Options

More loyalty should be added to season rewards

24

Comments

  • Options
    Wicket329Wicket329 Posts: 3,115 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    edited July 2022
    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
    Yeah I agree with you. The ability to use items and boosts has always been a bane for fair competition in AW. But I also get that Kabam needs to be able to monetize as much as possible given that they are for-profit.

    The item cap incentivizes using “as big a pot as possible” to make room for further mistakes, and boosts not counting towards the item cap makes it even more mandatory if one wants to minimize the chances of dying.

    Tbh, I feel that counting boosts but not revives towards the item cap might actually be beneficial to make a more just AW environment.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    Wicket329 said:

    @Dark_Claw1 at this point you are far more the problem than @xNig ever was. The conversation had moved on and was productive, and you decided to be petty and bring it back up. I don’t know what backstory there may be to this, but I’d strongly recommend either speaking to the question at hand, or not at all. You shouldn’t need somebody to referee your social interactions. I’m hoping a mod comes in to clean out some of these posts but leaves the substantive conversation.

    I previously posted some thoughts on the loyalty issue in response to xNig’s last points. I would appreciate any relevant conversation on that point.

    It’s okay bro. I’m not looking for approval nor do I need it. Been past that for some time already. Let’s ignore him and continue our discussion. Your views have greatly benefited me and gave me some food for thought.
  • Options
    Wicket329Wicket329 Posts: 3,115 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
    Yeah I agree with you. The ability to use items and boosts has always been a bane for fair competition in AW. But I also get that Kabam needs to be able to monetize as much as possible given that they are for-profit.

    The item cap incentivizes using “as big a pot as possible” to make room for further mistakes, and boosts not counting towards the item cap makes it even more mandatory if one wants to minimize the chances of dying.

    Tbh, I feel that counting boosts but not revives towards the item cap might actually be beneficial to make a more just AW environment.
    That’s an interesting idea. There would never be roadblocks because of infinite revive access (since they now only cost 1 loyalty), but obviously if you’re just trying to battering ram your way through a lane, you won’t win that war.

    Counting boosts towards the item cap would result in the 6 hour war boosts becoming more important and efficiency in war becoming king to get the most out of those boosts. Kabam would actually need to make those the only ones that worked in war, because if a player is just running EQ and activates a 10% boost they had expiring to speed things along, it wouldn’t be fair to count that towards the war item cap.

    Not sure if it’s necessarily a good idea, but definitely one worth considering and exploring.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
    Yeah I agree with you. The ability to use items and boosts has always been a bane for fair competition in AW. But I also get that Kabam needs to be able to monetize as much as possible given that they are for-profit.

    The item cap incentivizes using “as big a pot as possible” to make room for further mistakes, and boosts not counting towards the item cap makes it even more mandatory if one wants to minimize the chances of dying.

    Tbh, I feel that counting boosts but not revives towards the item cap might actually be beneficial to make a more just AW environment.
    That’s an interesting idea. There would never be roadblocks because of infinite revive access (since they now only cost 1 loyalty), but obviously if you’re just trying to battering ram your way through a lane, you won’t win that war.

    Counting boosts towards the item cap would result in the 6 hour war boosts becoming more important and efficiency in war becoming king to get the most out of those boosts. Kabam would actually need to make those the only ones that worked in war, because if a player is just running EQ and activates a 10% boost they had expiring to speed things along, it wouldn’t be fair to count that towards the war item cap.

    Not sure if it’s necessarily a good idea, but definitely one worth considering and exploring.
    Ah yes. Forgot about that (regular boosts for EQ) as well.

    I think the 1 loyalty revive was an awesome change (credit to @DNA3000) and with that change alone, even 1k loyalty daily seems more than sufficient since arguably, the max you HAVE to spend to revive 3 champs 15 times (that’s 45 champs x 40% health which is pretty insane) is 15 loyalty, with no purchase cap to boot.

    Thing is, in a long run, the aim is to make AW as fair as possible across alliances (which I think Kabam is trying to do by making pots and boosts as restrictive as possible shown by segregating AQ and AW revives and pots, increasing the costs of pots and maybe boosts [I’m not sure whether they did]), while still being able to monetize the mode (this I feel is a tricky slope to balance on since tipping it too much will lean towards the mode being p2w again).

