I don't think anyone complaining about the rewards and the distinct drop off in tier from awesome at the upper end to meaningless at the lower end is saying that all of the rewards should be equal.
Instead, given that they introduced shards a long time ago, every tier should get some amount of all of the different rewards, scaling down as you drop in tier.
If I counted correctly, then from Master to Participation, including the top 3 special ranks, there are 20 reward brackets. So, scale the top prize down by ~5% for each bracket, scaling down until the bottom bracket doesn't get much, but it gets something. (i.e. Master Rank 1 gets 10k 6* shards, Participation gets 500 6*, or 5%.)
And while I know some people are going to say the bottom bracket doesn't deserve anything, it isn't just the extreme ends where this would make a significant difference, as the middle is also affected by the sharp drop off in reward quality.
As others point out, 301st get NO t5b shards? That's absurd! But by simply scaling it down by 5% each bracket, at the 8th possible bracket down they would get 40500, compared to the 67500 of Rank 1, and continue to drop by 5% until the bottom bracket gets only 3375.
Further more, for those that still think that 5% is giving the bottom more tier too much, it will take 20 seasons, or roughly 2 years, for the bottom rank to get what rank 1 got in a single season, so the top rank is still clearly rewarded more, but the bottom would get more than a SINGLE PREMIUM HERO CRYSTAL.
Kabam, seriously, 1 PHC? You give a full PHC away once a week simply for logging in every day!
The problem with reward proportions like this is that they greatly dilute the incentive for trying to achieve a higher tier. If the only difference between my tier and the next one is 5%, I'm only going to try hard to reach the next tier if I believe I'm capable of jumping enough tiers with reasonable effort to make the total jump meaningful. If I can comfortably park in Gold 1 with a rank of about 1200 or I can try to push to Platinum 3 by trying to get above rank 300, I'm very likely to think that extra effort is not worth it.
Also, you are ridiculing the one PHC you get per season for the bottom rank, but the bottom rank is for alliances that place lower than rank 30,000. I can't imagine this will happen to any alliance except the most idle.
Our alliance tends to hover around tier 7. Very roughly, my guess is that will translate to somewhere around Gold 3, maybe Gold 2. At Gold 3, under your system we'd be getting about 50% of the max rewards every season. If a season averages two months, that would mean we'd be averaging 2500 6* shards, 5000 5* shards, half a T5B, and a T2A per month. Heck, I'll take it, but that seems to be a quantity of rewards that begins with F and ends with ton.
And the expanse grows further! The top 0.00001% are gonna get even fatter. I think, it must be boring for the guys on the top because they don't have anything to really push for anymore. Everything is easy for them and handed to them at this point. And for the mid-class guys there isn't really anything to push for because you can't really change the status quo with this system in place.
My Alliance is ranked around 900, of which I'm proud because we are a few hundred spots above most 11mil alliances.
But we are overflowing with t4b and t4cc. These reward brackets make it nearly impossible for us to move up from gold 1(we will drop from tier2 to tier4 when this is released). The 6k 5* and 2k 6* shards are nice, but nothing great. So there is little incentive here. Good idea just poor planning on the rewards.
What we really need are t2a and t5b (and to a lesser degree t1a). Could you guys add these, even in small amounts, to the rewards of the 301-1500 bracket? Or break that bracket up into 2 groups so we have something to play for?
Think about it: 6 reward brackets for the top 300 but 1 for the next 1200...
@Kabam Miike
First of all, i want to say that this is a great idea that i was hoping to see on this game. Having Seasons in Alliance Wars is a great way to get the competition higher on this game. Plus the timeframe looks really good for every season to last between 2-3 months.
Although i have to say that i am really dissapointed with the rewards in the brackets. Basically you say that Alliance War Seasons will have the most valuable items in the game(tier 5 basic catalysts,t2 alphas, 6 star shards), but based on the brackets these rewards will be distributed only on the top 300 alliances except 6 star shards which we can found on the top 1500. Top 300 alliances are basically the 1% of this game maybe less and while i get how these guys have to be rewarded for their efforts i don't understand why these rewards can't be found on lower brackets at smaller numbers.
This reminds me the previous season of the AQ. People had to fight for the top places in the AQ to get a T4 Class Catalyst Crystal. Rewards were 1 T4CC Crystal for the top 300 and 0 on everyone else in the bracket. So we ended up with people getting T4CC weekly or biweekly while others were getting 0 Class Catalysts. That way a small amount of people managed to stack tons of T4CC while others were having huge trouble on finding those. This is were the new Alliance Quest season made a really great job with the rewards. Top 300 are getting their T4CC crystals again plus with some other rewards but everyone on the expert bracket is getting a respectful amount for their efforts that translates to 30-40-50% of a T4CC.
