All Alliances Increasing To 20 Member Slots

Unknown

dearbluey wrote:

Paintsville wrote:

dearbluey wrote:

I hear an awful lot of people playing up the victim complex. I'll take an extra large tub of buttered popcorn, thanks. Double the butter/oil stuff, too. It's not often I find entertainment in this sort of mass entitlement victim mentality. Anyone want to share?

Because people should be happy to see their investment of time, money, and resources invalidated at the touch of a button? Because issues such as sharding, scaling, and outrageous roster slot costs already punish your customers for spending time and money on your characters, what's one more screw over?

You're right. Why should people feel entitled to things they earned? We should make it easier for those who didn't do the work to reap better rewards.

Oh wait, does this mean that you feel that people who didn't do the work or spend the money are ENTITLED to the same advantages? Interesting.

You're usually more reasonable. I'll engage later, once you're done putting extra words in my mouth.

I realize I was extra snarky, but what do you expect to such a demeaning post as the one I originally replied to? So please don't try to make yourself out to be the voice of reason.

With that said, I think free alliance slots are a great idea and will be great for the game. It will make for great competition and may change the game as we know it.

My issue is that the way it is being handled. This isn't a price change to ISO the day after I bought some. In that case I still have what I paid for. An advantage over someone who didn't buy ISO. This is different. Heck, if they would have halved the price of a slot then I wouldn't be nearly as upset. I am not asking people to choose free roster slots or no free roster slots. I am asking for people to realize that a paid for advantage is being stripped, and to ask yourself how you would feel in that situation. The people who paid for roster slots should be compensated SOMETHING. I agree a full refund is too much. I believe good things should be done for everyone. But at least TRY to lessen the blow to people that will see the work they done means less cause the playing field is changed on a whim.

P.S. another reason I went off in the last post is that I am so tired of people throwing the word entitled around. Because I am vocal when I perceive being wronged doesn't make me seem entitled. I will most likely have a reason behind my statements. But don't get me wrong. This is not about free roster slots. This is about people showing no empathy whatsoever for people, no matter how great their intentions are.

Unknown

I've given it some thought, and I think this change is not a good idea, here are the reasons :

1) Paying for one slot made the "new member" somehow responsible and could "fix" him in the Alliance and avoid Alliance swapping (at least for some time). It could enable Alliance stability. When a slot is for free, you can come and go and feel no obligation.
2) The cost of a slot was not that high, and it was a more clever way of getting money for D3P. More clever than shield hopping IMO for instance.
3) No matter the cost of an Alliance, there are only 100 Alliances in the Top 100 (seriously, there are ? - Yes. I'm sure you are thrilled to learn that reading that post). And all Top 100 Alliances already had 20 members. D3P has nothing to offer to Alliances below the Top 100, so what's the point ? Forumites have asked for rewards below the Top 100. Were they listened to ? To date, they weren't.

So aking the Alliance spots free will just give some illusion to many Alliances they can rank higher. They will. But from what we can read here and there, if you are transitioning, you need to invest a lot of money to rank higher and get the covers and rewards.

So this change is just delusional.

I'm sorry to say D3P, but you find out that you were too greedy in the first place, and the veterans are ONCE AGAIN screwed.

Thank you for bringing fuel to the fire. The forum didn't have enough complaints lately.

Pfff, Hailmary was beginning to like me, and with all this mess lately, he's going to bash me again.

atomzed

arktos1971 wrote:

1) Paying for one slot made the "new member" somehow responsible and could "fix" him in the Alliance and avoid Alliance swapping (at least for some time). It could enable Alliance stability. When a slot is for free, you can come and go and feel no obligation.

sorry man this is totally different from what I experienced. People stay in an alliance, not because of the paid slots. They stay because of the people.

In fact I would argue that the paid slots actually cause problem because we have players who paid for slots, made commanders, not playing the game anymore but refused to leave because they feel that they paid for the slots.

2) The cost of a slot was not that high, and it was a more clever way of getting money for D3P. More clever than shield hopping IMO for instance.

agree the cost isn't high... But it adds up. And also, not everyone is a whale like you btw shields were created NOT for money, but as a direct result of people complaining about not being able to play in last hour in pvp. I think shields while not perfect, is the most optimal solution in pvp. I haven't see any other proposal that trumps the current shield implementation.

