These compensations are weak.. only meant to benefit whales. Ugh this classism disgusts me..
Well at least somebody sees through this BS! Time & time again the developer reminds everybody that those who spend big $ or play this game as a full-time job are the ones who get the best stuff...
Ok and where is the leadership compensation that was promised before the servers were taken offline last week? I tried asking that last night and an over eager mod closed it without answering.
Everyone was equally affected but Kabam continues to insult us with tiered compensation? Utter rubbish. But typical....
We can't give a new player an entire 5-Star and 1000 6-Star shards. We scale rewards because we have a progression plan for the entire game.
Everyone was affected in the same way everyone should have the same compensation, just because I am half way through 6.1 doesn't mean I was any less affected than my cavalier alliance mates
You were though. Top tier players lost out on way more.
I get what all of you are saying about the compensation package reflecting current level of gameplay. However in my opinion they should have set up the Compensation packages based on average ranking in the AQ and war rating. Those were the areas affected. I realize another compensation package will be coming later on down the road having to do with these and that's good to hear. but the maintenance still affected everyone in my alliance in the exact same way and we all play on the same alliance quest map and the same war map yet everyone in my alliance got different compensation packages based on story mode progression. How is this fair if we are all up against the same level of difficulty concerning group game play content?
Nothing is absolutely fair. Your way, we'll have filler accounts in a masters alliances gets a ton of compensation, while a Cavalier player in a chill alliance gets a 3* crystal. Personally I think that's worse.
Plus, I don't consider AQ (I'm setting aside AW as that's going to be handled separately) the only noteworthy impact. It probably wasn't even the largest hit. AQ fights were fixed first, and AQ timers were reduced. That wouldn't make everyone whole, but it almost certainly made a lot of alliances whole, and those who were impacted were not impacted by as much as the downtime duration would suggest. Meanwhile we had people looped in content, losing fights, or just plain stuck unable to grind arena like they normally did. It was arena fights that were restored last and experienced the longest outage: some people could have lost basically their entire grind day. For people on the bubble, it could have cost them 5* shards (the rank changes between the two cycles that week suggest scores were depressed somewhat around the 10% cutoff).
A lot of areas of the game were affected in different ways, but we're not going to get hand crafted compensation for every single one of them. We need a proxy for them, and progression title is a better one than AQ ranking. It isn't perfect, but it probably correlates to overall game reward earning rates better than AQ rank, or prestige or rating which is how it has been done in the past.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered. And that's pretty easy to explain: this is a progressional game. People who can't handle tiered rewards probably don't stick around long. The game self-selects for players who believe tiering is fair. So the people who think tiering is unfair are always going to be the minority.
That’s a very interesting comment, kabam decide on how they do compensation by how much we moan. Thats good to know
That is an interesting comment. But I didn't say that. What I said is that in games like this, the players who feel tiering is fair are going to be the majority, just out of self-selection. Game developers don't always do what the majority of their players say. But when it comes to subjective things like "what's fair" they do listen to what the majority of players' perspective is, because there's no objective definition of fairness that can absolutely guide them in situations like this.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered
Am I reading that wrong then?
One of us clearly is, because I don't know which word I used incorrectly. That entire paragraph says nothing about Kabam, and only things about the players. It says that our playerbase self-selects for people who believe in tiered rewards tied to progression. It says literally nothing about Kabam's motives or reasoning at all.
Kabam certainly listens to players, but that's one factor in their decision making. When deciding what's fair, I would think an important consideration is "what would the majority of players think is fair." But that has everything to do with representing the interests of the players, and exactly nothing to do with "moaning." The best proxy *we* have on the opinions of the players are public comments on the forums and places like the Reddit. But they aren't perfect representations, so you have to take that with a large grain of salt.
But sometimes opinion is sufficiently overwhelming that you can make reasonable inferences. Did the players hate the 14.0 AW changes? Probably. Did they hate the initial compensation prior to the 200k AG one for 12.0? Probably. Do more players think tiered rewards are more fair than flat ones? Probably. Is that because there's less "moaning?" I don't think so: in fact I have to factor the moaning out when I make that determination. When I eliminate all the crazy hyperbolic nonsense from the discussions over the years, THEN I reach the conclusion that the majority of reasonable players prefer tiered rewards. I would imagine Kabam reached a similar decision.
Or to put it in a more direct way: I believe the majority of players prefer tiered rewards in spite of loud nonsensical complaints in either direction, not because of them.
Both levels of comp were really good actually. Some people just want everything handed to them. This game relies on a progression structure, or it ceases to function. Everybody cannot get the same compensation, because they are at different levels of progression. The engine of which drives the game. Even so, the difference is not profoundly significant.
If you want Cavalier perks, then become Cavalier like the rest of us, and stop crying for what you didn’t earn.
These compensations are weak.. only meant to benefit whales. Ugh this classism disgusts me..