    I think making only AW specific boosts effective in AW, like you mentioned, can possibly go a long way, especially if they count towards the item cap.

    Since loyalty can’t be bought with cash, using it to restrict the AW items can be a “leveling ground” where everyone is given the exact same amount of currency to buy the items they want to/need (this is similar to the “set of X items at the start of every war” item you mentioned).

    If they run out of it, they run out, and will have to make do with 40% revives until they manage to scrimp and save to replenish it.

    This actually makes more sense compared to universally increasing loyalty awarded to achieve the subjective “sustainable” amount.

    Since the benefits of players you mentioned will remain constant, this will actually make it so that those that “itemed” their way into their positions are no longer able to do so, and those that are legitly skilled but are unwilling to “item up” are able to rise up generically.
  • Options
    Wicket329Wicket329 Posts: 3,115 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
    Yeah I agree with you. The ability to use items and boosts has always been a bane for fair competition in AW. But I also get that Kabam needs to be able to monetize as much as possible given that they are for-profit.

    The item cap incentivizes using “as big a pot as possible” to make room for further mistakes, and boosts not counting towards the item cap makes it even more mandatory if one wants to minimize the chances of dying.

    Tbh, I feel that counting boosts but not revives towards the item cap might actually be beneficial to make a more just AW environment.
    That’s an interesting idea. There would never be roadblocks because of infinite revive access (since they now only cost 1 loyalty), but obviously if you’re just trying to battering ram your way through a lane, you won’t win that war.

    Counting boosts towards the item cap would result in the 6 hour war boosts becoming more important and efficiency in war becoming king to get the most out of those boosts. Kabam would actually need to make those the only ones that worked in war, because if a player is just running EQ and activates a 10% boost they had expiring to speed things along, it wouldn’t be fair to count that towards the war item cap.

    Not sure if it’s necessarily a good idea, but definitely one worth considering and exploring.
    Ah yes. Forgot about that (regular boosts for EQ) as well.

    I think the 1 loyalty revive was an awesome change (credit to @DNA3000) and with that change alone, even 1k loyalty daily seems more than sufficient since arguably, the max you HAVE to spend to revive 3 champs 15 times (that’s 45 champs x 40% health which is pretty insane) is 15 loyalty, with no purchase cap to boot.

    Thing is, in a long run, the aim is to make AW as fair as possible across alliances (which I think Kabam is trying to do by making pots and boosts as restrictive as possible shown by segregating AQ and AW revives and pots, increasing the costs of pots and maybe boosts [I’m not sure whether they did]), while still being able to monetize the mode (this I feel is a tricky slope to balance on since tipping it too much will lean towards the mode being p2w again).

    I think making only AW specific boosts effective in AW, like you mentioned, can possibly go a long way, especially if they count towards the item cap.

    Since loyalty can’t be bought with cash, using it to restrict the AW items can be a “leveling ground” where everyone is given the exact same amount of currency to buy the items they want to/need (this is similar to the “set of X items at the start of every war” item you mentioned).

    If they run out of it, they run out, and will have to make do with 40% revives until they manage to scrimp and save to replenish it.

    This actually makes more sense compared to universally increasing loyalty awarded to achieve the subjective “sustainable” amount.

    Since the benefits of players you mentioned will remain constant, this will actually make it so that those that “itemed” their way into their positions are no longer able to do so, and those that are legitly skilled but are unwilling to “item up” are able to rise up generically.
    I guess the problem at this point is the culture that’s grown around alliance war over the last few years. It has gotten to a point where it is expected in Challenger and Expert wars to go into every fight with as much of an advantage as you can possibly get, meaning full health and boosted to the moon.

    For potions to go from abundant to a limited commodity seemingly overnight is a huge shift and shock to that frame of mind. If this really is Kabam’s intent, to shift wars more towards a “you will die and that’s okay” kind of meta rather than a “if you lose a single fight, you are a burden to your alliance,” then the potion changes make a bit of sense.

