Why alliances are (sadly) the beginning of the end.

Unknown

I almost wish what I am typing wasn't something that I consider to be true. But alliances in their current state are bad for the longevity of this wonderful game.

If you start as a new player ( and every game should be set up to cater for and to attract and retain new players) you will have a blast up to venom in the prologue. Then you hit your first real wall. Challenge is good, and you steel yourself to gain more covers as you try to take on the goons in dark avengers. So you decide to click the SHINEY orange 'events' tab. You load up one of the PvE tournaments (although to you at this point it just looks like another prologue) and you see how far you can get. The 'rewards' button looks nice so you click it, and then you see an 'alliance rewards' button. This is probably the first time you realise there are alliances unless you've actually been reading the annoying pop ups (assuming a lot of the player base has ADHD as most gamers do, this is less likely than you'd expect).

"How do I get me an alliance?" You ask. And then (on the iOS version at least) you hunt for the elusive button that you don't know exists. IF you find it, you wonder how on earth you're supposed to join an alliance when you don't know any names. You try some obvious marvel ones. They're full or they don't exist. Because the system currently assumes you're on the forums already and already have a social network.

So you don't join an alliance, or you do, but it's pants. And now you start to feel frustrated that so many lovely rewards are beyond your grasp. And so you log in less. And less.


That's point 1. It can be fixed with interface changes, let's hope they come soon.


Here's point 2.

Due to HP costs to expand alliances the top will stay at the top, and the bottom will never catch them. It's rich get richer....
And d3 must have made a killing on people buying HP for alliance expansion slots. So they're not going to want to stop the gravy train. The trouble is that it creates every chance that the player base stops expanding and becomes a closed group, because it's hard to break into the top or even the middle. Alliance rewards are replacing personal rewards (certainly in terms of covers) and for a large % of the player base they are unobtainable.

And because people have invested so much (time / real money), if you reverse it there'll be a mutiny. Except that unless a way to level the playing field is found you're going to stretch the top ever further from the new starter. And the more you do that the more the new starter pokes his head into the game room of MPQ sees that he can't get anywhere and quits. Now not everyone will follow that pattern, but a significant amount will.

No / less new starters means the game will eventually die. Entropy is always inevitable, but in their current state alliances are speeding this process up.

Xeonic-Ice

Heh, you joined my alliance?

I've stated it in another thread but I really don't like how alliances are set up right now. 5 member alliances are competing with 20 member alliances which really shouldn't be the case. There's no way to compete and earn the stuff that you've been able to earn in a single tournament that you were able to for the last 6 months.

Unknown

Being a new player I kind of get the feeling that I won't ever be able to catch up and Join one. Right now I got my 1* team Maxed but can not pull any covers to progress my 2* team. Then it seems most people with Alliances only want people that have High lvl characters alreadt established. I understand why that is though, because the cost of a roster spot is not cheap and they need the most points then can get for that spot. So in the long run I will try to grind out my 2* team and by time I start a 3* team they will only want people with 4* teams.

Unknown

And truth be told the only people who should be in 5 person alliances are newer players. D3 has been giving out plenty of HP in which that if players save it up the first few slots are not hard at all to obtain.

Also with that said if you have a group of friends who have been playing together for awhile then it shouldn't be hard at all to pool a few dollars each and expand the alliance to a reasonable size if not max.

Yes I understand free to play vs pay to win act but there have been several alliances already who have proven you can have a full 20 from HP given

Unknown

Doesitgoboom wrote:

Being a new player I kind of get the feeling that I won't ever be able to catch up and Join one. Right now I got my 1* team Maxed but can not pull any covers to progress my 2* team. Then it seems most people with Alliances only want people that have High lvl characters alreadt established. I understand why that is though, because the cost of a roster spot is not cheap and they need the most points then can get for that spot. So in the long run I will try to grind out my 2* team and by time I start a 3* team they will only want people with 4* teams.

Nah not all alliances, to use Djano as an example we just took 1st in the simulator and have no level requirements in fact a lot of our members are in the 2* to 3* transition themselves.

It might not be easy but its certainly not impossible to get an alliance together to win some I so and covers. I wish everyone here the best of luck.

Unknown

Xeonic-Ice wrote:

I've stated it in another thread but I really don't like how alliances are set up right now. 5 member alliances are competing with 20 member alliances which really shouldn't be the case. There's no way to compete and earn the stuff that you've been able to earn in a single tournament that you were able to for the last 6 months.

