Alliance Wars - Defense Tactics and Rewards Update Discussion Thread

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.

1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?

Eric987

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.

In another post you said “random prizes are given in sporting events”. Please provide examples of this, very interested to see what you come up with.

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?

1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?

So by adding platinum 4, does that allow the top 800 in gold 2 to now move up to gold 1 ? The way it’s all stated is kind of confusing, Master is top 20, p1 is top 50, etc, but it’s not clear if p1 is top 21-50 or 21 to 71. That goes the same for p4 and gold 1; is p4 for 800 teams or the teams who have an overall rank inside the top 800 but outside the top 300 in p3 for a total of 500 teams. Please clear this up as it is pretty vague the way it’s worded currently.

Platinum 1 is 21-50 so platinum 4 will be the top 500 currently in gold 1. Gold 2 will not automatically move up. It is confusing the way kabam displays the leaderboard but you can see that platinum 1 only has 30 alliances in the bracket. That’s because it counts the 20 in masters as part of the top 50

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?
1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?

1) because it gives them a chance to catch up, assuming their skills are good enough.... This has already been established, why does it need to be repeated. The better question is why all the jealousy that someone got something better than you in rng (see again opening 10 cavs vs opening 1), You are still getting a totality of better rewards.

2) because you created a fallacy, so I pointed it out. That being said any event that gives out rewards of a spot in another random event (like poker), and I have seen sporting events where the rewards were lottery tickets.

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?
1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?
1) because it gives them a chance to catch up, assuming their skills are good enough.... This has already been established, why does it need to be repeated. The better question is why all the jealousy that someone got something better than you in rng (see again opening 10 cavs vs opening 1), You are still getting a totality of better rewards.

2) because you created a fallacy, so I pointed it out. That being said any event that gives out rewards of a spot in another random event (like poker), and I have seen sporting events where the rewards were lottery tickets.

1. If their skills are good enough, but they are consistently placing in Gold, why should they get better rewards than someone consistently placing in Plat or Master (even if such a player has inferior skills)? You cannot say that there is a better totality of rewards when the exact point being discussed is that the RNG allows a player who places lower to get better rewards than a player who places higher. Why should they have a chance to catch up by placing in gold? If they want to catch up, then move up the ladder and place in Plat or Master.

2. Poker wins the pot on the table. That is a fixed amount he knows what he is getting into, and the potential prize, when he makes the decision to play. Next example if any?

This is a discussion about War. Not just the Top TIer. One demo does not dominate the discussion in general.
you do know that these changes only apply to the top tiersof AW right? why would someone who will never play at this level try to tell those who will how they should feel?

Tiers 4-5 is top tier? Who knew? You can’t get into platinum playing on tiers 4-5. There are tier 3 alliances in gold 1. Facts

Kobster84

This is a discussion about War. Not just the Top TIer. One demo does not dominate the discussion in general.
you do know that these changes only apply to the top tiersof AW right? why would someone who will never play at this level try to tell those who will how they should feel?

Tiers 4-5 is top tier? Who knew? You can’t get into platinum playing on tiers 4-5. There are tier 3 alliances in gold 1. Facts

I’m sorry but that means they are losing or not playing wars I was in at the start of the season my ally was t4 in p3

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?
1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?
1) because it gives them a chance to catch up, assuming their skills are good enough.... This has already been established, why does it need to be repeated. The better question is why all the jealousy that someone got something better than you in rng (see again opening 10 cavs vs opening 1), You are still getting a totality of better rewards.

2) because you created a fallacy, so I pointed it out. That being said any event that gives out rewards of a spot in another random event (like poker), and I have seen sporting events where the rewards were lottery tickets.
1. If their skills are good enough, but they are consistently placing in Gold, why should they get better rewards than someone consistently placing in Plat or Master (even if such a player has inferior skills)? You cannot say that there is a better totality of rewards when the exact point being discussed is that the RNG allows a player who places lower to get better rewards than a player who places higher. Why should they have a chance to catch up by placing in gold? If they want to catch up, then move up the ladder and place in Plat or Master.