    The problem is that while loyalty is limited, the potions are still for sale for units so somebody will to spend will have a large advantage on a loyalty-potions-only player. Which, of course, is what makes them monetizable. I wonder how much the game actually brings in on people spending units for potions, I can’t imagine it’s a cash cow. I think most of the money that war brings in is indirect, via champion acquisition and ranking specifically for the mode, but maybe this economy shakeup is also intended to change that.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    Just wanted to add a simple calculation to see what’s the max amount of loyalty someone can spend in AW.

    15 items, assuming they’re all pots, 5 pots costs 162.2k loyalty, 10 will cost 364.4k loyalty.

    Since you can’t buy more than 10 L4 pots over 2 days, the remaining 5 will be L3 pots, bought in 2/3 over 2 days, which adds up to 31.75k + 53.75k = 85.5k.

    On pots alone, max someone can spend in a war is 449.9k (gonna approx it to 450k).

    Then we add in the invul/power start/regen boosts, assuming you’re very very efficient, that’s 2 for 2 sections and 1 for the mini/boss section, costing 30k.

    Following which the increase % of special damage boosts at 8k (I think) a pop, adding up to 24k (if you’re only using the same class and don’t need to swap them mid path).

    Then finally we have the special power return boost at 12k (I think) a pop, which comes up to 36k.

    Adding them all up, you’re looking at around 450k + 30k + 24k + 36k = 540k a war.

    As much as it sounds ridiculous to spend 540k loyalty for a war (over 2 days), it is possible.

    Like I mentioned earlier, “sustainability” is impossible because it is hugely subjective. People can spend 0, while others can theoretically spend 270k daily. Give anywhere below ~270k, there will be a small group of people saying it’s unsustainable, with that group getting larger as the amount decreases, not to mention how absurd it is to give everyone 270k daily.

    If it comes to that, it might be better off scrapping the item usage for AW and allow solely 40% revives.
  • Options
    Dark_Claw1Dark_Claw1 Posts: 139
    @Wicket329 i know, and I apologized as I posted. It’s not my nature to accept that from people which is a problem that I have. I am happy that xNig got on topic and the conversation has been much improved.

    I like the idea that everyone starts with the same set of items. That would take away any item management or buying wars abilities which I think would be cool.

    The counting boosts as items but not revives I also like. There are no road blocks with the current map (unless someone doesn’t scout their line) so that part really doesn’t matter but the fact that it would add to more deaths is why I like the idea. They should also remove the whole 3 ABs and have all deaths count again. I forget why they made that change but all deaths should count but again, that’s another issue.
  • Options
    Dark_Claw1Dark_Claw1 Posts: 139
    @Nabbydian i think you identified it with the elitist comment. The OP was meant to have a community conversation about the replenishment rate of loyalty not a singular conversation about the spending of loyalty. A singular conversation comes up with conclusions like “if you spent to much you aren’t very good” where a community conversation is sharing and understanding the range of what people do, provide ideas of how to best or efficiently go about those things and than come up with some possible solutions that support the function of those actions.
  • Options
    VendemiaireVendemiaire Posts: 2,178 ★★★★★
    Everyone, just quit your alliances if you're using more than 1 potion per war! Join a stone alliance to equate the input by your output.

    No boosts too!
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    edited July 2022

    @Wicket329 i know, and I apologized as I posted. It’s not my nature to accept that from people which is a problem that I have. I am happy that xNig got on topic and the conversation has been much improved.

    Don’t blame your lack of comprehension on me. I have always been on topic, you just didn’t understand the point I was making. My first post already had the word “optional” in it.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    Wicket329 said:

    xNig said:

    xNig - welcome to the conversation! That was your first post that had anything to do with the topic!

    There should be a somewhat easy way to earn the bare minimum of loyalty purchases each week. If that bare minimum is 300k a week than they should probably have a simple way to earn 400k a week.

    I don’t know what the exact bare minimum should be but I think that’s probably pretty close

    You apologized so I’m cool with that. No hard feelings.

    Anyway, I’d disagree with that overcompensating amount though.

    You have to understand that, as mentioned above, players are effectively trading loyalty for rewards with the use of items to artificially boost their war ratings into higher tiers/ranked rewards, which tbh, isn’t healthy, as it becomes more and more obligatory for them to do so, which in turn will start to cause the situation to spiral out of control once again.

