Gold 1 bracket is broken

MagicBenton

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

The Tiers are really irrelevant in terms of Seasons. Save for the Multipliers. Seasons are about cumulative Points. Tiers determine individual Rewards, but Seasons are based on total Points. It's two different systems coinciding.

Lmao tiers have EVERYTHING to do with seasons. In a system where getting the most points gets you the highest rankings, you always want to be at the highest multiplier possible to get the most points. There are many different factors and systems that go into determining your final season rank, but they are all related and nothing is irrelevant

Clearly you didn't read the following comment. I said irrelevant was the wrong choice of wording. There are Tiers (Tier 1-20), then Season Brackets. (Plat 1-3 etc). They line up somewhat but they're two different systems that operate differently. Not sure what factors and systems you're referring to in terms of Season Rank, but it's pretty straightforward. It's a Leaderboard. It's based on Points. Your Bracket determines your Multiplier, and it can flux based on the results that other Allies put up. You win, you go up. Someone scores more than you, you go down.

It helps to think before a post or at least use the edit button. Why post something and then go in the complete opposite direction right after? Alliance war tiers ARE RELEVANT with alliance war rankings. All the different systems in alliance war (tiers, war rating, leaderboard, point scoring) are relevant with each other and work together to determine your final leaderboard ranking.

You're not grasping what I'm saying and you seem to be looking for an argument so best of luck.

I think you just can't refute that tiers are relevant to alliance war seasons, but thanks.

I'm going to explain it one more time and you can argue with whatever you want.

Tiers are based on War Rating. You can win or lose and alter your Rating going up or down in Tiers, and that determines individual War Rewards. This can also be affected by other Allies winning or losing, but not as instantaneously as Brackets. The War Rating determines your Matches.

Brackets are based on how many Points you score. It's a live-action Leaderboard. You can't lose Points, but what you put up versus what others put up determines what Bracket you're in. It's an Arena for Allies. You can put up Points, but you can go down after as Allies put up more Points.

The Multiplier is determined by the Bracket you're in. Not the Tier you're in. We can see a reflection of the Tier in the scoring, but they have no effect on each other by design. It's a race of Points. There's no reason why the Tier needs to line up with the Bracket you're in.

The multiplier is determined by your war tier, not your reward bracket.

I wouldn't say it's determined by it. I would say you can see a reflection of it. There is a difference between the two because of how Points are accumulated. You need to run Wars constantly to maintain a position. With Tiers, if you fight and lose, you lose Rating. With Seasons, you still accumulate Points. I would agree that there is somewhat of a lesser correlation lower because how many BGs are run and how many Wars are fought also affect Points.

I'm not sure what you are talking about, but your multiplier is determined by your war tier. It is explicitly set by your war tier based on a table that I won't repost, as it has been posted in the thread already.

That's not an absolute because there are other factors that go into your Bracket. You need to assume that Allies are running a set number of Wars with a set number of BGs. In our case, our Bracket did not reflect our Tier because we weren't available to run 3 Wars a week. The end result suffered. You need to run Wars constantly to maintain or advance in Brackets. Tiers are based on Wins and Losses, and can remain the same longer, whereas you miss one or two Wars, and you can go down in Brackets.

Still not sure what you are talking about, because none of that has anything to do with multiplier. MULTIPLIER is determined by war tier. BRACKET is determined by points, but BRACKET is not MULTIPLIER.

Isn't the Multiplier changed based on the Bracket you're in?

No. As many have pointed out, multiplier is based on Tier alone.

Perhaps there's a miscommunication. When I say Tier, I'm talking about Tier 1-20 that determines the War Rewards for Wars. When I say Bracket, I'm not talking about all of Platinum. Platinum 1 is a Bracket, Platinum 2 is another.

Yes. Everyone here is aware and stand by what they said. Tier determines multiplier, not bracket.

Not consistently, no.