2. Poker wins the pot on the table. That is a fixed amount he knows what he is getting into, and the potential prize, when he makes the decision to play. Next example if any?

Placing in gold is not an indictment of an individual players skill, but of the team players skill. Trying to assume that a player is less skilled than you is very bad when it is a group event. In addition seeing how there are 9 lanes someone in a master alliance can theortically carry 1 person who could be level what ever.

1)Also I CAN say that there are better overall rewards. A player who goes with master for instance by defailt gets 5500 6* shards, and 10k 5* shards. Even if you dont think of those as the main rewards you will still get 2 t4bc, almost a whole t5bc, 1 t2a cats and T5cc shards The gold player will get no t5cc, will get 1 t4bc and 9000 t5bc and 1800 t2ac. There is virtually no way that overall he will come out ahead of you.

2) You dont seem to know much about poker. When you play in the lower events you are playing for a spot in another event, which is still a random event. In addition you know what you are getting into and the potential prize when you make your decision, nice try, next argument?

GroundedWisdom

I thought that Kabam was going to take time to monitor how Wars are going during this season. Did they realize there's teams that are in Platinum 1 and 2 that are still dying over a hundred times and not completing the map just the way it is? Now they're going to make it even harder with no Global benefits that benefits the attacker whatsoever. The game just keeps getting less interesting every single day

You have to look at the scoring. Dying doesn't guarantee a Win anymore. Defender Kills are gone. I don't see them coming back. It entirely depends on the scoring. If one Group takes down a Boss and the other doesn't, that's pretty much a Win. K.O.s aren't a measure of who wins and who loses anymore.

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.

Lvernon15

@Kabam Miike will we be seeing individual war reward buffs in July 17 with the new global? Or do we have to wait for the season?

As if skill was a determining factor in being in masters or platinum

DTMelodicMetal

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?
1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?
1) because it gives them a chance to catch up, assuming their skills are good enough.... This has already been established, why does it need to be repeated. The better question is why all the jealousy that someone got something better than you in rng (see again opening 10 cavs vs opening 1), You are still getting a totality of better rewards.

2) because you created a fallacy, so I pointed it out. That being said any event that gives out rewards of a spot in another random event (like poker), and I have seen sporting events where the rewards were lottery tickets.
1. If their skills are good enough, but they are consistently placing in Gold, why should they get better rewards than someone consistently placing in Plat or Master (even if such a player has inferior skills)? You cannot say that there is a better totality of rewards when the exact point being discussed is that the RNG allows a player who places lower to get better rewards than a player who places higher. Why should they have a chance to catch up by placing in gold? If they want to catch up, then move up the ladder and place in Plat or Master.

2. Poker wins the pot on the table. That is a fixed amount he knows what he is getting into, and the potential prize, when he makes the decision to play. Next example if any?
Placing in gold is not an indictment of an individual players skill, but of the team players skill. Trying to assume that a player is less skilled than you is very bad when it is a group event. In addition seeing how there are 9 lanes someone in a master alliance can theortically carry 1 person who could be level what ever.

1)Also I CAN say that there are better overall rewards. A player who goes with master for instance by defailt gets 5500 6* shards, and 10k 5* shards. Even if you dont think of those as the main rewards you will still get 2 t4bc, almost a whole t5bc, 1 t2a cats and T5cc shards The gold player will get no t5cc, will get 1 t4bc and 9000 t5bc and 1800 t2ac. There is virtually no way that overall he will come out ahead of you.

2) You dont seem to know much about poker. When you play in the lower events you are playing for a spot in another event, which is still a random event. In addition you know what you are getting into and the potential prize when you make your decision, nice try, next argument?