Well at least somebody sees through this BS! Time & time again the developer reminds everybody that those who spend big $ or play this game as a full-time job are the ones who get the best stuff...
The free to play players that started in the summer were getting better rewards for free from the calendar for doing nothing than the whales were getting spending thousands of dollars back when I was still progressing through the mid game. So forgive me a small chortle.
Play the game, progress in the game, and you'll get the better rewards. It takes exactly zero dollars to become uncollected or cavalier. The very top of the top of the playerbase does spend a lot, and players who don't have little chance of catching up to them, but they didn't get their own special compensation package for being the top of the top. They got the same Cav package as every free to play Cav player did.
And if you think it isn't possible to become Cavalier as free to play, that says more about your play than about the game's free.
Why couldn't your compensation be alliance based, top 100 alliance get x rewards, 101-250 x rewards, 250-1000 x rewards and so on, I am uncollected and on my way to cavalier, but people in my alliance who happen to already be cavalier got considerably more rewards, it makes no sense since we were all affected equally
I get what all of you are saying about the compensation package reflecting current level of gameplay. However in my opinion they should have set up the Compensation packages based on average ranking in the AQ and war rating. Those were the areas affected. I realize another compensation package will be coming later on down the road having to do with these and that's good to hear. but the maintenance still affected everyone in my alliance in the exact same way and we all play on the same alliance quest map and the same war map yet everyone in my alliance got different compensation packages based on story mode progression. How is this fair if we are all up against the same level of difficulty concerning group game play content?
Nothing is absolutely fair. Your way, we'll have filler accounts in a masters alliances gets a ton of compensation, while a Cavalier player in a chill alliance gets a 3* crystal. Personally I think that's worse.
Plus, I don't consider AQ (I'm setting aside AW as that's going to be handled separately) the only noteworthy impact. It probably wasn't even the largest hit. AQ fights were fixed first, and AQ timers were reduced. That wouldn't make everyone whole, but it almost certainly made a lot of alliances whole, and those who were impacted were not impacted by as much as the downtime duration would suggest. Meanwhile we had people looped in content, losing fights, or just plain stuck unable to grind arena like they normally did. It was arena fights that were restored last and experienced the longest outage: some people could have lost basically their entire grind day. For people on the bubble, it could have cost them 5* shards (the rank changes between the two cycles that week suggest scores were depressed somewhat around the 10% cutoff).
A lot of areas of the game were affected in different ways, but we're not going to get hand crafted compensation for every single one of them. We need a proxy for them, and progression title is a better one than AQ ranking. It isn't perfect, but it probably correlates to overall game reward earning rates better than AQ rank, or prestige or rating which is how it has been done in the past.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered. And that's pretty easy to explain: this is a progressional game. People who can't handle tiered rewards probably don't stick around long. The game self-selects for players who believe tiering is fair. So the people who think tiering is unfair are always going to be the minority.
That’s a very interesting comment, kabam decide on how they do compensation by how much we moan. Thats good to know
That is an interesting comment. But I didn't say that. What I said is that in games like this, the players who feel tiering is fair are going to be the majority, just out of self-selection. Game developers don't always do what the majority of their players say. But when it comes to subjective things like "what's fair" they do listen to what the majority of players' perspective is, because there's no objective definition of fairness that can absolutely guide them in situations like this.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered
Am I reading that wrong then?
One of us clearly is, because I don't know which word I used incorrectly. That entire paragraph says nothing about Kabam, and only things about the players. It says that our playerbase self-selects for people who believe in tiered rewards tied to progression. It says literally nothing about Kabam's motives or reasoning at all.
Kabam certainly listens to players, but that's one factor in their decision making. When deciding what's fair, I would think an important consideration is "what would the majority of players think is fair." But that has everything to do with representing the interests of the players, and exactly nothing to do with "moaning." The best proxy *we* have on the opinions of the players are public comments on the forums and places like the Reddit. But they aren't perfect representations, so you have to take that with a large grain of salt.
But sometimes opinion is sufficiently overwhelming that you can make reasonable inferences. Did the players hate the 14.0 AW changes? Probably. Did they hate the initial compensation prior to the 200k AG one for 12.0? Probably. Do more players think tiered rewards are more fair than flat ones? Probably. Is that because there's less "moaning?" I don't think so: in fact I have to factor the moaning out when I make that determination. When I eliminate all the crazy hyperbolic nonsense from the discussions over the years, THEN I reach the conclusion that the majority of reasonable players prefer tiered rewards. I would imagine Kabam reached a similar decision.
Or to put it in a more direct way: I believe the majority of players prefer tiered rewards in spite of loud nonsensical complaints in either direction, not because of them.
WEVE DONE THIS BOTH WAYS The words YOU used and if that’s not referring to kabam then I don’t know what is.