Please provide a counter-example where this is true. Are you claiming that bracket determines multiplier? That is easily refuted.

Clearly the Bracket determines the Multiplier. That's not even a question because the Multiplier changes based on the Bracket. I've already given an example. Brackets don't always reflect what Tier someone is in. I'm not disputing the information DNA provided. I think it's a useful analysis if Allies want to know what to aim for. There are also other variables that go into it. You need to fight the same amount of Wars with the same amount of BGs to find the same results. Someone can be in a higher Tier than their Bracket reflects if they miss Wars. It's a reflection, but it's not hard-and-fast that your Tier reflects your Bracket, hence the Multiplier. That's based on your cumulative Points in relation to the Points others put up. As this is getting redundant and I've already made my points, I'm out.

WOOOOOW you are making my brain hurt in this thread. THE TIER YOU ARE IN DETERMINES YOUR POINT MULTIPLIER 100% OF THE TIME.

The only thing that Brackets do is tell you what Season rewards you are going to earn once the Season ends.

GroundedWisdom

MagicBenton wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

FactorQ wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Hulksmasshh wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

The Tiers are really irrelevant in terms of Seasons. Save for the Multipliers. Seasons are about cumulative Points. Tiers determine individual Rewards, but Seasons are based on total Points. It's two different systems coinciding.

Lmao tiers have EVERYTHING to do with seasons. In a system where getting the most points gets you the highest rankings, you always want to be at the highest multiplier possible to get the most points. There are many different factors and systems that go into determining your final season rank, but they are all related and nothing is irrelevant

Clearly you didn't read the following comment. I said irrelevant was the wrong choice of wording. There are Tiers (Tier 1-20), then Season Brackets. (Plat 1-3 etc). They line up somewhat but they're two different systems that operate differently. Not sure what factors and systems you're referring to in terms of Season Rank, but it's pretty straightforward. It's a Leaderboard. It's based on Points. Your Bracket determines your Multiplier, and it can flux based on the results that other Allies put up. You win, you go up. Someone scores more than you, you go down.

It helps to think before a post or at least use the edit button. Why post something and then go in the complete opposite direction right after? Alliance war tiers ARE RELEVANT with alliance war rankings. All the different systems in alliance war (tiers, war rating, leaderboard, point scoring) are relevant with each other and work together to determine your final leaderboard ranking.

You're not grasping what I'm saying and you seem to be looking for an argument so best of luck.

I think you just can't refute that tiers are relevant to alliance war seasons, but thanks.

I'm going to explain it one more time and you can argue with whatever you want.

Tiers are based on War Rating. You can win or lose and alter your Rating going up or down in Tiers, and that determines individual War Rewards. This can also be affected by other Allies winning or losing, but not as instantaneously as Brackets. The War Rating determines your Matches.

Brackets are based on how many Points you score. It's a live-action Leaderboard. You can't lose Points, but what you put up versus what others put up determines what Bracket you're in. It's an Arena for Allies. You can put up Points, but you can go down after as Allies put up more Points.

The Multiplier is determined by the Bracket you're in. Not the Tier you're in. We can see a reflection of the Tier in the scoring, but they have no effect on each other by design. It's a race of Points. There's no reason why the Tier needs to line up with the Bracket you're in.

The multiplier is determined by your war tier, not your reward bracket.

I wouldn't say it's determined by it. I would say you can see a reflection of it. There is a difference between the two because of how Points are accumulated. You need to run Wars constantly to maintain a position. With Tiers, if you fight and lose, you lose Rating. With Seasons, you still accumulate Points. I would agree that there is somewhat of a lesser correlation lower because how many BGs are run and how many Wars are fought also affect Points.

I'm not sure what you are talking about, but your multiplier is determined by your war tier. It is explicitly set by your war tier based on a table that I won't repost, as it has been posted in the thread already.