Having said that i am looking forward for the new AW Seasons but i am waiting to see more rewards especially on the 2-10% of the game because we need them too.
Is there any way we will be able to see what bracket we are currently in or what rewards we’re expected to get according to the leaderboard? Could help people want to push for AW
Is there any way we will be able to see what bracket we are currently in or what rewards we’re expected to get according to the leaderboard? Could help people want to push for AW
You'll see your Alliance on the Leaderboards, and can also see your Current Alliance Badge!
And the expanse grows further! The top 0.00001% are gonna get even fatter. I think, it must be boring for the guys on the top because they don't have anything to really push for anymore. Everything is easy for them and handed to them at this point. And for the mid-class guys there isn't really anything to push for because you can't really change the status quo with this system in place.
Personally, I don't feel like I'm being left behind. I'm not a top tier player. I'm not a bottom tier player. But two years ago I was probably a 25% - 50% player. One year ago I was probably a 10% - 20% ish player. Today I'm probably a 5% - 10% ish player, depending on how you judge. I don't know who is trapped where they are, but I'm not one of them.
PS: the top 0.00001% is approximately one person, rounded upward.
And the expanse grows further! The top 0.00001% are gonna get even fatter. I think, it must be boring for the guys on the top because they don't have anything to really push for anymore. Everything is easy for them and handed to them at this point. And for the mid-class guys there isn't really anything to push for because you can't really change the status quo with this system in place.
Personally, I don't feel like I'm being left behind. I'm not a top tier player. I'm not a bottom tier player. But two years ago I was probably a 25% - 50% player. One year ago I was probably a 10% - 20% ish player. Today I'm probably a 5% - 10% ish player, depending on how you judge. I don't know who is trapped where they are, but I'm not one of them.
PS: the top 0.00001% is approximately one person, rounded upward.
It's called hyperbole. His point still stands...but a nice slow golf clap for you and your upwards climb
"Seasons are a brand new feature being built on top of Alliance Wars that will measure the performance of every Alliance in the Battle Realm, and finally answer the question, which Alliance is truly the best in the game?"
This does not answer the question "which alliance is truly the best in the game?". This only answers which alliance is willing to spend the most. If it was truly going to determine the best then it would do away with all potions and revives along with all nodes. That way it would be alliance against alliance and thats the only way to really know who is the best based on skill not on money.
Actually if you are very skilled in the current AW you’ll be spending the least. The alliance with the least deaths will be the best. The top competitive players in the game are attracted to the top competitive alliances (whether they spend or not). A random middle-pack alliance who decides to drop $3000 on a war with the rank 1 alliance will not win. Spending does not guarantee any win. Whoever wins the top 3 spots will really be the best. It will come down to execution, organization, and having the right players. Not just spending. (Unless you talking about spending on pilot/merc for every fight, but that is a different story)
And the expanse grows further! The top 0.00001% are gonna get even fatter. I think, it must be boring for the guys on the top because they don't have anything to really push for anymore. Everything is easy for them and handed to them at this point. And for the mid-class guys there isn't really anything to push for because you can't really change the status quo with this system in place.
Personally, I don't feel like I'm being left behind. I'm not a top tier player. I'm not a bottom tier player. But two years ago I was probably a 25% - 50% player. One year ago I was probably a 10% - 20% ish player. Today I'm probably a 5% - 10% ish player, depending on how you judge. I don't know who is trapped where they are, but I'm not one of them.
PS: the top 0.00001% is approximately one person, rounded upward.
It's called hyperbole. His point still stands...but a nice slow golf clap for you and your upwards climb
Hyperbole is an exaggeration. 2+2=18 is not hyperbole, it is just wrong. And I would think a counter-example would be suitable counterpoint, but perhaps all the clapping drowned it out in your mind, what with all the echoing.
Dear Developers,
I respect your busininss .But this will break balance between players .There are ectreme differences for rewards..top300 alliences will have perfect accout ,,I m allience leader .. ı have about 11,5 m allience team point ..ı m asking you how can ı hold my best player in allience.
Have the t2a rewards extend down through the gold tier. Keep the t5b as is.
Because of the tier scoring multipliers, it will be near impossible for alliances to crack the top 300 unless they start there. The cutting off of the 2 most scarce rewards at 300 will on reinforce this established paradigm. Extending t2a rewards down through gold will make players care about being in gold 1/2/3 whereas in the described setup, I don't think they will work about that much.
Interesting. However, I think you should change AW mathcmaking first so that it is based only on AW score, like it was when Alliance Wars started. Because now it sems to be heavily based on Alliance PI and we have ended up in the current situation of having 11-13 million PI alliances around tier 7 and 6-8 million PI alliances around tier 3.
