**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.

Donation lockout needs to be improved

2

Comments

  • Bear3Bear3 Posts: 996 ★★★
    His point is doing arena gets you units which gets you loyalty... just like arena gets you bc’s which gets you gold and units. People don’t like the idea of using their units though because of what else they can buy. I’d suggest not doing map 7... rewards are great, so is the cost.
  • JadedJaded Posts: 5,476 ★★★★★
    Bear3 said:

    His point is doing arena gets you units which gets you loyalty... just like arena gets you bc’s which gets you gold and units. People don’t like the idea of using their units though because of what else they can buy. I’d suggest not doing map 7... rewards are great, so is the cost.

    No, the point is loyalty should have been decreased as well because it’s a limited farmed resource. Indirectly you can farm other resources to pay for it but How fair is that in the long term? Why not increase a extremely old process of gaining loyalty?
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:


    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    I run a second account to farm loyalty donations. I guess I can retire it now. The fact that loyalty can only be earned from War plus 1k a day is garbage.

    I currently earn portions of my loyalty in arenas along with BCs and gold. Did 30k per AQ cycle worth for over a year. Kabam recently gave that option to everyone f2p or not.
    Where is loyalty in arena?
    I see. Misunderstood your post. The day I start using units to make donations is the day I go to a retirement alliance or else actually retire.
    To each their own but imo that is not a reasonable position given units are used through out all arenas of the contest to make up for shortcomings, loyalty contributions should not be excluded from that.
  • Bear3Bear3 Posts: 996 ★★★
    Not saying loyalty shouldn’t be boosted, I’m all for it. Just pointing out arena can gain you loyalty, just not directly. Most gold and units aren’t gained from arena directly either though. Exchange bc’s for both is the main source.
  • BenLucasBenLucas Posts: 69 ★
    They are trying to clamp down on $$$ bots, thats good. Maybe reduce some donation costs further, but hope they introduce even more ways to screw with bots.
  • Solrac_2Solrac_2 Posts: 497 ★★
    Most allys give you a free week of AQ and so the 8 day lockout doesn't hurt most. In fact, it is very beneficial to most allys because of the cheating that was going on with donations. This curbs it some but Kabam will have to get rid of the off-season if they want to 99% eradicate it.
  • Ironman3000Ironman3000 Posts: 1,916 ★★★★★
    You have to lower the loyalty costs and add a way to farm it.
  • G7proG7pro Posts: 13 ★
    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.
  • JadedJaded Posts: 5,476 ★★★★★
    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:


    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    I run a second account to farm loyalty donations. I guess I can retire it now. The fact that loyalty can only be earned from War plus 1k a day is garbage.

    I currently earn portions of my loyalty in arenas along with BCs and gold. Did 30k per AQ cycle worth for over a year. Kabam recently gave that option to everyone f2p or not.
    Where is loyalty in arena?
    I see. Misunderstood your post. The day I start using units to make donations is the day I go to a retirement alliance or else actually retire.
    To each their own but imo that is not a reasonable position given units are used through out all arenas of the contest to make up for shortcomings, loyalty contributions should not be excluded from that.
    Units for energy because you want to keep running content but don't want to wait... that's fine. Units for revives because you died and don't want to wait... that's fine. Units for offers... that's fine. Units for donations because the game artificially limits the amount it's possible to earn and scales the cost of AQ such that you can't earn enough? Not so much.
    So artificially hampering quest progress through timed energy, artificially hampering revives by limiting their availability and overcoming that with units is different from not enough loyalty to run 7x5(False BTW)?

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,657 Guardian
    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:


    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    I run a second account to farm loyalty donations. I guess I can retire it now. The fact that loyalty can only be earned from War plus 1k a day is garbage.