3) No matter the cost of an Alliance, there are only 100 Alliances in the Top 100 (seriously, there are ? - Yes. I'm sure you are thrilled to learn that reading that post). And all Top 100 Alliances already had 20 members. D3P has nothing to offer to Alliances below the Top 100, so what's the point ? Forumites have asked for rewards below the Top 100. Were they listened to ? To date, they weren't.

So aking the Alliance spots free will just give some illusion to many Alliances they can rank higher. They will. But from what we can read here and there, if you are transitioning, you need to invest a lot of money to rank higher and get the covers and rewards.

This is true. The free slots are not going to change the competitive meta in anyway.the game will still be as easy or as hard as it is to the player population.

So this change is just delusional.

only if you look at it from the perspective of top competitive players. But for f2p players this change is great.This change is great for f2p players and casual players. Now they can create an alliance with pure RL friends and enjoy the game casually. And they don't have to cough up tens of dollars to enjoy that fun camaraderie.

I'm sorry to say D3P, but you find out that you were too greedy in the first place, and the veterans are ONCE AGAIN screwed.

pls enlighten me why are veterans screwed? Besides the perception that their "hp investment" are "devalued".

Pfff, Hailmary was beginning to like me, and with all this mess lately, he's going to bash me again.

Well, so as long as you argue your points rationally, you can bash d3 for all you want. So far, you are still in Tue right direction

And really, most of the "fanboys" are not fanboys. We just can't stand biased perspective with poor reasoning, and unfairly accusing the developers.

lukewin

I think D3 already expected this backlash, yet still decided to move ahead with this decision. As a F2P player, I have not been affected monetarily by this, but I can empathize with people that have spent money and feel ripped off. If I would've spent $100 to grow an alliance, and now it was free, I'd be upset, but not "Gimme my $100 back" upset. I can also see their point of view though. They have provided a F2P game that people a lot of people have spent money to play. If you think about the money that you paid for alliance spots went to developing the game, licensing, all other aspects, and not just creating spots in an alliance, it might be easier an easier pill to swallow. If those that paid, divide the hours played by the dollars spent, for whatever reason, you might see the money well worth it. But whatever way you see it, is controlled by how you choose to see it. They've made a decision, and you can choose how you handle it.

This move costs them future revenue they could see from roster spots, but they still chose to do it. They think this decision benefits them, so I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt. Things change all the time. They make changes that people like, and changes that people hate. Some people are never going to complain, some people are always going to complain. As for me, I'm going to play and enjoy. One day, I'll likely move on. I won't be able to ask for my time back, but I know better than to ask. I can't say that I'll always be a F2P player, but there has been nothing so far, that has made me motivated enough to spend money. I have poured countless hours into the game, so for those that have paid, I can offer a "Thanks guys". Probably won't count for anything, but oh well.

Unknown

Didn't read through all of the pages, but as someone who back in the day paid 2k to add the last slot to my first alliance... I in no way feel the need to be compensated for that. I'm happy I did it, even though I'm 2 alliances away from it now. That slot stayed long after I left, and other people got to use it. Maybe those players would not have been able to expand an alliance to buy in back then. That alliance is still going last I checked, 20 people strong. They may not be ranking as highly as they used to when alliances started, when just having 20 players who were alive meant top 100, but they're still around.

I see this as a positive change. Also, one that should result in more humorous alliance names since they'll be so easy to make now.

Unknown

It all depends on which side of the fence you are. Personally, I'd like them to also make 50 or 100 rosters slots free, but I can see how some people might have problems with that

IamTheDanger

I can see things from the devs point of view. But 20? ****? IMO, making all alliances 10 or even 15 would be best. But not 20.

loroku

For what it's worth, I would suspect they would have a hard time compensating people even if they wanted to. I'm not sure if they track every single HP purchase (if they are smart they do) but unless they did, it would be impossible to restore purchases. Hard to say if it's a technical limitation or a business decision (and they are under no obligation to fill us in).