That's not an absolute because there are other factors that go into your Bracket. You need to assume that Allies are running a set number of Wars with a set number of BGs. In our case, our Bracket did not reflect our Tier because we weren't available to run 3 Wars a week. The end result suffered. You need to run Wars constantly to maintain or advance in Brackets. Tiers are based on Wins and Losses, and can remain the same longer, whereas you miss one or two Wars, and you can go down in Brackets.

Still not sure what you are talking about, because none of that has anything to do with multiplier. MULTIPLIER is determined by war tier. BRACKET is determined by points, but BRACKET is not MULTIPLIER.

Isn't the Multiplier changed based on the Bracket you're in?

No. As many have pointed out, multiplier is based on Tier alone.

Perhaps there's a miscommunication. When I say Tier, I'm talking about Tier 1-20 that determines the War Rewards for Wars. When I say Bracket, I'm not talking about all of Platinum. Platinum 1 is a Bracket, Platinum 2 is another.

Yes. Everyone here is aware and stand by what they said. Tier determines multiplier, not bracket.

Not consistently, no.

Please provide a counter-example where this is true. Are you claiming that bracket determines multiplier? That is easily refuted.

Clearly the Bracket determines the Multiplier. That's not even a question because the Multiplier changes based on the Bracket. I've already given an example. Brackets don't always reflect what Tier someone is in. I'm not disputing the information DNA provided. I think it's a useful analysis if Allies want to know what to aim for. There are also other variables that go into it. You need to fight the same amount of Wars with the same amount of BGs to find the same results. Someone can be in a higher Tier than their Bracket reflects if they miss Wars. It's a reflection, but it's not hard-and-fast that your Tier reflects your Bracket, hence the Multiplier. That's based on your cumulative Points in relation to the Points others put up. As this is getting redundant and I've already made my points, I'm out.

WOOOOOW you are making my brain hurt in this thread. THE TIER YOU ARE IN DETERMINES YOUR POINT MULTIPLIER 100% OF THE TIME.

The only thing that Brackets do is tell you what Season rewards you are going to earn once the Season ends.

So it does. I thought it was tied into the Bracket you were currently in. My bad. Probably would have caught on earlier, but I tend to close off when people jump on me. Lol.

GroundedWisdom

I was talking about how your Tier isn't always reflected in your Bracket, but I thought the Multiplier was in the Bracket. I was wrong. Sorry guys. Probably should have double-checked. I think it's because the Multiplier displays on the Menu with your Bracket that I connected the two.

Hulksmasshh

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I was talking about how your Tier isn't always reflected in your Bracket, but I thought the Multiplier was in the Bracket. I was wrong. Sorry guys. Probably should have double-checked. I think it's because the Multiplier displays on the Menu with your Bracket that I connected the two.

No problem, glad to help

DNA3000

khehmist wrote: »

Based on the discrepancy in rewards, after 3-4 seasons, no Gold 1 teams will have much if any chance of competing with, or ever becoming Platinum teams.

Putting in terms you care about Kabam - Taking away a realistic chance of advancement isn't going to motivate your customers to spend money. People on the edge of moving to a better managed game will leave. Leaving the reward structure the way it is will cost you revenue.

I don't think it is quite that bad. The difference in rewards between Platinum 3 and Gold 1 are not sufficiently wide to make that true. Now that we have an idea of what's in those war crystals, based on what I've seen it looks like very roughly you could expect to get about 2k T2 Alpha frags and a little more than 1k T5 Basic frags per crystal, again very roughly. That means the difference between Gold 1 and Platinum 3 is roughly: 1k 6* shards, 2k 5* shards, 0.24 of a T4CC, 26k T2 Alpha frags, and 9k T5 Basic frags. Every two to three months, that is a significant but not competition-destroying difference.

SuperChrona

An addition to this discussion about Gold 1. As an alliance leader of a top 200 gold 1 alliance this reward system for season is poison for alliances.

Never in my soon 2½ year as an alliance leader lost so many members due to game content. And my feeling is that it is the same for many others.