    I currently earn portions of my loyalty in arenas along with BCs and gold. Did 30k per AQ cycle worth for over a year. Kabam recently gave that option to everyone f2p or not.
    Where is loyalty in arena?
    I see. Misunderstood your post. The day I start using units to make donations is the day I go to a retirement alliance or else actually retire.
    Is there a difference between giving you loyalty in the arena or giving you battlechips which ultimately generate units which you can use to make loyalty donations? It seems to me that getting BC is better than getting loyalty directly because the units you get from BC is a player-controlled currency you can spend in lots of different ways, whereas loyalty is more limited in what you can spend it on.

    In general, general purpose currencies tend to favor the player. But here you seem to be implying that you will never use a general purpose currency to make donations if you cannot earn the specific currency necessary on its own. That seems to be a vote against general purpose currencies which seems to go against the notion that player choice generally favors the player.
  • JadedJaded Posts: 5,476 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    Oh definitely. I didn’t comment earlier on your post but yes agreed fully. No donations is the way to go. And allow the difficulty to determine what an alliance can do or not. Fully agree with that.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,657 Guardian
    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    You can't simply remove map donations because that would then eliminate the penalty for attempting a map you have no hope of completing. An alliance can often get way more points partially completing a high map than fully completing a low map. The high tier maps have a cost and then completion rewards to partially or fully offset those costs. This prevents alliances from doing content way higher than they can successfully complete just to arbitrage the map multipliers.

    The map costs are somewhat like the deposit for bottles you pay on the assumption you'll get them back partially or fully if you recycle the bottle. Whether they are set correctly or not, they can't be completely eliminated on all maps.
  • DiablosUltimateDiablosUltimate Posts: 1,021 ★★★
    edited June 2019
    All serious alliances I have seen don't require donations from their members on week they join anyway, so I don't know how it would encourage jumpers. I'm glad that I see this change, because it should reduce AQ scores in general, but I also find it both sad and laughable that it took them so many years to make it
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,638 ★★★★★
    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:


    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    I run a second account to farm loyalty donations. I guess I can retire it now. The fact that loyalty can only be earned from War plus 1k a day is garbage.

    I currently earn portions of my loyalty in arenas along with BCs and gold. Did 30k per AQ cycle worth for over a year. Kabam recently gave that option to everyone f2p or not.
    Where is loyalty in arena?
    I see. Misunderstood your post. The day I start using units to make donations is the day I go to a retirement alliance or else actually retire.
    To each their own but imo that is not a reasonable position given units are used through out all arenas of the contest to make up for shortcomings, loyalty contributions should not be excluded from that.
    Units for energy because you want to keep running content but don't want to wait... that's fine. Units for revives because you died and don't want to wait... that's fine. Units for offers... that's fine. Units for donations because the game artificially limits the amount it's possible to earn and scales the cost of AQ such that you can't earn enough? Not so much.
    So artificially hampering quest progress through timed energy, artificially hampering revives by limiting their availability and overcoming that with units is different from not enough loyalty to run 7x5(False BTW)?

    In the previous examples I am using units to compensate for not wanting to wait to get the resources through means available in the game. In the case of loyalty, I am using units because it isn't possible to earn enough. Spare me the metrics that show it is technically possible if you win wars at a high enough percentage and don't use loyalty on anything else.
  • Ironman3000Ironman3000 Posts: 1,916 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    You can't simply remove map donations because that would then eliminate the penalty for attempting a map you have no hope of completing. An alliance can often get way more points partially completing a high map than fully completing a low map. The high tier maps have a cost and then completion rewards to partially or fully offset those costs. This prevents alliances from doing content way higher than they can successfully complete just to arbitrage the map multipliers.

    The map costs are somewhat like the deposit for bottles you pay on the assumption you'll get them back partially or fully if you recycle the bottle. Whether they are set correctly or not, they can't be completely eliminated on all maps.
    Failing to clear a map and losing lots of points is the penalty for trying a map you're not ready for.

