Split Gold1 in two brackets and up the rewards

KnightarthusKnightarthus Member Posts: 419 ★★★
in General Discussion
Gold one is very competitive and there is great disparity between the top 300 and bottom 300 alliances in that bracket. The top 300-500 deserve to get platinum 3 equivalent. Platinum 3 and up brackets rewards need to be increased altogether because these are truly hard to achieve brackets that require skill organization and spending.

The current Gold 1 is not fair and the casual yet skilled player base that rank high in gold one are not getting proper rewards.

Your opinions ?

Comments

  • Primmer79Primmer79 Member Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    the upper part of gold 1 should not be equivalent to plat 3. they should be a lower tier and receive less rewards then plat 3, but more rewards than they did in season 1. bottom half of gold 1 stay the same.
  • RixobRixob Member Posts: 505 ★★
    i agree. i feel like gold 1 is huge. War rating from 1500 to 2200? that is a huge gap
  • DaMunkDaMunk Member Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    Yeah gold 1 is to big. What alliances are doing at the top of gold 1 and what the ones at the bottom are doing are completely different.
  • Liss_Bliss_Liss_Bliss_ Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    You want better rewards near the top of Gold1? Play better and get into the bottom of Platinum3. Plain and simple.
  • KnightarthusKnightarthus Member Posts: 419 ★★★
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    You want better rewards near the top of Gold1? Play better and get into the bottom of Platinum3. Plain and simple.

    Top gold one is already playing much better than bottom gold one. The difference is bigger than platinum 3 and top gold 1. Consider understanding the argument first.
  • MRod77MRod77 Member Posts: 154 ★
    i agree with this, top of gold 1 is tier 4, (tier 3 begins at 2300) and the bottom is tier 7. the top 6 categories is split into 300 alliances then 1200 go into gold 1, i would leave platinum and master where they are are, but definitely only about 300-600 in gold 1, that makes the breakout of rewards a little better. No reason for a tier 5,6 or 7 to push as they get the same rewards no matter what.
  • Liss_Bliss_Liss_Bliss_ Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    Knightarthus wrote: »
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    You want better rewards near the top of Gold1? Play better and get into the bottom of Platinum3. Plain and simple.

    Top gold one is already playing much better than bottom gold one. The difference is bigger than platinum 3 and top gold 1. Consider understanding the argument first.

    The argument is you want better rewards.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 19,658 Guardian
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    Knightarthus wrote: »
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    You want better rewards near the top of Gold1? Play better and get into the bottom of Platinum3. Plain and simple.

    Top gold one is already playing much better than bottom gold one. The difference is bigger than platinum 3 and top gold 1. Consider understanding the argument first.

    The argument is you want better rewards.

    To be fair, I'm in Gold 2 and I think the range between Platinum 3 and Gold 1 should probably be reconsidered.
  • Liss_Bliss_Liss_Bliss_ Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    Knightarthus wrote: »
    Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »
    You want better rewards near the top of Gold1? Play better and get into the bottom of Platinum3. Plain and simple.

    Top gold one is already playing much better than bottom gold one. The difference is bigger than platinum 3 and top gold 1. Consider understanding the argument first.

    The argument is you want better rewards.

    To be fair, I'm in Gold 2 and I think the range between Platinum 3 and Gold 1 should probably be reconsidered.

    My alliance sat around 250 in Gold1. If anything they should drop the bottom half down and give reduced rewards and leave the top half at the same rewards. I don’t feel like we were performing up to Plat3 standards. If we were we would have been in Plat3.
Sign In or Register to comment.