    Like I mentioned above as well, even if pots are adjusted to % based at 40% per pop, in an extreme situation, having to end all fights at 20% requires 2 pots (~40k loyalty), for an average of 5 fights a war equates to 200k loyalty every 2 days, or 100k daily/700k weekly, which honestly, isn’t a reasonable amount to give out.
    I’d argue that the idea of iteming your way into higher tiers isn’t as big of a problem as you think it is. Even when we were rolling in AW potions from the weekly packages, there were still two limits on that.

    The first being player skill. When both sides had access to as many potions as they could possibly need, Wars were almost like a series of Battlegrounds fights. Everybody had the ability to come in fresh (or close to it) for most fights, and so player skill (or how the inputs were feeling that day, depending on who you ask) was the deciding factor.

    The second limiting factor is the item cap. There is a finite number of items that can be used each war. If a player comes unprepared for a lane, they’re gonna get rocked and run out of items regardless of how much loyalty they have. If you really want this to be a factor though, you’d probably have to reduce it to somewhere between five and ten. That would require strategic item usage.

    I know it won’t happen, but part of me has always been curious what the mode would look like if all players were given the same stack of items at the beginning of each war and they could only use those items. Call it two team 40% revives and 4 team 60% healing potions and that’s it. Maybe not that exact item spread, but you get the idea.
    Yeah I agree with you. The ability to use items and boosts has always been a bane for fair competition in AW. But I also get that Kabam needs to be able to monetize as much as possible given that they are for-profit.

    The item cap incentivizes using “as big a pot as possible” to make room for further mistakes, and boosts not counting towards the item cap makes it even more mandatory if one wants to minimize the chances of dying.

    Tbh, I feel that counting boosts but not revives towards the item cap might actually be beneficial to make a more just AW environment.
    That’s an interesting idea. There would never be roadblocks because of infinite revive access (since they now only cost 1 loyalty), but obviously if you’re just trying to battering ram your way through a lane, you won’t win that war.

    Counting boosts towards the item cap would result in the 6 hour war boosts becoming more important and efficiency in war becoming king to get the most out of those boosts. Kabam would actually need to make those the only ones that worked in war, because if a player is just running EQ and activates a 10% boost they had expiring to speed things along, it wouldn’t be fair to count that towards the war item cap.

    Not sure if it’s necessarily a good idea, but definitely one worth considering and exploring.
    Ah yes. Forgot about that (regular boosts for EQ) as well.

    I think the 1 loyalty revive was an awesome change (credit to @DNA3000) and with that change alone, even 1k loyalty daily seems more than sufficient since arguably, the max you HAVE to spend to revive 3 champs 15 times (that’s 45 champs x 40% health which is pretty insane) is 15 loyalty, with no purchase cap to boot.

    Thing is, in a long run, the aim is to make AW as fair as possible across alliances (which I think Kabam is trying to do by making pots and boosts as restrictive as possible shown by segregating AQ and AW revives and pots, increasing the costs of pots and maybe boosts [I’m not sure whether they did]), while still being able to monetize the mode (this I feel is a tricky slope to balance on since tipping it too much will lean towards the mode being p2w again).

    I think making only AW specific boosts effective in AW, like you mentioned, can possibly go a long way, especially if they count towards the item cap.

    Since loyalty can’t be bought with cash, using it to restrict the AW items can be a “leveling ground” where everyone is given the exact same amount of currency to buy the items they want to/need (this is similar to the “set of X items at the start of every war” item you mentioned).

    If they run out of it, they run out, and will have to make do with 40% revives until they manage to scrimp and save to replenish it.

    This actually makes more sense compared to universally increasing loyalty awarded to achieve the subjective “sustainable” amount.

    Since the benefits of players you mentioned will remain constant, this will actually make it so that those that “itemed” their way into their positions are no longer able to do so, and those that are legitly skilled but are unwilling to “item up” are able to rise up generically.
    I guess the problem at this point is the culture that’s grown around alliance war over the last few years. It has gotten to a point where it is expected in Challenger and Expert wars to go into every fight with as much of an advantage as you can possibly get, meaning full health and boosted to the moon.