    Map donations never made much sense to me. Seems like they're just a way to make people spens more time and/or money on the game just to play it.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,638 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:


    LeNoirFaineant said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    LeNoirFaineant said:

    I run a second account to farm loyalty donations. I guess I can retire it now. The fact that loyalty can only be earned from War plus 1k a day is garbage.

    I currently earn portions of my loyalty in arenas along with BCs and gold. Did 30k per AQ cycle worth for over a year. Kabam recently gave that option to everyone f2p or not.
    Where is loyalty in arena?
    I see. Misunderstood your post. The day I start using units to make donations is the day I go to a retirement alliance or else actually retire.
    Is there a difference between giving you loyalty in the arena or giving you battlechips which ultimately generate units which you can use to make loyalty donations? It seems to me that getting BC is better than getting loyalty directly because the units you get from BC is a player-controlled currency you can spend in lots of different ways, whereas loyalty is more limited in what you can spend it on.

    In general, general purpose currencies tend to favor the player. But here you seem to be implying that you will never use a general purpose currency to make donations if you cannot earn the specific currency necessary on its own. That seems to be a vote against general purpose currencies which seems to go against the notion that player choice generally favors the player.
    If they cut the amount of battlechips you could earn and replaced them with loyalty, there wouldn't be a difference I agree. In fact, as units are hit or miss it might be a net positive but I still wouldn't like it. Units from arena have been a thing as long as I've been playing the game. Loyalty was irrelevant for a long time. Just a way to get garbage boosts or UC. Now it's a constant pain in the ass for me and there is no way to farm it. It's unlike every other resource in the game. There doesn't seem to be any reason why it should be different other than to force players to use units for donations. I'm FTP and using units for donations for an unfarmable resource is repugnant to me.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,657 Guardian
    Drooped2 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    You can't simply remove map donations because that would then eliminate the penalty for attempting a map you have no hope of completing. An alliance can often get way more points partially completing a high map than fully completing a low map. The high tier maps have a cost and then completion rewards to partially or fully offset those costs. This prevents alliances from doing content way higher than they can successfully complete just to arbitrage the map multipliers.

    The map costs are somewhat like the deposit for bottles you pay on the assumption you'll get them back partially or fully if you recycle the bottle. Whether they are set correctly or not, they can't be completely eliminated on all maps.
    Make aq pass or fail you dont best the boss you get 0 points.
    You could do that but that is severely punishing when you fail. The current system is more graduated. In any case, that's a sufficiently dramatic change to AQ victory conditions that it doesn't represent the current reality donations have to exist within.
  • Solrac_2Solrac_2 Posts: 497 ★★
    Drooped2 said:

    Solrac_2 said:

    Most allys give you a free week of AQ and so the 8 day lockout doesn't hurt most. In fact, it is very beneficial to most allys because of the cheating that was going on with donations. This curbs it some but Kabam will have to get rid of the off-season if they want to 99% eradicate it.

    Meh no you just donate buy in shell allainces and swap in off season to a well stocked bank
    Which is why I mentioned getting rid of the off-season. Did you miss that part? It doesn't eliminate it entirely but greatly curbs it. Also, if Kabam could figure out a way to punish shells that don't do AW to ensure that if there is any jumping that there is a strong deterrent.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,657 Guardian
    Ironman3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    You can't simply remove map donations because that would then eliminate the penalty for attempting a map you have no hope of completing. An alliance can often get way more points partially completing a high map than fully completing a low map. The high tier maps have a cost and then completion rewards to partially or fully offset those costs. This prevents alliances from doing content way higher than they can successfully complete just to arbitrage the map multipliers.

    The map costs are somewhat like the deposit for bottles you pay on the assumption you'll get them back partially or fully if you recycle the bottle. Whether they are set correctly or not, they can't be completely eliminated on all maps.
    Failing to clear a map and losing lots of points is the penalty for trying a map you're not ready for.
    Are you saying you have facts to support the contention I'm wrong in asserting you can gain more points through high tier map failures, or did you choose to ignore that statement completely?