Pwuz_

Honestly I'm only a frustrated with this change since I started my Alliance from the ground up as a single Commander Alliance. Each Alliance Position (currently 19), was the result of me sacrificing my own personal roster to ensure that I could expand my alliance further. Just in the short term, I wouldn't have trashed my Ms. Marvel cover had I known that I wouldn't need 2000 HP for the next roster slot just to make room for Blade.

I've only kept 3* or better covers for months now. I've been locked out of Combined Arms, because I've been saving HP for the next Alliance Slot.

Sure, as a top 250 Alliance (occasionally only top 500), I've earned HP from the Alliance rewards. But that is only a small amount compared to what I've saved and sacrificed to get to this point. I'd love to have at least 1 of EVERY character in the game. That's honestly my goal right now.

Finally, I'd just like everyone to remember, it's not like any of us are expecting real world refunds for this (or at least I hope no one is). We are looking for some type of in game compensation.

My Suggestion:
100 HP per slot for any alliance currently with 6 or more members, divided up between all current commanders.

Unknown

There was never going to be a good outcome from the alliance thing but I think this is better than ignoring the problem.

HailMary

I have mixed feelings about this one.

In terms of general game health with regard to leveling the playing field, this is a very cool move. It's also pointedly anti-monetization and anti-P2W, since they're completely eliminating a revenue stream that provided in-game advantage, no matter how minuscule that revenue stream was.

But, I really hope it comes with some sort of compensation (a la Pwuz's suggestion) for those who paid for alliance expansion. Even as someone who never did so, it feels like those who recently bought slots were short-changed. There's an argument to be made that those who bought slots a while back have been able to reap the benefits of those slots, and don't "deserve" compensation. But, recent purchasers, esp. of the higher-cost slots, haven't had a chance to reap those benefits. They're just out a few hundred/few thousand HP.

Also, one side effect, mentioned earlier, is that people randomly searching for alliances now won't be able to discern seriousness or the degree of activity of an alliance simply from how much HP they've sunk into expanding it. That'll be fun for randoms.

Moon Roach

HailMary wrote:

Also, one side effect, mentioned earlier, is that people randomly searching for alliances now won't be able to discern seriousness or the degree of activity of an alliance simply from how much HP they've sunk into expanding it. That'll be fun for randoms.

Thanks for the +1 on that.

And here's something I prepared earlier: http://www.d3pforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=17620

babinro

Okin107 wrote:

While this is an AWESOME update and I really mean AWESOME, anything to be said about the people that already paid the money for 20 slots in their alliance? I mean it's a lot of HP there and it suddenly is equaled to 0. The investment is completely devaluated.

Personally, I LOVE the change because I have not paid for an alliance and maybe now I can create my own competing one. But I can feel the unfairness of those that already spent a LOT to build 20 slots alliances and now they are just free.

Any thoughts on compensating the HP in some way?

I agree...AWESOME change for the game as a whole.

I'll play devils advocate for a moment on the statement that people's investments (including mine) are suddenly equaled to 0. This statement is FALSE.

You see...that vast majority of us have probably been in a 20 or so alliance for MONTHS. This is a long time for us to take advantage of a alliance numbers in order to win awards we otherwise may not have won in our prior non-20 alliance. In other words...you've been reaping the rewards of this hp investment for every single even since the time you purchased that alliance slot. This includes all those *** covers, hp and ISO you probably wouldn't have received otherwise. Looking at the change this way...I in no way even remotely regret the 1500 or so HP I've spent on alliance slots since starting MPQ (this was probably 8 months ago). I've easily gotten my expenses back and more.

That said...if you've just spend thousands of HP to finish an alliance in the last 30 days than that is truly a kick in the nads.

Still...we all know the game is subject to change. I've recently put over 7500 hp into building Fury and I'm fully aware they could nerf him into oblivion next month. Characters change, mechanics change and features change. Thankfully, it's easy to see this particular change as one that's best for the long term health of the game as a whole.

I don't think it's reasonable to offer lifetime refunds on everyone whose spent hp on alliance slots...but it would be great to consider it for those who have recently invested.

Unknown

Pwuz_ wrote:

My Suggestion:
100 HP per slot for any alliance currently with 6 or more members, divided up between all current commanders.