This doesn't seem logical to me.
I too don't know why people complain about top tier alliances so much. We have worked just as hard if not harder to be where we are at. It took me almost 9 months to get my first 4* now people get them in like their first week. The progression starting from the bottom is so much faster than it use to be. I bet most people would quit if they didnt get a 4* for their first 9 months of playing this game. Also a lot of the guys in top tier alliances are super skilled. Yes we have strong champs, but we are facing top competition and you wouldnt be able to last with weak champs. I would quit if I got the same rewards as tier 10. How would that be fair?
Awesome feature. But it is going to make the strong alliances a lot more stronger. We can easily see that all top players above 1000000 base rating are grouped in the top few alliances. Can there be a system wherein an alliances total base rating cant exceed a certain value; that will make other alliances on par with the top ones as all top players cant be saturated in one alliance if done so.
An alliance has 25 members but each time the war is opened with 1 battleground so only 10 members will participate. This will ensure the victories because those 10 members are the best from 25.
What will happen at the end of the season with the 15 members that never fought?
Will they receive rewards equal with those 10 who fought or how is the system set for them?
Or otherwise there can be three groups of alliances. Alliances above 15000000 base rating placed in 1 group; alliances between 15000000 to 9000000 placed in another n 9000000 and below placed in another with same tiers as mentioned above with slight modifications in rewards
I like this, sound like a great addition to the game. Have to agree though, apart from the top 300 the rewards aren’t very exciting. Sure free stuff, not going to complain, but so swim in T4CC and T4B anyway.
Also we have to remember that this game is essentially pay to win, especially on the top. So getting in the top 300 will be a $$$ fiesta.
So mixed feelings to be honest. Looks nice, but the rewards hardly justify spending units in wars.
@Kabam Miike will there be a way to see your alliances total score in alliance wars seasons and willtge total score of alliance wars seasons effect where you rank?
My thread got closed down so here goes my main concern again. Piloting needs to be stopped.
The new seasons mode looks great, rewards are juiced up and Kabam are delivering the resources we’ve been asking for. That’s the good part. Now the bad...
Kabam need to ensure that this mode is fair. And they need to monitor it. Piloting in war is as common as ever. Matchmaking as rigged as ever with alliances purposefully avoiding each other. These problems mean that the distribution of the most prestigious rewards in game will not be fairly distributed. This is exploiting the game and should be punishable.
Piloting?
Best I can tell is that he is talking about where alliances purposefully choose times to start war so there is zero chance they will have to face an alliance that is close to their skill/spending level.
Thought it was already established that skipping a war, which happened a lot during the war matchmaking between top alliances, was bad. I am not seeing how it needs to be addressed.
he means, as an example, MMX looks for a war at 12PM PST, when they find a match, then CORE looks for a war at 1PM PST, then ISO looks for one at 2PM PST, and so on and so forth.
All this does is show they are pussies who can't deal with a decent war
There was a topic or a remark in a different topic regarding this, they did face off against each other back then; the only true winner was Kabam.
But back ot: still hoping for ways for solo players to get access to (portions of) these rewards.
Why always fixed numbers for rank rewards? It would be better to have a % distribution of rewards. Maybe the top 10 or top 50 is fixed and the rest is based on how many alliances is part of the season and only those that have done 5 or 10 wars are part of the total calculation.
Comments
The problem with reward proportions like this is that they greatly dilute the incentive for trying to achieve a higher tier. If the only difference between my tier and the next one is 5%, I'm only going to try hard to reach the next tier if I believe I'm capable of jumping enough tiers with reasonable effort to make the total jump meaningful. If I can comfortably park in Gold 1 with a rank of about 1200 or I can try to push to Platinum 3 by trying to get above rank 300, I'm very likely to think that extra effort is not worth it.
Also, you are ridiculing the one PHC you get per season for the bottom rank, but the bottom rank is for alliances that place lower than rank 30,000. I can't imagine this will happen to any alliance except the most idle.
Our alliance tends to hover around tier 7. Very roughly, my guess is that will translate to somewhere around Gold 3, maybe Gold 2. At Gold 3, under your system we'd be getting about 50% of the max rewards every season. If a season averages two months, that would mean we'd be averaging 2500 6* shards, 5000 5* shards, half a T5B, and a T2A per month. Heck, I'll take it, but that seems to be a quantity of rewards that begins with F and ends with ton.
not reseting the war scores is unfair as this is a contest and top alliances are at 3k war rating allready so its unfair challenge
But we are overflowing with t4b and t4cc. These reward brackets make it nearly impossible for us to move up from gold 1(we will drop from tier2 to tier4 when this is released). The 6k 5* and 2k 6* shards are nice, but nothing great. So there is little incentive here. Good idea just poor planning on the rewards.
