Top 50 Alliances... what was your final Mercenary %?

JVReal
JVReal Posts: 1,884 Chairperson of the Boards
edited March 2015 in MPQ General Discussion
I'm curious...

Of the top 50 alliances, how many of your members were mercenaries? What was the percentage?

No harm in being honest, these numbers will help to show D3 how broken their top 50 alliance reward structure is in rewarding "Alliances".

Thank you.
Failed to load the poll.
«1

Comments

  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    You should have just asked for how many, rather than %. With 20 person alliances, half of us will have %s in between your options.
  • babinro
    babinro Posts: 771 Critical Contributor
    edited March 2015
    100% technically.
    My alliance creates a sub alliance strictly for PvE and it picks the highest scoring members from all of our several main alliances to join. From there, we then take on mercs as needed to reach our goal.

    This is done for all PvE's...not just the 4* ones.

    Why the game lets us exploit alliance hopping this badly is beyond me. Hence why I've been an advocate for locking playing into their alliance upon joining an event. If they leave the alliance during said event then they continue to score for the ORIGINAL alliance. It stops all this final day gutting of alliances to 'game' the system garbage.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    We took 3, which makes us 15%, so I said "other"
  • Der_Lex
    Der_Lex Posts: 1,035 Chairperson of the Boards
    3 for us as well.
  • Colognoisseur
    Colognoisseur Posts: 807 Critical Contributor
    We only took one from our own associated Alliance Deadpools Tacos and we did that only because it was easier than him going and hunting for an outside situation.
    I clicked 0% because we would've been top 50 without but if you want to be precise it was 5%.
  • tanis3303
    tanis3303 Posts: 855 Critical Contributor
    Colognoisseur wrote:
    We only took one from our own associated Alliance Deadpools Tacos and we did that only because it was easier than him going and hunting for an outside situation.
    I clicked 0% because we would've been top 50 without but if you want to be precise it was 5%.

    ^ This guy! Colog, i think you and i scared off the rest of our bracket, we had 1-2 locked up since like day 2 icon_e_wink.gif

    Anyway, to the OP's question, Skynet 1 got top 50, with i believe it was 3 mercs? so whatever % that is. Skynet 2.0 decided not to participate in the alliance killing swapping/kicking fest this time and ended up like 55th, but with the added bonus of none of our members being butt-hurt about being kicked and no one going to bed angry icon_mrgreen.gif
  • Colognoisseur
    Colognoisseur Posts: 807 Critical Contributor
    tanis3303 wrote:
    Colognoisseur wrote:
    We only took one from our own associated Alliance Deadpools Tacos and we did that only because it was easier than him going and hunting for an outside situation.
    I clicked 0% because we would've been top 50 without but if you want to be precise it was 5%.

    ^ This guy! Colog, i think you and i scared off the rest of our bracket, we had 1-2 locked up since like day 2 icon_e_wink.gif

    Based on some of the other brackets I saw I think we had it relatively easy. It was fun playing in the same bracket with you, you kept me on my toes.
  • tanis3303
    tanis3303 Posts: 855 Critical Contributor
    yea, no doubt. I dont want to throw the word "easy" around, but i think we had it better than most, a lot of our bracket had 270 rosters, so they were facing the same lvl 350+ battles. I knew i wasnt gonna catch you since i missed the end of one of the subs, but i also knew if i kept it up we'd scare everyone else away from top 5 icon_e_wink.gif
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Our alliance was -25%. 5 people left our alliance to go merc elsewhere.

    The "alliance" reward has become a second personal award. All the people with high scores are just coming together to earn a second cover.

