Map 7, New Milestones, Rank Rewards, Glory Store Update, Reduced cost for Map 4 - 6 Discussion

Summoners!

We've just posted a lot of brand new information about Map 7, changes to Maps 1-6, updates to the Glory Store, Ranked Rewards, and MIlestones, and a whole lot more!

There's a lot to take in. Read all about it here: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/121318/map-7-kings-ransom-new-milestones-rank-rewards-glory-store-update-reduced-cost-for-map-4-6

And you'll definitely have questions, so feel free to ask them in this thread here. We'll be updating our FAQ below as the day goes on.

FAQ

Who is Map 7 for?
It is not designed for the faint of heart. It is meant for those who wish to reach the top Ranks of Alliance Quests only. You will need plenty of skill, a robust roster, and a strong, communicative Alliance to even hope to complete Map 7. It goes without saying but Map 7 is also for people who read the Nodes. If you don’t read the Nodes, well… there’s a meme about not having a good time or something like that.

Why are you making Map 7?
First and foremost, we’re making Map 7 because Map 6 is over 2 years old. Since Map 6 was made at a much different time, the best Summoners have well surpassed its challenge in terms of skill and power. Rather than re-factor Map 6 as a whole and create a more severe difficulty spike from Map 5 to 6, we opted to create Map 7 as a more dynamic, modern challenge for the Summoners of 2019, not the Summoners of 2016.

Will Map 7 take longer than Map 6?
It has roughly the same number of tiles to clear as Map 6 did, however it has more paths, meaning there is much less room for “reserve” Summoners to help out. In our testing of the Map, it took generally the same amount of time to complete as Map 6 as long as all 10 Summoners were bringing their A-Game.

So it’s more intense?
Absolutely. Not only is there less room for error because of the new Buffs and 6-Star Champions, but the base difficulty is higher than Map 6 meaning HP and Attack are also higher. We want to be very clear: Map 7 is only for the most coordinated, prepared, and strongest Alliances. If you are not seeking a top Rank, Map 7 is going to be rough for you. There is a real possibility that you will not be able to 100% explore Map 7 in 3 Battlegroups in all 5 days of Alliance Quests - the choice is yours on whether you want to risk pushing even further as an Alliance.

Why is Map 7 so expensive?
Map 7 is more rewarding than Map 6 - both in points and in Map Crystals. In order to emphasize the degree of difficulty and also to require commitment up front, the map cost has been set intentionally high. Map 7 is an investment, and one that can be lucrative for Alliances who work together those rewards do not come without a significant risk. Luckily, if you’re on the fence about whether the cost will be worth it, Map 7 will be free the week of February 24th alongside all other Alliance Quest Maps.

Comments

DNA3000

PandamanPete wrote: »

V1PER1987 wrote: »

This seems very backwards. So just because there are 3rd party black market options, means the players should do it? I guess playing by the rules isn’t cool anymore. I guess people should engage in illegal activities as long as it’s something they really want. Can’t people just play the game without spending a fortune through illegal means in order to do it? Man games have become way more complicated from when Pong was invented.

Whether they SHOULD do it or not doesn't matter; if they CAN do it then they will. My alliance doesn't do it, but like I was saying, pretty much every other one does. Making these costs unattainable without spending is just encouraging this behavior more and more

Isn't this comparable to saying that because we only give medals for first, second and third place, that encourages cheating to place in the top three? Are we encouraging cheating by only medalling the top three, and if so are we supposed to change the amount of medals to disincentivize cheating?

danielmath

I really wish the deterrent to map 7 was the difficulty and not the donation costs, that's the error IMO.

rwhack

Kabam Miike wrote: »

PandamanPete wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

It is steep, but it is not a typo! Map 7 is meant to be High Risk, High Reward and a pretty big investment to run!

That's the thing; it's not a big investment to alliances that buy "donation drops" from 3rd party players. If these "black market donations" aren't addressed then there will be no legitimate alliances placing highly in AQ anymore

We are working to address this behaviour. I don't have any details right now, and can't share much on what we're doing anyways, but we haven't forgotten about that.

Map costs are too high. It’s not the behavior that’s the problem.

Address the “behavior” and I guarantee your revenue drops as people leave the game.

Kabam created the problem. Loyalty, gold, BC accumulate the same way they did forever ago. Coat to rank up heroes and run maps went up. The market found a way. It’s inherently dishonest not to see the real issue. It’s right here. Don’t hate the player hate the game. The game created the problem.