Yup. There should be either some sort of scaling system (mathematically calculated mean value, only top 5 members achievement counts, etc.). Or separate brackets for different alliance sizes (for example: Small 5, Medium 6-10, Large 11-20). Several brackets would mean more covers & prizes (although those small alliance brackets could offer also smaller prizes compared to bigger ones) but it would also allow people to stay in small alliances if they desire and still get at least a slightly better chance to achieve at least something.

At the moment it's all pay-2-win more fun stuff. And I'm currently shamelessly milking it as much as possible by joining a large alliance.

NorthernPolarity

I agree with point 1, but I don't agree with lower tiered players being stuck. If you're a 1* or mid-leveled 2* player, then alliance rewards don't affect you at all. The 3* cover was moved from top 5 rewards, which you probably weren't going to get anyways. I could see this affecting high leveled 2* players are transitioning into 3* that can actually place top 5 consistently, but if your roster is that developed, then it shouldn't be hard to get into a top 100 alliance. If theres a problem with the current system, then there was a problem with how its been for the past half a year, and since the app is doing pretty well nowadays, I don't think that it's really an issue.

Unknown

MTGOFerret wrote:

Doesitgoboom wrote:

Being a new player I kind of get the feeling that I won't ever be able to catch up and Join one. Right now I got my 1* team Maxed but can not pull any covers to progress my 2* team. Then it seems most people with Alliances only want people that have High lvl characters alreadt established. I understand why that is though, because the cost of a roster spot is not cheap and they need the most points then can get for that spot. So in the long run I will try to grind out my 2* team and by time I start a 3* team they will only want people with 4* teams.

Nah not all alliances, to use Djano as an example we just took 1st in the simulator and have no level requirements in fact a lot of our members are in the 2* to 3* transition themselves.

It might not be easy but its certainly not impossible to get an alliance together to win some I so and covers. I wish everyone here the best of luck.

You don't happen to have room for one more then?

Unknown

Sadly we are full, but check the alliance forums and pick one that seems like it would be fun. Its how I got into Django

Unknown

Doesitgoboom wrote:

Being a new player I kind of get the feeling that I won't ever be able to catch up and Join one.... Then it seems most people with Alliances only want people that have High lvl characters alreadt established.

When alliances had been released, First few looks in the alliance board it did seem to be "must have 3*** maxed teams" all around. That wasn't quite the reality, I was only just on the 2* tier but found an alliance.
Most of the forum active people are going to be those that have played a long time and have 2**-3*** teir.
I wonder though how many newbie's are lurking about or just taking a look but not saying anything? Is it worth starting a thread in the alliance board asking not for teams, but for people to announce themselves and start to organise teams?

Expansion of alliances to over 5 is a lot harder than I think has been indicated on here so far. 600 HP is quite a lot to a new player - 2-4 (extra roster slots for themselves!) and that's just getting to a 6th member. Best way to sort that is optional alliance treasury?


Oh and one wish list thing for alliance rewards - have a different colour cover of the 2** reward for underneath the 3*** one. Not something for me. Think it would be good for those trying to make it to 2* level and something for lower ranked alliances.

Unknown

With scaling and rubber banding newish players certainly could be competitive and possibly even finish top 5 if they go crazy on an event. What the new players lack is enough HP for all of their needs. Trying to expand roster slots, and use an occasional shield, and pony up for alliance roster slots is a daunting proposition. Should they stop buying roster slots because alliance slots are worth more now?

I can see that this may be a response to the complaints of how easily 1* teams could show up in the top 10 in events and this made veterans feel like they had it too easy and did not deserve such top level placements. The alliance rewards seems to take something from that pot and make it more heavily favored to go to established veterans who do have the HP to build large alliances and have ties with other veterans through the forums.

Yes there is a noticeably larger amount of HP flying around so it may be argued that even the little guys will get their alliance up to size eventually, but if they push to get from size 5 to size 8 and get a decent spot this time, how many people will be needed next time since everyone will be trying so hard to bulk up so to speak. It becomes no longer a question of how well did I play but how many more people can we add before this event ends...

Unknown

I wasnt keen on the idea of alliances when they first came out but the rewards are just too tempting. If you can gather together a group of people from the forum (or another social media site) then you can pool resources to help fight the costs of expansion. As others have said it is possible to save up that heard earned HP and get the spaces for free but yes it obviously takes time. I really don't see why those who freely choose not to support the game/developers but still expect to be able to place at the top above those who choose to do so. If you look at how much time you put into the game, is dropping a few quid here and there that much to pay for when you think about how much other forms of entertain cost (cinema etc verses waiting and watching films on tv).

DD-The-Mighty

AlucardUK wrote:

I wasnt keen on the idea of alliances when they first came out but the rewards are just too tempting.

of course they are. they're what used to be on the main reward tier. They just hijacked it, and moved it to the alliance board. adding yet another barrier between you and a cover.