    For potions to go from abundant to a limited commodity seemingly overnight is a huge shift and shock to that frame of mind. If this really is Kabam’s intent, to shift wars more towards a “you will die and that’s okay” kind of meta rather than a “if you lose a single fight, you are a burden to your alliance,” then the potion changes make a bit of sense.

    The problem is that while loyalty is limited, the potions are still for sale for units so somebody will to spend will have a large advantage on a loyalty-potions-only player. Which, of course, is what makes them monetizable. I wonder how much the game actually brings in on people spending units for potions, I can’t imagine it’s a cash cow. I think most of the money that war brings in is indirect, via champion acquisition and ranking specifically for the mode, but maybe this economy shakeup is also intended to change that.
    I kinda doubt that AW actually brings in that much money compared to crystal openings etc.

    Thing is, after 12.0, every small change Kabam tries to implement faces a lot of resistance from the community that prefers to stick to the status quo, rather than risk adapting to something new, even if whatever is implemented is better to the overall game.

    🤷🏻‍♂️
  • Options
    Dark_Claw1Dark_Claw1 Posts: 139
    xNig, I comprehend everything you said and they were not on topic which is why I responded to them the way I did. You posted original as fact and nothing can be done and also insulting. I explained the outsider looking in because you seemed to have no idea why what you were saying was off topic. I then tried to explain it further with the gas price analogy and you still didn’t get it. Some people just don’t get it bud. I, for whatever reason feel like people should be held accountable. I have apologized numerous times for my actions because I am aware that these posts are annoying to the rest of the chat which is holding myself accountable. You, not understanding, haven’t apologized for your actions once. I am belittling you a bit which might be why you respond defensively and not reflectively but I don’t think people respond reflectively to strangers on chat boards, especially when they are representing a know it all perspective anyway….and you probably don’t know that I’m belittling you either so….whatever

    You did get on topic eventually which is great. You obviously don’t know the difference so that point is mute to you but good for everyone else.
  • Options
    Wicket329Wicket329 Posts: 3,115 ★★★★★

    xNig, I comprehend everything you said and they were not on topic which is why I responded to them the way I did. You posted original as fact and nothing can be done and also insulting. I explained the outsider looking in because you seemed to have no idea why what you were saying was off topic. I then tried to explain it further with the gas price analogy and you still didn’t get it. Some people just don’t get it bud. I, for whatever reason feel like people should be held accountable. I have apologized numerous times for my actions because I am aware that these posts are annoying to the rest of the chat which is holding myself accountable. You, not understanding, haven’t apologized for your actions once. I am belittling you a bit which might be why you respond defensively and not reflectively but I don’t think people respond reflectively to strangers on chat boards, especially when they are representing a know it all perspective anyway….and you probably don’t know that I’m belittling you either so….whatever

    You did get on topic eventually which is great. You obviously don’t know the difference so that point is mute to you but good for everyone else.

    Mate. Just leave it and move on. This isn’t that big of a deal, it doesn’t need multiple posts. The conversation has progressed past this, let it go.
  • Options
    Qwerty12345Qwerty12345 Posts: 777 ★★★
    Until AW rewards are buffed (and AQ)... they are pointless parts of the game to fret over, which would include potions and other items.

    once they are buffed... then we need lowered prices or to be given more of it.

    AQ items are even pricier. There is no "1 glory revive".
  • Options
    Dark_Claw1Dark_Claw1 Posts: 139
    @Qwerty12345 it could use an Overhaul for sure. War should be really hard and almost impossible to 100% and there should be ways to strategically out maneuver the other team. The very first war map had some of that. The challenge I think with that is if it is to hard even less people will participate BUT if the rewards were outstanding than that would potentially encourage participation. Increasing the individual win rewards as well as the season rewards would potentially encourage more participation. A 3 week season I think would also help
  • Options
    thanks4playingthanks4playing Posts: 805 ★★★
    Kabam Jax said:

    This thread is a roller coaster!

    This serves as warning to keep the conversation on track. As many have pointed out, it's veered wildly off course numerous times. Keep your opinions about the topic and not about each other.