CoatHang3r

BrianGrant wrote: »

CoatHang3r wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

CoatHang3r wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

Is the loyalty cost a typo by any chance? It's not just a small increase from what alliances who are currently running 6x5 are paying, it's nearly double.

Current 6x5 is 34,000 and 7x5 is 50,000. That’s about 50% though. Dunno if ya’ll dip from extras or account for the 8day cycle and 7day week of donations to Reduce the cost to 28,000.

Yeah I was doing the math in my head instead of looking at the charts which is why I said nearly double. But a 50% increase is still too much for a resource that isn't farmable. This is just leading to less fun and more burnout.

Somewhat yeah.

But here is something else to think about when comparing to 6x5. *Assuming the numbers and sheets i have are correct.
77666 is less donos.
77766 is +5k loyalty, less BCs.
77776 is +10k loyalty, less BCs, +100k gold.
And 77777 is +16k loyalty, same BCs and +166k gold.

Looking at it from there the increased costs are mostly in running 7 on the final 2 days which would be going harder on map 7 than almost all allies did when map 6 was introduced.

I understand what you are saying. I'm sure Kabam thought the same thing with these changes. But at the end of the day, it's way more efficient to farm up resources on an alt to cover the costs and just run 77777 than sacrifice map 7 days. Running all map 6 has been fine without making an alt, but my loyalty is at a stand still. It doesn't go up, doesn't go down, and that's with occasionally skipping out on the 3 minute boosts.

At the end of the day it will all be possible to do, and do legitimately, but is it healthy for the game? Not in my opinion.

While the loyalty costs to run 7x5 are beyond what an individual can earn in a week. I have to ask are you opening your war crystals? They contain a significant amount of loyalty which would make your loyalty rate artificially low.

What are other loyalty expenditures you’ve had in the past?

Should it be 7x5 and war boosts? Could it be 7x5 or war boosts? Or like all areas of the game (most games), if you want to do everything you’re going to need a lot of time or money.

SCZ

BrianGrant wrote: »

I understand what you are saying. I'm sure Kabam thought the same thing with these changes. But at the end of the day, it's way more efficient to farm up resources on an alt to cover the costs and just run 77777 than sacrifice map 7 days. Running all map 6 has been fine without making an alt, but my loyalty is at a stand still. It doesn't go up, doesn't go down, and that's with occasionally skipping out on the 3 minute boosts.

At the end of the day it will all be possible to do, and do legitimately, but is it healthy for the game? Not in my opinion.

While I agree costs are too high it’s still you’re prerogative to be in an alliance that pushes aw and 7x5. If it’s not worth the cost then an ally that more closely aligns with your ideas of “healthy” should be pursued, then maybe if enough do the same things will change. Besides kabam still hangs their hat on it’s not the intent to be doing theses maps every day(even though we know that’s not reality)

Playing at the highest levels requires either a ton of time or money or both.

Qu1ckshoT32_Gaming

I'm confused, when I mentioned the donations black market I was given a level one forum time out. Are we allowed to openly discuss this topic now?

DNA3000

danielmath wrote: »

I really wish the deterrent to map 7 was the difficulty and not the donation costs, that's the error IMO.

I *think* the intent is similar to the original stated intent of the cost structure of Map 6, namely that there's an element of "progress" to the costs. Specifically, it isn't intended that alliances can immediately jump to 7x5, the idea is for the costs to be high enough that initially alliances will only be able to run Map 7 once or twice a week, doing 77666 for a while. And over time, as both earning power increases and the game itself progresses in its reward structure alliance will be able to increase their Map 7 frequency to 77766, the 77776, then finally 7x5. The costs are intended to be a stepped set of hurdles to overcome, creating a stepped set of progress points.

Of course, many players don't look at games that way: they try to beat everything immediately, and if it is mathematically possible they believe it should be practically possible. But I don't think good game design is supposed to cater to this impulse.

Wakandas_Finest

Did I miss where they listed what 4 encounters in section 3 are being removed and which nodes in sections 2 and 3 are being removed from map 6?

Kabam DK

Thebgj01 wrote: »

Map 5 costs— Is it 450k gold per group per day?

It's 450,000 for 3 Battlegroups per day. Per group, it's 25%, 50%, and 25% of that cost for BG1, 2, and 3, respectively.