1. A player's individual skill is irrelevant. I can be the best player but if I am making the choice to stay in a Gold alliance, I should be content to get less rewards. You are saying that a Master player will invariably come out ahead of a Gold player, but with this RNG that is not true. Yes a Master player will get the guaranteed T5B. But a Gold player may have 4 x 22k T5b shards if he lucks out on RNG, however small the chance, this should not be a possibility. And if you want to even weigh into the analysis the other rewards like T4CC or T4B .. well then you clearly just are not at the stage of the game to discuss this lol; every end game player has essentially an unlimited supply to those, oftentimes having their stash overflowing. Coming back to the main point, if the aim is to encourage higher rewards are higher tiers, why not make the rewards fixed? Only if the aim is to allow a lower player to leapfrog past a higher player, through sheer RNG and luck, do RNG rewards make sense - but this latter argument is not your position since you say that it will all even out. So what is your position? Please try your best to be internally consistent here.

2. The end game is still the prize money. You are just taking a myopic view (as usual). Nice try again, do you have any other (actual) examples?

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?

Antecdotal, it is not enough on an individual level to be statistically enough.

Kobster84

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?
Antecdotal, it is not enough on an individual level to be statistically enough.

No the lower end rewards are extremely more common then the higher tier ones meaning in an ally 25 people could get close to the minimum and 5 could get the max for the same work

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.

Spend to get ahead? Move up the tiers and get Plat or Master rewards etc. You dont need 20 R5s to compete in Masters if you are good enough. Stay in Gold till you have 6-7 and move to a Plat alliance, you will survive if you are good enough. Move up to masters when you have the bare minimum to compete there.

The point is that you shouldn't be waiting at a Gold alliance for a handout to get rewards to boost you to the level of master players.

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?
Antecdotal, it is not enough on an individual level to be statistically enough.

You are basically saying

(1) Over time, RNG evens out . So top players you will end up getting better rewards, stop complaining.

(2) RNG is good because it allows lower players to get lucky with RNG and catch up with higher players (even though some how over time it supposedly will even out and top players will end up getting better rewards lmao).

Explain this one to me. You cannot have both. Either RNG favours players consistently placing lower or it favours players consistently placing higher.

@Lormif instead of saying that RNG will even out the randomness, why not propose a positive argument to justify the introduction in the first place? If the aim of randomness is ultimately for there to be an evening out of the rewards such that consistently placing in the higher bracket should give you more rewards in the long term than someone consistently placing in the lower bracket, why do that through the mechanism of RNG instead of just ensured higher rewards for a higher bracket?

We don't see random prizes being awarded in sporting competitions. So why here?
1) A positive reason to do it is to help keep the curv from becoming completely unattainable. We will now start getting t5cc, where as the lower alliances will not. Allowing them a chance to be an outlier and get more upgrade mats allows people to catch up to us if they have the skill...

2) Random prizes are given in sporting events, even still this is not a sporting event.
Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.

Season end war crystals can be removed entirely and replaced with a static amount of t5b or t2a. RNG should be left for champion crystals and not rewards for a competition. It's like finishing 1st place in a race but the guy who finished 10th is getting paid more.
Working as intended
Yup, totally makes sense. It's like Jeremy Lin getting a championship ring......oh wait that actually happened.
except they are not. the same thing. Over the course of events the person who finishes 1st will get vastly more, it is just in the short term there is a possibility of him getting more once. why are so many people bad at stats.
The problem with your argument is sample size. Over the course of a full year there will be 8-9 AW seasons assuming 2 week off seasons. A master ally gets 6 AW season crystals each season while a plat 3 ally gets 5 AW seasons crystals. That’s a total of 8-9 more crystals per year which is statistically irrelevant when the range of outcomes in the crystals is so large.
Its funny that you guys like to keep changing the argument, one time it was a gold vs plat, now it is master vs plat. Statistically the higher alliance member will come out on top. All this jealously because someone got lucky is absurd. It is like getting mad because you bought 10 cavs and someone else bought 1 cav and they got a 6* but you didnt.
Also not a good argument because you are choosing to purchase a crystal with known drop rates. I think it’s awesome whenever people get lucky on those, good for them. AW season crystals are different in that they are a reward for a game mode with vastly different ranges of skill and effort.
You are still buying (by playing war) a crystal with a variable drop rate. The argument is exactly the same, just the currency you are buying it with is different..
I’ll participate in a reasonable counterpoint but this just shows me you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s a huge stretch to equate those.
Best argument you have is an ad hominem? How many times have I head sports teams say that they purchased something with their blood sweat and tears? Your currency is your participation and effort. That you cannot see that is not on me.
1. So your point is basically what I mentioned a few pages back - that RNG is intended to allow weaker players to leapfrog and catch up to higher players. Once you realise that, then it should be obvious why people at the top are unhappy about these rewards. Your recognition of the possibility of an "outlier" also completely goes against the grain of your initial argument that it will all even out eventually and a player consistently placing higher will get overall better rewards.