You know what, I'm not doing your homework anymore. "We've done this both ways" says exactly what about Kabam, besides the fact that they've handed out compensation packages both ways (which is so simple of an idea I can't even paraphrase it). You said I made a statement about how Kabam chooses to do compensation. What does that statement say about how Kabam chooses how to do anything.
You have the entire weekend to think about it, because chances are 50/50 Monday's the next time I'll see the thread. Or you can continue the argument with yourself, because I'm not really contributing anything to this little whatever it is.
I spent a ton of time getting good at this game. Practicing different nodes, champions, synergies, etc.
I spent countless hours farming potions in ROL, units and PHCs in arena, and reaching milestones for revives.
I put in a ton of work and sometimes money to get to where I am in the game. I became Cavalier. I took down LOL. I got through 6.3. I’ve 100% every Variant. Organized an alliance to move up in AQ.
I did this, and I earned and spent countless resources along the way. Far more than those who have not done these things.
And you think you deserve the same compensation that I do?
What a joke.
You are wrong and your logic is flawed.
The actual point is that this game relies on a progression based structure, or it fails as a game. This is clear to me.
Satisfied with the compensation in general, met my minimum expectations except that it would have been nice if kabam were abit less stingy and gave 2000 6* shards instead of 1000.
Both levels of comp were really good actually. Some people just want everything handed to them. This game relies on a progression structure, or it ceases to function. Everybody cannot get the same compensation, because they are at different levels of progression. The engine of which drives the game. Even so, the difference is not profoundly significant.
If you want Cavalier perks, then become Cavalier like the rest of us, and stop crying for what you didn’t earn.
I agree with you, if they were not given the same reward they would complain, instead of complaining about the compensation and that it is unfair because the cavaliers were given better compensation, progress in the game and stop crying, so they will get the benefits of being cavaliers
I spent a ton of time getting good at this game. Practicing different nodes, champions, synergies, etc.
I spent countless hours farming potions in ROL, units and PHCs in arena, and reaching milestones for revives.
I put in a ton of work and sometimes money to get to where I am in the game. I became Cavalier. I took down LOL. I got through 6.3. I’ve 100% every Variant. Organized an alliance to move up in AQ.
I did this, and I earned and spent countless resources along the way. Far more than those who have not done these things.
And you think you deserve the same compensation that I do?
What a joke.
You are wrong and your logic is flawed.
The actual point is that this game relies on a progression based structure, or it fails as a game. This is clear to me.
These compensations are weak.. only meant to benefit whales. Ugh this classism disgusts me..
Well at least somebody sees through this BS! Time & time again the developer reminds everybody that those who spend big $ or play this game as a full-time job are the ones who get the best stuff...
I dont spend big $. But after after 2 years i have attained cav title. If i got the same comp as someone who hasn't put in the work, i wouldnt feel the compensation had the same impact relative to where my roster is at. It's a pretty simple concept. Do you also get angry that UC unlocks benefits such as the UC calendar? This may not be the right game for you if you don't like a progression system.
I get what all of you are saying about the compensation package reflecting current level of gameplay. However in my opinion they should have set up the Compensation packages based on average ranking in the AQ and war rating. Those were the areas affected. I realize another compensation package will be coming later on down the road having to do with these and that's good to hear. but the maintenance still affected everyone in my alliance in the exact same way and we all play on the same alliance quest map and the same war map yet everyone in my alliance got different compensation packages based on story mode progression. How is this fair if we are all up against the same level of difficulty concerning group game play content?
Nothing is absolutely fair. Your way, we'll have filler accounts in a masters alliances gets a ton of compensation, while a Cavalier player in a chill alliance gets a 3* crystal. Personally I think that's worse.
Plus, I don't consider AQ (I'm setting aside AW as that's going to be handled separately) the only noteworthy impact. It probably wasn't even the largest hit. AQ fights were fixed first, and AQ timers were reduced. That wouldn't make everyone whole, but it almost certainly made a lot of alliances whole, and those who were impacted were not impacted by as much as the downtime duration would suggest. Meanwhile we had people looped in content, losing fights, or just plain stuck unable to grind arena like they normally did. It was arena fights that were restored last and experienced the longest outage: some people could have lost basically their entire grind day. For people on the bubble, it could have cost them 5* shards (the rank changes between the two cycles that week suggest scores were depressed somewhat around the 10% cutoff).
A lot of areas of the game were affected in different ways, but we're not going to get hand crafted compensation for every single one of them. We need a proxy for them, and progression title is a better one than AQ ranking. It isn't perfect, but it probably correlates to overall game reward earning rates better than AQ rank, or prestige or rating which is how it has been done in the past.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered. And that's pretty easy to explain: this is a progressional game. People who can't handle tiered rewards probably don't stick around long. The game self-selects for players who believe tiering is fair. So the people who think tiering is unfair are always going to be the minority.