Rasilover

Pretty Disappointed that the Potions are still the same price.
Anyways looking forward for the new Map 6 Changes.
Hopefully Section 3 will no longer require 10 Members to explore

BrianGrant

CoatHang3r wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

CoatHang3r wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

CoatHang3r wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

Is the loyalty cost a typo by any chance? It's not just a small increase from what alliances who are currently running 6x5 are paying, it's nearly double.

Current 6x5 is 34,000 and 7x5 is 50,000. That’s about 50% though. Dunno if ya’ll dip from extras or account for the 8day cycle and 7day week of donations to Reduce the cost to 28,000.

Yeah I was doing the math in my head instead of looking at the charts which is why I said nearly double. But a 50% increase is still too much for a resource that isn't farmable. This is just leading to less fun and more burnout.

Somewhat yeah.

But here is something else to think about when comparing to 6x5. *Assuming the numbers and sheets i have are correct.
77666 is less donos.
77766 is +5k loyalty, less BCs.
77776 is +10k loyalty, less BCs, +100k gold.
And 77777 is +16k loyalty, same BCs and +166k gold.

Looking at it from there the increased costs are mostly in running 7 on the final 2 days which would be going harder on map 7 than almost all allies did when map 6 was introduced.

I understand what you are saying. I'm sure Kabam thought the same thing with these changes. But at the end of the day, it's way more efficient to farm up resources on an alt to cover the costs and just run 77777 than sacrifice map 7 days. Running all map 6 has been fine without making an alt, but my loyalty is at a stand still. It doesn't go up, doesn't go down, and that's with occasionally skipping out on the 3 minute boosts.

At the end of the day it will all be possible to do, and do legitimately, but is it healthy for the game? Not in my opinion.

While the loyalty costs to run 7x5 are beyond what an individual can earn in a week. I have to ask are you opening your war crystals? They contain a significant amount of loyalty which would make your loyalty rate artificially low.

What are other loyalty expenditures you’ve had in the past?

Should it be 7x5 and war boosts? Could it be 7x5 or war boosts? Or like all areas of the game (most games), if you want to do everything you’re going to need a lot of time or money.

Well my loyalty is going down really. I counted the loyalty from the unopened crystals in the equation of loyalty evening out. But the updated costs don't lead me to make interesting choices between AW and AQ, it leads me to just make an alt so I can do both. And with the biggest source of loyalty coming from War, it hurts alliances who would prefer to just focus on AQ. Conceptually I understand the changes and why they were made, but it pushes burnout more than it pushes fun in my opinion. I think Kabam can do a better job at moving the game forward in a way that doesn't burn players out.

Kabam DK

Rasilover wrote: »

Pretty Disappointed that the Potions are still the same price.
Anyways looking forward for the new Map 6 Changes.
Hopefully Section 3 will no longer require 10 Members to explore

It still does.

Gunners

Can we just get a buff to ways of earning loyalty and gold ? Keep adding things to suck up these resources like new aq maps boost new champs etc but not buffing ways to earn them feel sorry for 7×5 ally no way they can keep up with those donations long the loyalty we earn won't even cover half the cost

RagamugginGunner

Raganator wrote: »

Really trying to burn out officers these days. Can't wait for those nodes to make it to AW.

Yeah, this is gonna be hell for officers.

Rasilover

Kabam DK wrote: »

Rasilover wrote: »

Pretty Disappointed that the Potions are still the same price.
Anyways looking forward for the new Map 6 Changes.
Hopefully Section 3 will no longer require 10 Members to explore

It still does.

Oh Womp Womp

Wakandas_Finest

@Kabam Miike can we get more info on map 6 changes? Which encounters are being removed and which nodes please

Omni

Kabam likes to nudge players “choices” with how we use resources. Loyalty has always been essentially the most finite of the 3 donation requirements and also the most difficult to farm.

Introducing a larger cost to run more difficult map whilst already having a good estimate on the amount of players who will run map 7 was done so knowing these same players would have to make a choice. War of aq. Seems like the players at the top want to have their cake and eat it too...**** and moaning is the only way they can keep players on the fringe alliances from catching up.

Gunners

Don't see the point is running map 7 when pretty soon you would have to rely on the black market for donations something that I'm against and don't agree with the game should be played fairly but these charges are only feeding these markets really hope kabam fix or buff ways to make donations manageable

Kabam DK

Wakandas_Finest wrote: »

Did I miss where they listed what 4 encounters in section 3 are being removed and which nodes in sections 2 and 3 are being removed from map 6?