    When my alliance first started attempting Map 6, we were earning far more AQ points for Map 6 failures than Map 5 full explores. I consider this direct proof this kind of multiplier manipulation is both workable and rewarding.
  • Sieger7999Sieger7999 Posts: 48 ★
    I think loyalty shouldn’t be a donation, it should auto accrue in the treasury based off how long each member has been part of the ally. So it would ramp up something like this:

    Each week your treasury will get x amount per summoner depending on how long they have been a member:
    <=2 weeks - 0 loyalty
    2-4 weeks - 5000
    4-8 weeks -7000
    8+ weeks - 10000

    I haven’t done any maths on the breakdown, just a concept that I think would limit shell alliances and also actually give a bonus to alliance loyalty
  • Ironman3000Ironman3000 Posts: 1,916 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Ironman3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Jaded said:

    G7pro said:

    The people of kabam are so miserable. They are getting hated with each new choice.
    It upsets me.

    If they lowered loyalty costs as well there wouldn’t be any outcry. But they always miss the big picture. If they want to lockout donation periods, fine. Then make all resources needed for map 7 possible to earn in their direct method per week plus extra so we can use it on other items as well.
    I agree but ending third party resource sales is an important step. I just feel they handled it wrong

    Still feel donations are flawed and should just go away and increase the difficulty
    You can't simply remove map donations because that would then eliminate the penalty for attempting a map you have no hope of completing. An alliance can often get way more points partially completing a high map than fully completing a low map. The high tier maps have a cost and then completion rewards to partially or fully offset those costs. This prevents alliances from doing content way higher than they can successfully complete just to arbitrage the map multipliers.

    The map costs are somewhat like the deposit for bottles you pay on the assumption you'll get them back partially or fully if you recycle the bottle. Whether they are set correctly or not, they can't be completely eliminated on all maps.
    Failing to clear a map and losing lots of points is the penalty for trying a map you're not ready for.
    Are you saying you have facts to support the contention I'm wrong in asserting you can gain more points through high tier map failures, or did you choose to ignore that statement completely?

    When my alliance first started attempting Map 6, we were earning far more AQ points for Map 6 failures than Map 5 full explores. I consider this direct proof this kind of multiplier manipulation is both workable and rewarding.
    Ugh, that's a good thing. It incentivises people to push their skills. Allys pushing map 6 or 7 should earn more points than those playing it safe and coasting through map 5.
  • Zuko_ILCZuko_ILC Posts: 1,504 ★★★★★
    Here's a better idea get rid of donation requirements altogether???? If players were looking for cheaper less time consuming ways to be able to afford to play AQ maps they want to.....doing this will just make people quit.

    There should be no donations required we already give you our time and money and you charge us on top of that to just play game modes that should be free. Black market exists because you're prices are too high.

    Lower the costs, better yet make the community happy and get rid of it altogether. You might find that more people would reignite their interest and probably even spend more if you wouldn't try to hold everyone back behind a pay wall....

    Seriously you lose so much money by half your tactics and poor marketing. I was a huge spender and just got tired of it like lots. I'd still be spending if it was actually worth it.
  • StrStr Posts: 547 ★★
    I get the idea behind it and i can see why kabam want to act. Especially if they are trying to reduce things like credit card fraud.

    But this will cause problems for alliances which have any regular turnover. One person not paying and leaving will be a big problem. Alliances will probably have to over charge and build up treasury reserves.

    There was a more obvious solution kabam. Scrap the map costs. That way no-one does it and people can play the challenging content. I dont see why AQ costs so much when entering every uncollected quest, AW, ROL, LOl and event quest is free.

    Especially as champs are so expensive to rank up with gold. Act 6 content being resource and champ intensive. This is a good opportunity to solve several problems at once. It would also be good for PR with the community which have traditionally been largely ignored.

Sign In or Register to comment.