The problem for me is two part. One is that there are no motivation for most of the season once you figure out that it is impossible to reach platinium 3. And you are no where near being close to dropping to gold 2. So what is the motivation? Really need to break up gold 1 into 2 og 3 tiers and make gold 1 rewards closer to platinium 3 rewards. The drop from platinium 3 to gold 1 rewards are just to great.

My suggestion make gold 1 top 300 - 600. Increase rewards in gold 1 with 9000 alpha tier 2 shards half of platinium 3. Increase war season crystals to 8. Make rest of gold 1 rewards the same as the current one. For top 600 to top 1500.

BitterSteel

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I was wrong.

Anyone checked if pigs are flying?

GroundedWisdom

BitterSteel wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I was wrong.

Anyone checked if pigs are flying?

How did I know someone would comment on that? Lol. I'm not always right, I'm not always wrong. Stubborn sometimes, yes. I think you would find the same for anyone really, especially in the Gaming Community. You could almost say we are all the same in some ways.
It's hard to be open-minded when you're used to people going on the offensive. Sometimes I just block as a defense.

DNA3000

khehmist wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

khehmist wrote: »

Based on the discrepancy in rewards, after 3-4 seasons, no Gold 1 teams will have much if any chance of competing with, or ever becoming Platinum teams.

Putting in terms you care about Kabam - Taking away a realistic chance of advancement isn't going to motivate your customers to spend money. People on the edge of moving to a better managed game will leave. Leaving the reward structure the way it is will cost you revenue.

I don't think it is quite that bad. The difference in rewards between Platinum 3 and Gold 1 are not sufficiently wide to make that true. Now that we have an idea of what's in those war crystals, based on what I've seen it looks like very roughly you could expect to get about 2k T2 Alpha frags and a little more than 1k T5 Basic frags per crystal, again very roughly. That means the difference between Gold 1 and Platinum 3 is roughly: 1k 6* shards, 2k 5* shards, 0.24 of a T4CC, 26k T2 Alpha frags, and 9k T5 Basic frags. Every two to three months, that is a significant but not competition-destroying difference.

Wrong. Take 2 teams that are within 1% of Alliance Rankings from each other across Tier 3/4. Give half of one team an extra 6* and a 5/65 every 4 seasons and those 2 teams are no longer competitive.

If that's the case then the alliances with players buying their way to large 6* rosters are already unbeatable, and not even the AW season rewards can catch them, so once again the problem is only theoretical.

*Any* difference in rewards can eventually accumulate to a large difference assuming everything else remains identical, but everything else doesn't remain identical. The point is the difference in rewards is small relative to the other rewards those alliances are earning. If you honestly believe that that difference in rewards makes the alliances inevitably non-competitive in four seasons, then cutting the difference in half just defers the problem to be eight seasons or less. "Or less" because as those rewards add up they increase the performance gap between the alliances, increasing the reward earning gap as well.

Not to mention the fact your numbers are wrong. The earning difference is 1k 6* shards. That means it takes ten seasons for that difference to equal an entire 6* champion difference. It takes eight seasons for the T5 Basic fragment difference to equal two whole T5 basic crystals. Those are time scales of one and a half to two years.

DNA3000

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

BitterSteel wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I was wrong.

Anyone checked if pigs are flying?

How did I know someone would comment on that? Lol. I'm not always right, I'm not always wrong. Stubborn sometimes, yes. I think you would find the same for anyone really, especially in the Gaming Community. You could almost say we are all the same in some ways.
It's hard to be open-minded when you're used to people going on the offensive. Sometimes I just block as a defense.

Part of the problem is you are not just sometimes but literally always saying that word choice doesn't matter and people should just take what you say at face value. Usually that creates subtle but important problems. This time it literally made you say the opposite of what you intended. That's why being careful about how things are expressed is as important as what things are being expressed. There's no way any of us could have known you were using terminology in a reverse manner without persistent questioning.