    There is some good conversation and perspectives on this topic and I'd hate to have to close the thread because of the bickering.

    Just wanted to say that I appreciate that someone from Kabam is not only reading these posts (i.e., taking the time and energy to learn from the community), but is also promoting conversation and dialogue. I hope that the perspectives on this post can help make MCOC better overall.
  • Options
    Wicket329Wicket329 Posts: 3,115 ★★★★★

    Until AW rewards are buffed (and AQ)... they are pointless parts of the game to fret over, which would include potions and other items.

    once they are buffed... then we need lowered prices or to be given more of it.

    AQ items are even pricier. There is no "1 glory revive".

    True, but (low value) AQ revives are handed out in the Summoner Advancement weekly event. I think I usually see two revives per week from that, and because AQ doesn’t change, players will typically settle into a groove over time on their lanes and minimize item usage as a result. When you start a new lane or new map, it can be very item intensive until you figure out your best options. But once you do, it’s not so bad. I usually can do my Map 8 lanes either completely or nearly itemless.

    Also, AQ doesn’t punish the alliance for sloppy clears, so there’s no need to heal all the way up. If I need it, I will usually just toss in one of those 1650 health revives and finish out the fight from low health. If I tried doing that in war and lost again, my alliance mates would be rightly frustrated. But if I do it in AQ, nobody cares.

    Finally, I don’t think there’s a glory shortage in the same way there is a loyalty one. After my glory payout at the end of the week, I usually find myself waiting for the store to reset before I actually spend any of it. Or I’m waiting to spend it before I actually claim my AQ payout because I’m sitting at the cap on glory.

    AQ needs to be updated in relation to the new r4 availability in the game economy, but I don’t see potion availability as a primary concern.
  • Options
    mohan8493mohan8493 Posts: 25
    Add bulk loyalty to season rewards it’s only fair
  • Options
    Dark_Claw1Dark_Claw1 Posts: 139
    Yep, that was the first thing listed lol. I called it “a large sum”…..bulk sounds better
  • Options
    Wiredawg1Wiredawg1 Posts: 504 ★★★★
    I do agree amount of loyalty given isn’t enough. And when you factor in if you doing map 7/8 and try to keep cost of aq tickets down and even spread across all 3 rescources. It’s really lacking
  • Options
    XdrebelXdrebel Posts: 7
    @Kabam Zibiit
    IF U GUY updated loyalty store then make a way to give more loyalty to the players too
    1 ADD LOYALTY TO SEASON REWARDS LIKE
    FOR MASTER ADD 1500000 LOYALTY
    FOR PLATINUM 1-2 ADD 1000000 SO ASS FOLLOW
    AND ALSO CHANGE THE DAILY EARNING OF LOYALTY FROM 1000 TO 15000 DAILY SO THIS WILL HELP.
    BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF LOYALTY U GUYZ GIVE IS WAY LESS COMPARE TO AMOUNT WE SPEND ON AW
  • Options
    FenicoFenico Posts: 307 ★★★
    This is the only correct solution on this situation. It is useless to push in the war anymore, "just save as much loyalty as you can and don't care about season rewards" is the recipe for success for upcoming seasons.

    Adding loyalty to season rewards solves all the issues, there will be a reason to push for higher season rewards and it will solve loyalty drought.

    I've seen few arguments in sense "if you need more loyalty you are playing in higher level of AW than you should". At first glance it seems like good argument but we literally get 2 potions for winning a war. It is barely sustainable as it is even without the store.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,260 ★★★★★
    Fenico said:

    This is the only correct solution on this situation. It is useless to push in the war anymore, "just save as much loyalty as you can and don't care about season rewards" is the recipe for success for upcoming seasons.

    Adding loyalty to season rewards solves all the issues, there will be a reason to push for higher season rewards and it will solve loyalty drought.

    I've seen few arguments in sense "if you need more loyalty you are playing in higher level of AW than you should". At first glance it seems like good argument but we literally get 2 potions for winning a war. It is barely sustainable as it is even without the store.

    But if you don’t spend potions in a lower tier war, whatever you get from winning/losing a war is a bonus.
Sign In or Register to comment.