Hey @Wakandas_Finest, we simply didn't get into specifics because it's hard to convey out of context, but if you're interested:

1. Removed Node 92 (Doc Ock), and the Linked Nodes now come from Node 99 (King Groot)
2. Moved Node 81 (Green Goblin) back one node, deleted Node 77 (Thor Ragnarok) and bridged the remaining nodes
3. Removed the fight on Node 122 (Killmonger) (it is still a node that needs to be stepped on)
4. Moved Node 75 with its links and removed empty Node
5. Removed the Node left of Node 94
6. Removed Node 90 (Magik) and Node 81's Linked Node now targets node 89 Instead of 90.
7. Removed empty Node between 37 and 46
8. Restructured line between node 52 and Node 69, also removed the empty node

ShinobiGuy

Anyone else feel the wheels turning? I mean, we even got BG weighing in on this. These are interesting times for sure.

CoatHang3r

Gunners wrote: »

Can we just get a buff to ways of earning loyalty and gold ? Keep adding things to suck up these resources like new aq maps boost new champs etc but not buffing ways to earn them feel sorry for 7×5 ally no way they can keep up with those donations long the loyalty we earn won't even cover half the cost

Both gold and loyaly have recieved increases in the past. In fact when map 6 was first introduced we earned far less loyalty than we do today; AW tier’s introduced a significant increase in loyalty. I’d estimate loyalty earnings to be at about 34k (or more if you win in aw) a week; that’s 7x4.

Furthermore you can easily keep up with loyalty and 7x5 if you put your units towards it. And let’s be honest few 7x5 allies are going to have many people without conversion badges; it’ll cost them 160 units a week to make up the difference between 7x5 and 6x5. Those FTP players will need to work it out with thier allies but that’s not something they haven't done in the past or do not do today with trading etc while running 6x5.

DNA3000

BrianGrant wrote: »

Well my loyalty is going down really. I counted the loyalty from the unopened crystals in the equation of loyalty evening out. But the updated costs don't lead me to make interesting choices between AW and AQ, it leads me to just make an alt so I can do both. And with the biggest source of loyalty coming from War, it hurts alliances who would prefer to just focus on AQ. Conceptually I understand the changes and why they were made, but it pushes burnout more than it pushes fun in my opinion. I think Kabam can do a better job at moving the game forward in a way that doesn't burn players out.

Hypothetically speaking, Kabam could take the players' psychology out of the equation. Instead of using high costs to step progress they could put alliances on rails. They could limit alliances to no more than one Map 7 per week, no matter how much resources they have. Then six months later they could increase that limit to two. Then they could look at resource earning averages and if those supported it they could increase that limit to three. They could take the spending costs out of the player's hands and put everyone on a max budget. No one would be allowed to push harder for more resources to unlock more Map 7s than anyone else, so there's no more rat race to push for higher donation spending.

That creates the stepped progress you generally want to have, while also eliminating the possibility for players to push past reasonable limits. It also takes control out of the players' hands. That's not a coincidence. Burnout is a function of players given the opportunity to push higher than healthy. You eliminate burnout in only one of two ways. You make it impossible to push that high, or you make it worthless to push that high. This makes it impossible. We could also cap Map 7 rewards with throttles which would make it worthless to push too high. There are games that exist that do one or both of these. But are either of these a good idea?

DocJC

Kabam Miike wrote: »

PandamanPete wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

It is steep, but it is not a typo! Map 7 is meant to be High Risk, High Reward and a pretty big investment to run!

That's the thing; it's not a big investment to alliances that buy "donation drops" from 3rd party players. If these "black market donations" aren't addressed then there will be no legitimate alliances placing highly in AQ anymore

We are working to address this behaviour. I don't have any details right now, and can't share much on what we're doing anyways, but we haven't forgotten about that.

@Kabam Miike

Since you bring this up.....

Can you please actually address why the costs are so high now? Honestly, please look at the numbers and explain how any summoner is supposed to get those resources?

Your original reseasoning for map 6 costs was that no one would be able to run it for 5 days so the costs reflected only a minimal amount of days.

In previous posts, one of your mods also said costs would be addressed and lowered I assumed.

Now further escalating costs for Map 7 and no reason given? How is that fair to alliances that want to run it? A few shards is supposed to make it all better?