I feel for your situation and the other alliances that were funded by one person, like Godlike. I really wish they could do some form of compensation, as this really is a bizarre decision.
I payed 1700 HP months ago for the UncannyMUGs, I have since left, as they were more serious about all events, and I wanted to be more casual and choose what to play. I am sure there are many other people have done the same. Why would current commanders be rewarded with HP if they were not the ones that payed for it?

I really don't think this is going to change anything, besides give people the impression that they have a "chance". I think a high percentage of the people that score high, have gravitated to these forums to find an alliance, and will continue to do so, when they fall apart. Sure there will people that score high, and be fine with their own little island, but I doubt that they will just luck into 20 members that bring them into the top 100. It is a gated community, and one that feasts on the corpses of fallen alliances. I don't anticipate that changing.

I keep track of the top 100, every season. Keep in mind that an alliance of 20 that had all members get all the season progression rewards (and stop at that point) would rank as follows:

I wrote:

A full alliance of 20, that had all members make all progression rewards (7,500 for newer seasond and 10,000 for earlier seasons), would place as follows in the seasons:
Season 6 - 61st
Season 5 - 69th
Season 4 - 76th
Season 3 - 44th
Season 2 - 18th
Season 1 - 78th

It isn't like 20 random people will join a public alliance and all hit the progression rewards. This changes little but gives up a source of income, that they obviously thought was hurting them more than it was helping them. The sad thing is that means they are making more money now thanks to "True Healing" which is why they are sticking to it.

Am I thrilled by the change? No. Am I angered that I won't get compensation? No. Does this hurt me in any way? No. So I will keep on playing as I have been.

If you don't feel the same, the only way you can show them is to stop playing.

seth_is_OK

Alliances increasing to 20 member slots for free? Great! I've been slowly increasing (by myself) my Alliance PowerPack to 12 members currently. We're casual and rank from around 1500 to 2500 usually. I don't see this change affecting us too much, but it would be nice to have a higher daily ISO bonus. The rewards are pretty paltry down around rank 1500 and I would invest in the Alliance with the hope that it would pay off in the future.

No compensation for the money I've invested? That hurts. I've had to make tough choices in the past about where to spend my HP. I'll usually buy Logan's Loonies when they go on sale and half of it would go to the Alliance and half to roster slots. The most recent sale was during the Anniversary event which was over a week ago and is outside the time frame to get compensated.

Do I expect full compensation? No, that's silly. D3 doesn't owe me anything. However, it would help me get over the loss of my money or possible roster slots with some token of appreciation for the amount of money I've invested without seeing the rewards of a Top 100 (or even Top 1000) Alliance. Maybe a 10-token pack of heroics for every 5 roster slots opened. Or a percentage of HP I've spent. Some gesture of goodwill would be appreciated.

lukewin

Just a trolling post, but those that spent for alliance spots, will now get the ability to get a 20 roster alliance for the price of a new alliance, 15 spots FREE!!!!

chaos01

As a player that started an alliance and has been the sole contributor of HP for slot purchasing growing an alliance from 5 to 12 that is 6300 HP I have now wasted. With only 12 we are not placing top 100 or really getting anything over ISO rewards. This makes me feel cheated and I really want those HP back. I have maybe recouped 600 total from alliance rewards. This change flat out sucks.

Unknown

seth_is_OK wrote:

Alliances increasing to 20 member slots for free? Great! I've been slowly increasing (by myself) my Alliance PowerPack to 12 members currently. We're casual and rank from around 1500 to 2500 usually. I don't see this change affecting us too much, but it would be nice to have a higher daily ISO bonus. The rewards are pretty paltry down around rank 1500 and I would invest in the Alliance with the hope that it would pay off in the future.

No compensation for the money I've invested? That hurts. I've had to make tough choices in the past about where to spend my HP. I'll usually buy Logan's Loonies when they go on sale and half of it would go to the Alliance and half to roster slots. The most recent sale was during the Anniversary event which was over a week ago and is outside the time frame to get compensated.

