MVP rewards

Comments

• DNA3000 Member, Guardian Guardian › Posts: 19,841 Guardian

  September 2019

  In general I don't think it is a good idea to reward MVPs in alliance war for the simple reason that the MVP point system doesn't remotely correlate to what would actually be most valuable to the alliance as a whole. If you have two players converging on a node, do you want both of them to decide to let the stronger player have it, or do you want the weaker one to take a chance to improve their chances of getting an MVP award.
  
  As someone who has managed battlegroups in competitive war in the past, what is "most valuable" to me is following instructions. The game doesn't give MVP points to players who follow my instructions. I wouldn't want to ever incentivize players to do anything other than following the instructions of their officers. It is hard enough to get players to do that consistently as it is.
  
  Also, I believe defensive placement and kills count towards MVP. So how do you tell a player that you want them to place a diverse placement, but doing so will probably make it difficult or impossible for them to get MVP rewards no matter what else they do, compared to the player that just happens to be placing the strongest ones for that battlegroup's depth chart.
  
  I think anything that distracts from the idea that everyone is working together for the same reward is not a good idea in general. I think most alliances that would need an incentive like this in the firsts place would probably be torn apart by the incentive over time.

  4
• BradMercer Member Posts: 206 ★

  September 2019

  I hear what u are saying and it makes sense. From what I’ve seen I don’t think defence matters for MVP, looks more like ground covered.
  All I’m saying is in my ally there are people getting 14-17% exploration each war (the same people).
  Then there’s the same people sitting at 6-8% and it’s because they’re only clearing paths and letting others take the hard kills. Mom not saying there’s anything wrong with trying to save for attack bonus etc, but these people gotta learn to fight the hard match and maybe an incentive could help push them to go for it.
  I know it’s a team game that’s why I said low rewards, atm the MVP means nothing other than a name and brag rights. It has potential to be greater.
  
  You made good points tho so I think I’ll be chilling on the idea

  0
• Timone147 Member Posts: 1,276 ★★★★

  September 2019

  Overall I dont like this idea as often path or role dictate who is MVP. I clear the minis on the right side and boss typically in my ally by design as I am more capable of the fights.
  
  This is encouraged further by the scoring system and we wouldnt want people going kamikaze to try and earn more rewards. It's a team effort regardless of MVP or not imo.

  0
• KattohS Member Posts: 724 ★★

  September 2019

  DNA3000 said:

  In general I don't think it is a good idea to reward MVPs in alliance war for the simple reason that the MVP point system doesn't remotely correlate to what would actually be most valuable to the alliance as a whole. If you have two players converging on a node, do you want both of them to decide to let the stronger player have it, or do you want the weaker one to take a chance to improve their chances of getting an MVP award.
  
  As someone who has managed battlegroups in competitive war in the past, what is "most valuable" to me is following instructions. The game doesn't give MVP points to players who follow my instructions. I wouldn't want to ever incentivize players to do anything other than following the instructions of their officers. It is hard enough to get players to do that consistently as it is.
  
  Also, I believe defensive placement and kills count towards MVP. So how do you tell a player that you want them to place a diverse placement, but doing so will probably make it difficult or impossible for them to get MVP rewards no matter what else they do, compared to the player that just happens to be placing the strongest ones for that battlegroup's depth chart.
  
  I think anything that distracts from the idea that everyone is working together for the same reward is not a good idea in general. I think most alliances that would need an incentive like this in the firsts place would probably be torn apart by the incentive over time.

  Also some persons won’t get chances at fighting the boss and improving their skills since “boss killers” won’t give you a chance.
  
  

  0
• beaupoem Member Posts: 443 ★

  September 2019

  It would encourage weaker players or players without the right counters to fight fights they can't finish in 1 shot, just so they can get more exploration. So no, that would be a bad idea.

  0
• Mauled Member, Guardian Guardian › Posts: 3,957 Guardian

  September 2019

  Sometimes it would be nice - I take path 1 and all of the left side minibosses as they all seem to be Blade/Ghost fodder for the most part. As a result of this, and my time zone I end up clearing my path mini, going to sleep, then clearing the 2nd path mini too as alliance has unlinked it. By time they are up I have done the stun immune and am usually waiting at the boss node.
  
  Yes I end up woth MVP a lot but it’s ‘cause I have a longer path and people are sleeping while I do a lot of movement. I’m not really any better than them

  1