Omni

ShinobiGuy wrote: »

Anyone else feel the wheels turning? I mean, we even got BG weighing in on this. These are interesting times for sure.

He only chimes in when things directly impact him and his alliance. If hypothetically speaking the bottle neck for running this map was something 99 percent of the community didn’t have (for argument sake let’s say 1.5k six star shards a week) but he and his alliance receives, then he wouldn’t be complaining.

Kabam is trying to do something here, he just doesn’t like it because they are saying he won’t be able to do something which will only further the divide between top players and the rest of the base

unknown

This content has been removed.

Hulksmasshh

DNA3000 wrote: »

BrianGrant wrote: »

Well my loyalty is going down really. I counted the loyalty from the unopened crystals in the equation of loyalty evening out. But the updated costs don't lead me to make interesting choices between AW and AQ, it leads me to just make an alt so I can do both. And with the biggest source of loyalty coming from War, it hurts alliances who would prefer to just focus on AQ. Conceptually I understand the changes and why they were made, but it pushes burnout more than it pushes fun in my opinion. I think Kabam can do a better job at moving the game forward in a way that doesn't burn players out.

Hypothetically speaking, Kabam could take the players' psychology out of the equation. Instead of using high costs to step progress they could put alliances on rails. They could limit alliances to no more than one Map 7 per week, no matter how much resources they have.

Wow I actually love this idea. Even raise the donation costs for map 7 in this case to keep up with their bottom line. Alliances can choose when they want their super difficult map7 day to be (if they so choose). Day 5 will give the most points but scheduling might be better to play it on an off-AW day. Gives the best of both worlds

MaatMan

Difficulty added need ls to be unachievable for most players.
If 7x5 was instantly achievable then it would negate the purpose.
You need to have a place you are, and end goal and a path to get there.
I think a readonable expaction should be to be able to afford and conplet 1-2 map 7 a week for a while and slowly increase that to more.

ShinobiGuy

Omni wrote: »

ShinobiGuy wrote: »

Anyone else feel the wheels turning? I mean, we even got BG weighing in on this. These are interesting times for sure.

He only chimes in when things directly impact him and his alliance. If hypothetically speaking the bottle neck for running this map was something 99 percent of the community didn’t have (for argument sake let’s say 1.5k six star shards a week) but he and his alliance receives, then he wouldn’t be complaining.

Kabam is trying to do something here, he just doesn’t like it because they are saying he won’t be able to do something which will only further the divide between top players and the rest of the base

I don’t know, I’m a long time player, 3+ years, and not in a competitive alliance. Doing UC monthly and waiting on act 6 which I’ll complete slowly. AQ map 5 and gold 1 AW. We’ve found our stride and a good balance playing the game. All these changes are nothing but positive for us.

BG I feel is the level headed high tier player (who, if this wasn’t his source of income, plays waaaaay to much) so when he’s against some of the changes and the direction the game is taking it feels more like a shift in something than ever before.

PS. Love your channel BG, looking forward to the vid on this.

SummonerNR

For those only running MAP-5 and Below... Will anything be done to allow Leaders to refund Treasury Battlechips back to members since there is 0 cost to run Map-5 now ? Or possibly just make that a feature Leaders can do for any of the 3 Treasury accounts (if an alliance has built up an over abundance). Allow disbursement EVENLY to all members of XX amount of a category ? Or would this cause problems with higher alliances who have been getting “outside donations” from 5-minute members (“dark treasury”), and be an unintended way for them to skirt the spirit of fairplay ? Maybe if it were only applicable to Battlechips (the “free” category for 5 and below) it would avoid the higher problem (which seems limited more to Loyalty costs).

ALSO, just to clarify.. Does the GLOBAL CLASS BUFF boost apply to our own attackers, or does that apply to the Map Defenders, or to EVERYONE (attackers and defenders alike) ?

DocJC

Quite frankly why does it even cost anything to open maps?

You are getting your money from pots regardless.

You want to know why there’s a black market? Because Kabam made it that way.

Kabam is the only one making the divide. Every single alliance should be able to play map 7 if they wanted. Map costs should never have been a deterring factor to begin with.

Difficulty and organization to run the map should be the only factor to whether an alliance can complete a map. That Kabam has put in these ridiculous map costs to begin with is something I’m shocked more people don’t push back on. It’s ridiculous.