Make Alliance Rewards available to individuals

peteer01

I have an idea that would help reward strong individual players who aren't in a strong alliance for whatever reason.

Keep all of the Alliance Rewards as they are, but also allow Alliance Rewards for an equal number of individual performers.

For example, in the ISO-8 Brotherhood event that is about to end, the top rewards for Alliances are:

Rank 1-2: Kamala Khan (Yellow), 2000 ISO and 250 HP (40 players [2 x 20])
Rank 3-50: Kamala Khan (Yellow), 2000 ISO and 100 HP (960 players [48 x 20])
Rank 51-100: Kamala Khan (Yellow), 2000 ISO and 50 HP (1000 players [48 x 20])

If you're in a top alliance, great, you know what you're getting. But if you're a top producer in a lower alliance right now you fall further behind the top alliances despite what might be a great individual effort.

My suggestion is that if you are a top 2 alliance, and/or in the top 40 players, you should get the Rank 1-2 reward. If you are in the top 3-50 alliance, and/or 41-1000 players, you should get the Rank 3-50 reward. And so on. A top 40 player in a top 5 alliance would get the Rank 1-2 reward, but everyone else in his alliance would get the Rank 3-50 award.

Basically, you would get the higher of your individual rank or alliance rank. Alliances would continue to be extremely valuable, because your alliance guarantees everyone in it a certain level of reward for both PvE and PvP, but everyone is encouraged to continue pushing for points and ranking with a potential to reach the next tier of rewards.

This allows for a lot of people, newcomers who are progressing in the game, people who are becoming more serious, people who are coming back after a break or kicked out of an alliance, people who are in an alliance with friends and family, or people who have outgrown their alliance, to all see benefit in playing more. That should help get those people the 3* and 4* covers and HP they need to compete, increase competitive players (and likely revenue) for D3, and doesn't take anything away from the current alliance system. If anything, I think it would be valuable to players to see where they fall globally, and perhaps encourage people who are playing at that top level to get into (or start their own) high level alliance.

I'm hopeful D3 can look at this and consider it. The only downside I can see is a lack of visibility around where one stands on a global level, based on different time shards, but if it's implemented the way I suggest, there's no downside, it would only ever be a pleasant surprise or the status quo alliance reward.

FaustianDeal

Very few alliances were t50 without swaps, a good number of the winning teams either didn't exist or were basically empty until there were fewer than 24 hours to go in the event. Remove the pretense and have a global scoreboard where you just award the top 1000 players an extra cover.

Rather than awarding the 'better of 2 prize pools'; I think the 4* cover should be taken off the table for the alliance prizes. Just leave the normal 3* prizes there (with the normal bands) and let our teams stay as they are. The 4* kicker prize is done using a separate global leaderboard.

peteer01

FaustianDeal wrote:

Very few alliances were t50 without swaps, a good number of the winning teams either didn't exist or were basically empty until there were fewer than 24 hours to go in the event. Remove the pretense and have a global scoreboard where you just award the top 1000 players an extra cover.

Rather than awarding the 'better of 2 prize pools'; I think the 4* cover should be taken off the table for the alliance prizes. Just leave the normal 3* prizes there (with the normal bands) and let our teams stay as they are. The 4* kicker prize is done using a separate global leaderboard.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of top prizes, like 4* covers, being awarded based on alliance, but I think alliances have a place in the game. Done correctly they can add to the game instead of detract from it.

Either way, either your suggestion or my suggestion would be preferable to the status quo, in my opinion.

A nice benefit of the global leaderboard is that it would discourage people from waiting to start an event late on purpose in hopes of an easier individual group.

KrazyKeylime

why not have alliance awards be progressive rewards instead? i am in a casual alliance with real world friends and some random people to fill spots. i like the idea that the top alliance scores get a reward. but i will never be a top 100 to qualify for your change or even 1000 we usually place 1500ish. a progressive goal will work for the majority of players and gives them some thing to grind for especially with all the mecrs switching for placement last minute changing all the scores. another idea is to reward players in the same alliance by giving a small hp bonus in daily rewards 5-10 for every 3 months in an alliance or only once you get 3 months.

peteer01

KrazyKeylime wrote:

i am in a casual alliance with real world friends and some random people to fill spots.

You're the kind of person I'm talking about. I'm sure the hardcore alliances incentivize a small number of players to play longer than they otherwise would or spend more money than they otherwise would. That said, people like you, who play enough to post here and encourage your friends to start playing, and then keep playing, are important to both the user base and D3's profits. Tweaking alliance rewards, even if it's just discouraging alliance jumping or encourage top players in casual alliances, would go a long way to making the game more enjoyable.

I just ground my way to a top five finish in the Kingpin PvE event, and I'm in a casual alliance that probably won't see top 500. But if my friends and family stopped playing, so would I. Similarly, if I end up frustrated with the cover distribution disparity alliances create, I'll be more likely to quit, and my friends and family will likely follow suit. I don't know what the tweak is, but I know that alliances could be improved.