What we really need are t2a and t5b (and to a lesser degree t1a). Could you guys add these, even in small amounts, to the rewards of the 301-1500 bracket? Or break that bracket up into 2 groups so we have something to play for?
Think about it: 6 reward brackets for the top 300 but 1 for the next 1200...
First of all, i want to say that this is a great idea that i was hoping to see on this game. Having Seasons in Alliance Wars is a great way to get the competition higher on this game. Plus the timeframe looks really good for every season to last between 2-3 months.
Although i have to say that i am really dissapointed with the rewards in the brackets. Basically you say that Alliance War Seasons will have the most valuable items in the game(tier 5 basic catalysts,t2 alphas, 6 star shards), but based on the brackets these rewards will be distributed only on the top 300 alliances except 6 star shards which we can found on the top 1500. Top 300 alliances are basically the 1% of this game maybe less and while i get how these guys have to be rewarded for their efforts i don't understand why these rewards can't be found on lower brackets at smaller numbers.
This reminds me the previous season of the AQ. People had to fight for the top places in the AQ to get a T4 Class Catalyst Crystal. Rewards were 1 T4CC Crystal for the top 300 and 0 on everyone else in the bracket. So we ended up with people getting T4CC weekly or biweekly while others were getting 0 Class Catalysts. That way a small amount of people managed to stack tons of T4CC while others were having huge trouble on finding those. This is were the new Alliance Quest season made a really great job with the rewards. Top 300 are getting their T4CC crystals again plus with some other rewards but everyone on the expert bracket is getting a respectful amount for their efforts that translates to 30-40-50% of a T4CC.
Having said that i am looking forward for the new AW Seasons but i am waiting to see more rewards especially on the 2-10% of the game because we need them too.
You'll see your Alliance on the Leaderboards, and can also see your Current Alliance Badge!
Personally, I don't feel like I'm being left behind. I'm not a top tier player. I'm not a bottom tier player. But two years ago I was probably a 25% - 50% player. One year ago I was probably a 10% - 20% ish player. Today I'm probably a 5% - 10% ish player, depending on how you judge. I don't know who is trapped where they are, but I'm not one of them.
PS: the top 0.00001% is approximately one person, rounded upward.
It's called hyperbole. His point still stands...but a nice slow golf clap for you and your upwards climb
Actually if you are very skilled in the current AW you’ll be spending the least. The alliance with the least deaths will be the best. The top competitive players in the game are attracted to the top competitive alliances (whether they spend or not). A random middle-pack alliance who decides to drop $3000 on a war with the rank 1 alliance will not win. Spending does not guarantee any win. Whoever wins the top 3 spots will really be the best. It will come down to execution, organization, and having the right players. Not just spending. (Unless you talking about spending on pilot/merc for every fight, but that is a different story)
Wrong Thread.
Hyperbole is an exaggeration. 2+2=18 is not hyperbole, it is just wrong. And I would think a counter-example would be suitable counterpoint, but perhaps all the clapping drowned it out in your mind, what with all the echoing.
Oh look, someone else who doesn't understand what the app store approval guidelines are.
I respect your busininss .But this will break balance between players .There are ectreme differences for rewards..top300 alliences will have perfect accout ,,I m allience leader .. ı have about 11,5 m allience team point ..ı m asking you how can ı hold my best player in allience.
Have the t2a rewards extend down through the gold tier. Keep the t5b as is.
Because of the tier scoring multipliers, it will be near impossible for alliances to crack the top 300 unless they start there. The cutting off of the 2 most scarce rewards at 300 will on reinforce this established paradigm. Extending t2a rewards down through gold will make players care about being in gold 1/2/3 whereas in the described setup, I don't think they will work about that much.
This doesn't seem logical to me.
An alliance has 25 members but each time the war is opened with 1 battleground so only 10 members will participate. This will ensure the victories because those 10 members are the best from 25.
What will happen at the end of the season with the 15 members that never fought?
Will they receive rewards equal with those 10 who fought or how is the system set for them?
Thank you in advance for an answer.
Also we have to remember that this game is essentially pay to win, especially on the top. So getting in the top 300 will be a $$$ fiesta.
So mixed feelings to be honest. Looks nice, but the rewards hardly justify spending units in wars.
There was a topic or a remark in a different topic regarding this, they did face off against each other back then; the only true winner was Kabam.
But back ot: still hoping for ways for solo players to get access to (portions of) these rewards.