Do I expect full compensation? No, that's silly. D3 doesn't owe me anything. However, it would help me get over the loss of my money or possible roster slots with some token of appreciation for the amount of money I've invested without seeing the rewards of a Top 100 (or even Top 1000) Alliance. Maybe a 10-token pack of heroics for every 5 roster slots opened. Or a percentage of HP I've spent. Some gesture of goodwill would be appreciated.

This was my intention. Sometimes I lose my point in the frustration when it comes to lack of empathy. Some kind of acknowledgement for the people that spent money to get what is now given away. Not a refund so much as anything to say "Thanks for paying for those spots." I understand that things change, and most changes are good. D3 has taken great strides in my opinion when it comes to listening to a lot of the common issues that are talked about in the forums. I believe I am going to let this one be a time when I agree to disagree. It seems the majority of posts lean towards "The paid alliance spot reaped benefits", while I lean towards "The hard work of the players reaped the benefits, and would have reaped the same benefits if alliance spots were free from the beginning."

But all in all, this is a great change for the game. I hope more great changes come in the future. I look forward to any changes that this new alliance system brings, because a good shake up can be a positive thing.

I still think it's a kick in the nads, but not really intentional. You can't please everyone.

Chrono_Tata

I'm one of those players who never paid for an alliance slots but just been joining other already bought alliances, but I'm genuinely upset for people who had bought their slots recently. I think the suggestion that only the people who have bought alliance slots in the last week deserve a refund is particularly insulting. The last alliance slot costs 2000 HP. Let's say that someone bumping their alliance up to full size somehow takes them into top 100 alliance for PvP and PvE. In a week, they would probably be winning around 200-300 extra HP from it, a bit of ISO and not more than 5 3-star cover. Someone who bought the slot 2 weeks ago would have double that, but that's nowhere near enough reward to break even their investment. Full refunds should be given to anyone who bought a slot in the last month, I'd say, and maybe partial refund for people who have bought one in the last 2-3 months.

If the company doesn't want/can't be bothered to give out so many refunds, I think another potential solution would be, first of all, disable any alliance slot buying within the next patch. And, instead of rolling out 20 alliance slot size for everyone straight away, do a staggered rollout. Any alliance smaller than 10 gets bumped up to 10 in the next patch. Then, after a month or so, bump it to 15, then bump up to 20 in another month. That way, people who have already paid for alliance slots would have time to gain the benefit over people who haven't.

Unknown

Paintsville wrote:

I realize I was extra snarky, but what do you expect to such a demeaning post as the one I originally replied to? So please don't try to make yourself out to be the voice of reason.

With that said, I think free alliance slots are a great idea and will be great for the game. It will make for great competition and may change the game as we know it.

My issue is that the way it is being handled. This isn't a price change to ISO the day after I bought some. In that case I still have what I paid for. An advantage over someone who didn't buy ISO. This is different. Heck, if they would have halved the price of a slot then I wouldn't be nearly as upset. I am not asking people to choose free roster slots or no free roster slots. I am asking for people to realize that a paid for advantage is being stripped, and to ask yourself how you would feel in that situation. The people who paid for roster slots should be compensated SOMETHING. I agree a full refund is too much. I believe good things should be done for everyone. But at least TRY to lessen the blow to people that will see the work they done means less cause the playing field is changed on a whim.

P.S. another reason I went off in the last post is that I am so tired of people throwing the word entitled around. Because I am vocal when I perceive being wronged doesn't make me seem entitled. I will most likely have a reason behind my statements. But don't get me wrong. This is not about free roster slots. This is about people showing no empathy whatsoever for people, no matter how great their intentions are.

Here's the thing, man. I usually do try to be the voice of reason. I try and empathize with people, but these forums have been getting more and more vocal and whiney with every little change made to the game. Are all the changes good? No, of course not, and everyone has their opinions on the matter of course (and I've put in my two cents elsewhere about certain changes not being ideal - for me, anyway), but as time goes on the more shouting and demanding of compensation for "investment" - be it time, money, effort, whatever - has worn me down to the point that today, right here, right now, I don't have a drop of empathy left for those that are here wanting compensation. Maybe that will change tomorrow, or next week, or whatever. I can't care all the time. I don't have superhuman stats in Empathy.

It's not the change. It's not that some people feel slighted by it. It's that they demand, demand, demand. Doesn't it make you tired, too?