2. I don't see what random rewards tennis players get, or soccer players, or golf etc. You win the tournament, you get a fixed prize money. You get to the semis, you get another sum.
1) No it does not in any way go again the grain. There is a large enough sample to understand that someone with one crystal beating someone with 5 crystals is an outlier. In addition I do not mind giving players a random chance to catch up. Remember they are not leap frogging, they are catching up, assuming their skill is on par, because they still are not getting all the level up mats you are, or shards.
2) Tennis and soccer and gold players are all sports players? Fallacy much?
1. Why should even 1 player who is consistently placing gold get better rewards in the long term (as an "outlier") than a player consistently placing master or plat?

2. Instead of denouncing the examples I have cited, why don't you give examples of actual sporting events where rewards are random?
1) because it gives them a chance to catch up, assuming their skills are good enough.... This has already been established, why does it need to be repeated. The better question is why all the jealousy that someone got something better than you in rng (see again opening 10 cavs vs opening 1), You are still getting a totality of better rewards.

2) because you created a fallacy, so I pointed it out. That being said any event that gives out rewards of a spot in another random event (like poker), and I have seen sporting events where the rewards were lottery tickets.
1. If their skills are good enough, but they are consistently placing in Gold, why should they get better rewards than someone consistently placing in Plat or Master (even if such a player has inferior skills)? You cannot say that there is a better totality of rewards when the exact point being discussed is that the RNG allows a player who places lower to get better rewards than a player who places higher. Why should they have a chance to catch up by placing in gold? If they want to catch up, then move up the ladder and place in Plat or Master.

2. Poker wins the pot on the table. That is a fixed amount he knows what he is getting into, and the potential prize, when he makes the decision to play. Next example if any?
Placing in gold is not an indictment of an individual players skill, but of the team players skill. Trying to assume that a player is less skilled than you is very bad when it is a group event. In addition seeing how there are 9 lanes someone in a master alliance can theortically carry 1 person who could be level what ever.

1)Also I CAN say that there are better overall rewards. A player who goes with master for instance by defailt gets 5500 6* shards, and 10k 5* shards. Even if you dont think of those as the main rewards you will still get 2 t4bc, almost a whole t5bc, 1 t2a cats and T5cc shards The gold player will get no t5cc, will get 1 t4bc and 9000 t5bc and 1800 t2ac. There is virtually no way that overall he will come out ahead of you.

2) You dont seem to know much about poker. When you play in the lower events you are playing for a spot in another event, which is still a random event. In addition you know what you are getting into and the potential prize when you make your decision, nice try, next argument?
1. A player's individual skill is irrelevant. I can be the best player but if I am making the choice to stay in a Gold alliance, I should be content to get less rewards. You are saying that a Master player will invariably come out ahead of a Gold player, but with this RNG that is not true. Yes a Master player will get the guaranteed T5B. But a Gold player may have 4 x 22k T5b shards if he lucks out on RNG, however small the chance, this should not be a possibility. And if you want to even weigh into the analysis the other rewards like T4CC or T4B .. well then you clearly just are not at the stage of the game to discuss this lol; every end game player has essentially an unlimited supply to those, oftentimes having their stash overflowing. Coming back to the main point, if the aim is to encourage higher rewards are higher tiers, why not make the rewards fixed? Only if the aim is to allow a lower player to leapfrog past a higher player, through sheer RNG and luck, do RNG rewards make sense - but this latter argument is not your position since you say that it will all even out. So what is your position? Please try your best to be internally consistent here.

2. The end game is still the prize money. You are just taking a mypoic view (as usual). Nice try again, do you have any other (actual) examples?