    Totally. Broken. System.
  • Lidolas
    Lidolas Posts: 500
    Before I can answer, I need some clarification on mercenary. I'm in a group of 4.5 alliances. We have a PvP only, two PvE only, one for both and a semi-retired (the 0.5). For the 4* releases, We tried to gather together two top 50 alliances, but it became clear that wasn't going to work. We consolidated and got a top spot. I wouldn't consider any of them a mercenary.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Lidolas wrote:
    I wouldn't consider any of them a mercenary.
    I think everyone else would. An alliance is a group of 20 people, not the best 20 from a pool of 90.
  • lukewin
    lukewin Posts: 1,356 Chairperson of the Boards
    Complicated for us too. We have 2 PVP, 1 PVE group, and took 20 best scorers. But 2 of our best went out to help another alliance, and then I took in 3. So technically 1?
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    lukewin wrote:
    Complicated for us too. We have 2 PVP, 1 PVE group, and took 20 best scorers.
    ... and an alliance isn't the best 20 out of 60 either. See Babrino's post... I agree with him that you guys are at 100%, not zero or 5%
  • Doc L
    Doc L Posts: 279 Mover and Shaker
    My alliance finished #89, and we didn't have any mercs in or out. We all chat online, are all friends together, so we either win together or lose together. I can totally understand mercs in this system, and especially with an event as broken as that one, but just not for us.
  • D2KM_
    D2KM_ Posts: 134
    I can proudly say that Lock and Load finished 4th overall with 0 mercs icon_e_biggrin.gif we had some turnover at the beginning of the event, but everyone who is currently in Lock and Load are all perm members. Everyone in our alliance did a great job and we have some crazy awesome grinders in our alliance.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    babinro wrote:
    100% technically.
    My alliance creates a sub alliance strictly for PvE and it picks the highest scoring members from all of our several main alliances to join. From there, we then take on mercs as needed to reach our goal.

    This is done for all PvE's...not just the 4* ones.

    Why the game lets us exploit alliance hopping this badly is beyond me. Hence why I've been an advocate for locking playing into their alliance upon joining an event. If they leave the alliance during said event then they continue to score for the ORIGINAL alliance. It stops all this final day gutting of alliances to 'game' the system garbage.

    It's things like this... the so-called "meta"... I wonder if the devs know about this. Not that it's a huge deal, but the fact that they don't seem to have the same play experience as we do concerns me. I'm not advocating a change per se (although I think it's a great idea).
  • JVReal
    JVReal Posts: 1,884 Chairperson of the Boards
    Lidolas wrote:
    Before I can answer, I need some clarification on mercenary. I'm in a group of 4.5 alliances. We have a PvP only, two PvE only, one for both and a semi-retired (the 0.5). For the 4* releases, We tried to gather together two top 50 alliances, but it became clear that wasn't going to work. We consolidated and got a top spot. I wouldn't consider any of them a mercenary.
    Personally, I believe that an Alliance are the people that are in that specific Alliance, which is 20 people. I can see some groups having 2 Alliances, one for PVP and one for PVE and swapping back and forth. I even give that the benefit of not calling swapping between the two mercing, because not everyone PVP's and not everyone PVE's.

    But any more than 2 alliances that are related and continuously interchanging would count as mercing in my opinion.

    We have a group of 3 alliances, an entry level alliance for beginners, then they move up to the mid tier alliance when they get their roster built and begin to build momentum. They move up to the ranking alliance when they've become established and have shone in the middle tier alliance. There isn't an awful lot of swapping going on between ours. People who go on vacation drop down to the middle tier alliance and their high scorer hops up to the ranking one. That to me is working with Real Life as opposed to working the system, giving people a chance to take a break when they feel burnt out, without permanently losing their spot.
  • Lidolas
    Lidolas Posts: 500
    I guess I would define merc'ing as posting on here or Facebook looking for an alliance. Someone who is only interested in the cover. We were able to do all our swapping based through normal chat channels that we use every day.

    But whatever the definition, it was definitely more stressful for commanders than we would have liked, and we would have rather been able to stay in the usual alliances that can both hit 'normal' PvE event rewards.
  • Breakking
    Breakking Posts: 56 Match Maker
    DMZ Sparta needed 4 mercs to finish in the Top 50. It was ugly
  • lokiagentofhotness
    lokiagentofhotness Posts: 192 Tile Toppler
    I was a merc for this event, and I have to honestly say, after 5 days of grinding to get 120k points (both me and the half of my alliance that did a lot of grinding - I think our scores ranged from 100-140+K), I decided to merc out because I felt I deserved that additional cover. I hear people saying that some of them have lives and therefore couldn't grind that much (and got kicked by their alliances) and if you want to talk about how the game mechanics suck (they do, I agree) and PVE need to be fixed (it does, I agree) then yeah the game mechanics suck. But I have a life too, so why do you deserve the cover more than I do for doing less work? And if you did accomplish really high scores and you didn't get the cover, your alliance let you down, not the mercs.

    On a separate note, I'd like to publicly apologize to the commander of PhoenixxRising, no hard feelings I hope!

    tl;dr - mercs are people too, etc. etc.

Categories