.8mill from? That would require 4000 matches played at 2-1. Getting 1950 per match. Seems really high.
    Oopsy, missed a decimal place somewhere along the lines. 780,000 not 7.8 mil.

    But again, this is just to show that you’re getting extra points from 2-1 than 2-0.
  • SearmenisSearmenis Member Posts: 1,598 ★★★★★
    Why the timetable is different from the Alliance War one? If you want to change alliances without causing any trouble to the one you currently are, you can't now. Leaving the alliance when War season ends, will be halfway to BG season and vice versa.
  • Wozzle007Wozzle007 Member Posts: 1,005 ★★★★★
    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Wozzle007 said:

    Gmonkey said:

    Wozzle007 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.
    Place 1 and 2 stars once in the higher division. And quit out match as soon as you are running in. Super fast no 8 minutes.
    Not sure if you read the whole of my post. I’m saying it’s far quicker to use 1/2* and lose on purpose. Although KT1 videos say this much better and far more entertaining.
Sign In or Register to comment.