1) with this RNG it will be true, because it follows a standard distribution, it may take several war seasons but they will eventually come out ahead. I disagree with you on there should be a super small chance for them to get it. I do love your appeal to authority fallacy... I stated the total rewards would be better, you trying to limit the reward group to just a subset is not an indictment on me, but you. YOU DO get higher rewards, and no one but you is saying leapfrog. I have already stated and been very consistant.

2) The end game is not all the events in a sport. The superbowl is not the only sporting event in football, the World series of poker is not the only event, it has qualifying events.

Also I am not the one being mypoic, that would be you. I am looking at the bigger picture and how it applies to everyone, you re looking at "wow this person got rewards better than me this one time"

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.
Spend to get ahead? Move up the tiers and get Plat or Master rewards etc. You dont need 20 R5s to compete in Masters if you are good enough. Stay in Gold till you have 6-7 and move to a Plat alliance, you will survive if you are good enough. Move up to masters when you have the bare minimum to compete there.

The point is that you shouldn't be waiting at a Gold alliance for a handout to get rewards to boost you to the level of master players.

Except you said with fixed rewards they would be able to do it.. We are not talking about external factors... But nice goal post move... How do you move up the tiers if everyone is always getting better rewards than you even for the same skill level. No one is talking about a hand out.

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?
Antecdotal, it is not enough on an individual level to be statistically enough.
You are basically saying

(1) Over time, RNG evens out . So top players you will end up getting better rewards, stop complaining.

(2) RNG is good because it allows lower players to get lucky with RNG and catch up with higher players (even though some how over time it supposedly will even out and top players will end up getting better rewards lmao).

Explain this one to me. You cannot have both. Either RNG favours players consistently placing lower or it favours players consistently placing higher.

They are not mutual exclusive. 1) is a long term view and 2) is a short term view. so you can have both. In the short term it gives lower tier players a chance to catch up. In the long term if they cannot catch up in the short term they are boned....

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.
Spend to get ahead? Move up the tiers and get Plat or Master rewards etc. You dont need 20 R5s to compete in Masters if you are good enough. Stay in Gold till you have 6-7 and move to a Plat alliance, you will survive if you are good enough. Move up to masters when you have the bare minimum to compete there.

The point is that you shouldn't be waiting at a Gold alliance for a handout to get rewards to boost you to the level of master players.
Except you said with fixed rewards they would be able to do it.. We are not talking about external factors... But nice goal post move... How do you move up the tiers if everyone is always getting better rewards than you even for the same skill level. No one is talking about a hand out.

AW rewards is not distributed along the lines of skill level, you said the same yourself. The point is that if you want to get better rewards, you should be pushing for the higher tiers. It is a handout because you are talking about a Gold player trying to get better rewards through RNG and luck while camping in a lower tier.

It is not a goalpost move. It is acknowledgement of the reality that AW is not the only way to progress in the game. You are taking the myopic view (again) that if you are in a Gold tier ally now you can never move up the tiers unless you succeed on RNG and get a better pull today. That is simply not true. You can join an ally that does 7x5 AQ and farm T5B, build up your R5 roster, then move to a Plat ally, get more T5B etc. There are so many ways to move up the ladder, social mobility so to speak in the game. RNG is just the worst design to allow that as it is entirely random and not tied to a player's actual merit or effort.

GroundedWisdom

@Kabam Miike will we be seeing individual war reward buffs in July 17 with the new global? Or do we have to wait for the season?

The Win/Loss Rewards will come before the Season.

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.
Spend to get ahead? Move up the tiers and get Plat or Master rewards etc. You dont need 20 R5s to compete in Masters if you are good enough. Stay in Gold till you have 6-7 and move to a Plat alliance, you will survive if you are good enough. Move up to masters when you have the bare minimum to compete there.