That’s a very interesting comment, kabam decide on how they do compensation by how much we moan. Thats good to know
That is an interesting comment. But I didn't say that. What I said is that in games like this, the players who feel tiering is fair are going to be the majority, just out of self-selection. Game developers don't always do what the majority of their players say. But when it comes to subjective things like "what's fair" they do listen to what the majority of players' perspective is, because there's no objective definition of fairness that can absolutely guide them in situations like this.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this. We've done this both ways, with compensation packages being the same for everyone, and tiered. Way more people complain about flat than tiered
Am I reading that wrong then?
One of us clearly is, because I don't know which word I used incorrectly. That entire paragraph says nothing about Kabam, and only things about the players. It says that our playerbase self-selects for people who believe in tiered rewards tied to progression. It says literally nothing about Kabam's motives or reasoning at all.
Kabam certainly listens to players, but that's one factor in their decision making. When deciding what's fair, I would think an important consideration is "what would the majority of players think is fair." But that has everything to do with representing the interests of the players, and exactly nothing to do with "moaning." The best proxy *we* have on the opinions of the players are public comments on the forums and places like the Reddit. But they aren't perfect representations, so you have to take that with a large grain of salt.
But sometimes opinion is sufficiently overwhelming that you can make reasonable inferences. Did the players hate the 14.0 AW changes? Probably. Did they hate the initial compensation prior to the 200k AG one for 12.0? Probably. Do more players think tiered rewards are more fair than flat ones? Probably. Is that because there's less "moaning?" I don't think so: in fact I have to factor the moaning out when I make that determination. When I eliminate all the crazy hyperbolic nonsense from the discussions over the years, THEN I reach the conclusion that the majority of reasonable players prefer tiered rewards. I would imagine Kabam reached a similar decision.
Or to put it in a more direct way: I believe the majority of players prefer tiered rewards in spite of loud nonsensical complaints in either direction, not because of them.
WEVE DONE THIS BOTH WAYS The words YOU used and if that’s not referring to kabam then I don’t know what is.
He never said the moaning caused Kabam to do anything. You said he claimed that. He said that they tried multiple options and that the current option is the one most agree is fair. That is all. You implied causation, not him.
You tiered the compensation? Are you having a laugh, how was I any less affected by the maintenance than someone who is cavalier, how was someone who isnt uncollected affected any differently, this is a slap in the face
Because earlier game players wouldn’t have got as many rewards as a late game player in that time
Comments
Kabam certainly listens to players, but that's one factor in their decision making. When deciding what's fair, I would think an important consideration is "what would the majority of players think is fair." But that has everything to do with representing the interests of the players, and exactly nothing to do with "moaning." The best proxy *we* have on the opinions of the players are public comments on the forums and places like the Reddit. But they aren't perfect representations, so you have to take that with a large grain of salt.
But sometimes opinion is sufficiently overwhelming that you can make reasonable inferences. Did the players hate the 14.0 AW changes? Probably. Did they hate the initial compensation prior to the 200k AG one for 12.0? Probably. Do more players think tiered rewards are more fair than flat ones? Probably. Is that because there's less "moaning?" I don't think so: in fact I have to factor the moaning out when I make that determination. When I eliminate all the crazy hyperbolic nonsense from the discussions over the years, THEN I reach the conclusion that the majority of reasonable players prefer tiered rewards. I would imagine Kabam reached a similar decision.
Or to put it in a more direct way: I believe the majority of players prefer tiered rewards in spite of loud nonsensical complaints in either direction, not because of them.
If you want Cavalier perks, then become Cavalier like the rest of us, and stop crying for what you didn’t earn.
Play the game, progress in the game, and you'll get the better rewards. It takes exactly zero dollars to become uncollected or cavalier. The very top of the top of the playerbase does spend a lot, and players who don't have little chance of catching up to them, but they didn't get their own special compensation package for being the top of the top. They got the same Cav package as every free to play Cav player did.
And if you think it isn't possible to become Cavalier as free to play, that says more about your play than about the game's free.
You have the entire weekend to think about it, because chances are 50/50 Monday's the next time I'll see the thread. Or you can continue the argument with yourself, because I'm not really contributing anything to this little whatever it is.
I spent a ton of time getting good at this game. Practicing different nodes, champions, synergies, etc.
I spent countless hours farming potions in ROL, units and PHCs in arena, and reaching milestones for revives.
I put in a ton of work and sometimes money to get to where I am in the game. I became Cavalier. I took down LOL. I got through 6.3. I’ve 100% every Variant. Organized an alliance to move up in AQ.
I did this, and I earned and spent countless resources along the way. Far more than those who have not done these things.
And you think you deserve the same compensation that I do?
What a joke.
You are wrong and your logic is flawed.
The actual point is that this game relies on a progression based structure, or it fails as a game. This is clear to me.