Map 7 - Gold Unit Loyalty Farmers

So when is this going to be banned? The top AW AQ alliances can not afford map7 x 5 days - just like they couldn’t afford map 6 - without botting farmers. Real players who don’t cheat should be able to compete in AQ - and AW and Arena - based on what they can farm and they can afford without resorting to scams and fraud and bots.

2 cents.

Mic drop!

Comments

xNig

A possible workaround, since such stuffs are hard to prove, is to prevent new members from donating until they have been in the alliance for one week (or two), or participated in one AQ cycle.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Bfyffe28

xNig wrote: »

A possible workaround, since such stuffs are hard to prove, is to prevent new members from donating until they have been in the alliance for one week (or two), or participated in one AQ cycle.

This would be great. After a couple of weeks with lower cutoffs they’re basically right back to what they were. I doubt it’s a coincidence that map7 was announced in that timeframe

VanillaCoke

As the great @BrianGrant said difficulty should be the "cost" and the factor that allows alliances to separate themselves from each other - not donation costs. I mean, when it comes to individual challenges like the Champion's Clash Kabam even states "this is very difficult and not everybody is meant to complete the challenge." However, there's no "cost" that prevents people from joining. Why can't that same principle apply to completing higher level of AQ maps?

unknown

This content has been removed.

Bfyffe28

All of that sounds good but that’s not the way it is and isn’t an excuse to make arenas worse for the rest of us. This is just another instance of the top ruining something for everyone else. I realize they pay a lot of money to the game but they aren’t entitled to everything. I hope they lower the map costs so maybe everyone else gets the trickle down effect

xNig

Drooped2 wrote: »

Siliyo wrote: »

As the great @BrianGrant said difficulty should be the "cost" and the factor that allows alliances to separate themselves from each other - not donation costs. I mean, when it comes to individual challenges like the Champion's Clash Kabam even states "this is very difficult and not everybody is meant to complete the challenge." However, there's no "cost" that prevents people from joining. Why can't that same principle apply to completing higher level of AQ maps?

I've always supported that not even sure why donating needs to exist. Make content hard enough to stop people

The issue is... no content ever is.

ContestOfNoobs

Drooped2 wrote: »

Siliyo wrote: »

As the great @BrianGrant said difficulty should be the "cost" and the factor that allows alliances to separate themselves from each other - not donation costs. I mean, when it comes to individual challenges like the Champion's Clash Kabam even states "this is very difficult and not everybody is meant to complete the challenge." However, there's no "cost" that prevents people from joining. Why can't that same principle apply to completing higher level of AQ maps?

I've always supported that not even sure why donating needs to exist. Make content hard enough to stop people

you mean like champion clash?

where a lot of people are complainng they don't have "certain" glaive in there roster is what I find funny, theres abunch of people who beaten the challenge without corvus, seen plenty of ghost gameplay and even another youtube "hobbitrchrom" beaten it without corvus in the roster.

its those players who like to complain that they aren't ready for this content, people will always complain when they feel that not owning a specific champ for content is hindering them from the game.

Marri_2

Who cares...those alliances were already in the top rank rewards spots so that's no difference. And you can get to the milestones regardless of what others do. So who cares?

When will ppl start realizing that those top alliances aren't playing the same game as you (unless you are in those top alliances but hey, then you are doing the same thing!😎) and just enjoy the parts of the game you can compete in.

The self entitlement here is palpable.
"Oohhh, mommy, I want that"
"But baby, you aren't big enough for that yet"
"But mohohohommyyyyy, they stole it"
"That doesn't matter, you still aren't big enough. Now go play with your action figures. See how many you have?"

Not that I agree with cheating, but that kind of cheating is not my concern.

ILovePonies

ContestOfNoobs wrote: »

Drooped2 wrote: »

Siliyo wrote: »

As the great @BrianGrant said difficulty should be the "cost" and the factor that allows alliances to separate themselves from each other - not donation costs. I mean, when it comes to individual challenges like the Champion's Clash Kabam even states "this is very difficult and not everybody is meant to complete the challenge." However, there's no "cost" that prevents people from joining. Why can't that same principle apply to completing higher level of AQ maps?

I've always supported that not even sure why donating needs to exist. Make content hard enough to stop people

you mean like champion clash?

where a lot of people are complainng they don't have "certain" glaive in there roster is what I find funny, theres abunch of people who beaten the challenge without corvus, seen plenty of ghost gameplay and even another youtube "hobbitrchrom" beaten it without corvus in the roster.

its those players who like to complain that they aren't ready for this content, people will always complain when they feel that not owning a specific champ for content is hindering them from the game.

I did CM clash with 565 quake 565 aa 4* 330 ronan 3/45 hype, wasnt too bad

Ultra8529

xNig wrote: »

A possible workaround, since such stuffs are hard to prove, is to prevent new members from donating until they have been in the alliance for one week (or two), or participated in one AQ cycle.

That sounds like a nightmare for alliances and a paradise for alliance hoppers - jump around each week, collect free AQ rewards and give the best excuse for not donating each week "I can't right now!"

xNig

Ultra8529 wrote: »

xNig wrote: »

A possible workaround, since such stuffs are hard to prove, is to prevent new members from donating until they have been in the alliance for one week (or two), or participated in one AQ cycle.

That sounds like a nightmare for alliances and a paradise for alliance hoppers - jump around each week, collect free AQ rewards and give the best excuse for not donating each week "I can't right now!"

Then it’s up to the alliance to either not recruit such individuals, or retain their members so they don’t get huge turnarounds.

Alternatively, Kabam could just make the blackout for donation 5 days and the new guy has to donate since a 5-day period will definitely overlap with an AQ cycle. Having farmers in the alliance prior to AQ starting is just screwing over themselves due to lower prestige.

It’ll also make it more obvious when the rankings are compared week to week and there are sudden dips in those alliances’ ranks that coincide with someone with low prestige coming into the alliance and leaving shortly after.

Gert1s_Da_guru

xNig wrote: »

A possible workaround, since such stuffs are hard to prove, is to prevent new members from donating until they have been in the alliance for one week (or two), or participated in one AQ cycle.

Nahh still the merc would join and donate the loyalty for the next 2 months..they buy it in millions lol

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.