The point is that you shouldn't be waiting at a Gold alliance for a handout to get rewards to boost you to the level of master players.
Except you said with fixed rewards they would be able to do it.. We are not talking about external factors... But nice goal post move... How do you move up the tiers if everyone is always getting better rewards than you even for the same skill level. No one is talking about a hand out.
AW rewards is not distributed along the lines of skill level, you said the same yourself. The point is that if you want to get better rewards, you should be pushing for the higher tiers. It is a handout because you are talking about a Gold player trying to get better rewards through RNG and luck while camping in a lower tier.

No I did not say that, I said INDIVIDUAL skill level, not skill level, it is a group skill level... You keep misrepresenting what I say, is your argument that weak that you cannot debate what I say?

You will still get better rewards at higher levels...

I am still waiting for you to point out how if I am on your skill level I can catch up to you based off the rewards being fixed, you stated it, when will you back it up... It is impossible.

@Lormif Was my last comment not on point? Do 5 seasons of AW and 200+ Map 7 crystals not qualify as many events?
Antecdotal, it is not enough on an individual level to be statistically enough.
You are basically saying

(1) Over time, RNG evens out . So top players you will end up getting better rewards, stop complaining.

(2) RNG is good because it allows lower players to get lucky with RNG and catch up with higher players (even though some how over time it supposedly will even out and top players will end up getting better rewards lmao).

Explain this one to me. You cannot have both. Either RNG favours players consistently placing lower or it favours players consistently placing higher.
They are not mutual exclusive. 1) is a long term view and 2) is a short term view. so you can have both. In the short term it gives lower tier players a chance to catch up. In the long term if they cannot catch up in the short term they are boned....

Except that you have said 5 seasons is not long enough of a sample size for a higher tier player to recognise that he is actually coming out on top. So how long is enough? 10? 20?

That becomes a matter of years. The game is reaching 5 years old. Trying to say that rewards even out on a time horizon in the measure of years is utterly meaningless and itself shows that the rewards distribution are skewed.

@Lormif what you are saying is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I know right ... I keep asking him for a positive reason why we should have RNG and then he says it is to allow lower players to catch up. But they can similarly catch up by having fixed rewards across the board lol. Totally no positive case other than to come on this thread and say "blah blah sample size it all evens out blah blah yall just complaining and jealous".

how can lower tier players catch up with fixed rewards? The higher tier players will keep having better and better. The skill level for a lower tier player to catch up would have to be vastly higher then the higher tiers.
Spend to get ahead? Move up the tiers and get Plat or Master rewards etc. You dont need 20 R5s to compete in Masters if you are good enough. Stay in Gold till you have 6-7 and move to a Plat alliance, you will survive if you are good enough. Move up to masters when you have the bare minimum to compete there.

The point is that you shouldn't be waiting at a Gold alliance for a handout to get rewards to boost you to the level of master players.
Except you said with fixed rewards they would be able to do it.. We are not talking about external factors... But nice goal post move... How do you move up the tiers if everyone is always getting better rewards than you even for the same skill level. No one is talking about a hand out.
AW rewards is not distributed along the lines of skill level, you said the same yourself. The point is that if you want to get better rewards, you should be pushing for the higher tiers. It is a handout because you are talking about a Gold player trying to get better rewards through RNG and luck while camping in a lower tier.
No I did not say that, I said INDIVIDUAL skill level, not skill level, it is a group skill level... You keep misrepresenting what I say, is your argument that weak that you cannot debate what I say?

You will still get better rewards at higher levels...

I am still waiting for you to point out how if I am on your skill level I can catch up to you based off the rewards being fixed, you stated it, when will you back it up... It is impossible.

If AW rewards are tied to group skill level, and group skill level are not tied precisely to individual skill level, then AW rewards are not tied to individual skill level. It is not a misrepresentation; I just jumped a couple of logical steps as I assumed you could figure it out yourself.

As to how you can catch up - as I mentioned above - there are external factors. It is too myopic and narrow-minded of you to look at AW rewards as the only means of social mobility in this game.

Anyway I know where the weight of the public sentiment lies when I am debating with the first person I've seen on this forums with a majority of reactions being disagree over agree.

Everything in this game outside of potions and items comes from RNG. Skill isn’t the only thing that gets you into platinum and above alliances. Your roster which is almost totally dependent on RNG plays a part as well.