MaxCavalera

I am also curious about how much restraint D3 will use on expanding alliance roster size which they almost stated was a forgone conclusion.

Unknown

DD-The-Mighty wrote:

AlucardUK wrote:

I wasnt keen on the idea of alliances when they first came out but the rewards are just too tempting.

of course they are. they're what used to be on the main reward tier. They just hijacked it, and moved it to the alliance board. adding yet another barrier between you and a cover.

Given that it was a tier I probably wouldnt have managed to obtain regularly before and now its much more likely, for me at least, its removed a barrier but I can see this is an issue for some.

Unknown

MTGOFerret wrote:

And truth be told the only people who should be in 5 person alliances are newer players. D3 has been giving out plenty of HP in which that if players save it up the first few slots are not hard at all to obtain.

Also with that said if you have a group of friends who have been playing together for awhile then it shouldn't be hard at all to pool a few dollars each and expand the alliance to a reasonable size if not max.

Yes I understand free to play vs pay to win act but there have been several alliances already who have proven you can have a full 20 from HP given

The problem with this is why should players be forced to create a 20 man just to even have a shot at progression? Some of us don't want to be a part of a team of players and just want to be in a small group of real life friends, not some "psuedo" online friendship.

This was a problem that I pointed out before, and with luck it's being looked into. Paying to expand and getting a guaranteed cover every single time alliance rewards are offered has no place in this game considering the random nature they continuously push.

In the true essence of it, this does become pay to win now. From what I have read of the larger alliances, securing a spot on the roster means spending the 500 to open the next slot. So, that now becomes a 500 hp purchase of a guaranteed cover, typically a 3* cover (worth 1250 hp), every time. But what about Alliance members that didn't/don't have to pay for slots because they are already open? They benefit even more, they get the free ride.

In the unbracketed approach, they aren't really rewarding anything according to price of admission for doing so. Point in fact, as stated, they are indeed punishing those in 5 mans, whether that be those that want to stay small or new players that don't have any option but to join/create a new group.

The whole system in place goes against the supposed model of being f2p and have just as equal a chance at winning as those that spent money.

Now, I'm not asking to be promised a cover as part of a 5 man every time there is alliance rewards offered, just as equal a chance as any other alliance does. The same for 20 man alliances. There is absolutely no reason they should have no worries about getting a cover.

Because this system is so widely utilized by now, their options are limited on how they can fix the fairness and/or proper progression without upsetting plenty of players. The unfortunate thing is you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, but this system does need to be made more accessible to all players. If that means bracketing according to size, or keeping it unbracketed and averaging all gained points by alliance member size, or something else, there is a very distinct possibility that more players will lose interest, as stated in the thread.

Unknown

Well having just been booted from a 20/20 alliance after offering on day 1 to buy my slot, I have to say it's harder than people make out to get into a top 100. There's no reasonable way to search, and the threads in alliance never update when full, and I'm seeing zero response to players making the 3* transition in the solo player thread.

Then again, I'm still sore from being booted after a week grinding my **** off for blue CPt and being denied black hulk, so take what I'm saying however you please.

Unknown

How did you get booted if you bought your slot? Unless you mean you offered, but they didn't end up asking you to pay for it?

_RiO_

DD-The-Mighty wrote:

AlucardUK wrote:

I wasnt keen on the idea of alliances when they first came out but the rewards are just too tempting.

of course they are. they're what used to be on the main reward tier. They just hijacked it, and moved it to the alliance board. adding yet another barrier between you and a cover.

Bingo. The official word is that the rewards were moved to provide a better balance and ensure they're given out to more people. When you factor alliance size into things, that does hold up. Ofcourse it's still a thin veneer over the fact that moving the solo cover rewards and starving the solo progression rewards of HP are just incentives to bait players into the alliance features and get them on the bandwagon to spend HP and ISO on it.

If the problem is not enough people can obtain rewards to keep the game economy in a good place, then there are after all other ways of fixing that. E.g. you can expand the award range on the top and middle solo placement rewards, or reduce the required points for solo progression rewards. Instead everything gets lumped into the new alliance feature under the guise of 'fixing' the game. (And in the long run breaking it even further than it already was...)

MaxCavalera

Tarquos wrote:

Well having just been booted from a 20/20 alliance after offering on day 1 to buy my slot, I have to say it's harder than people make out to get into a top 100. There's no reasonable way to search, and the threads in alliance never update when full, and I'm seeing zero response to players making the 3* transition in the solo player thread.

Then again, I'm still sore from being booted after a week grinding my **** off for blue CPt and being denied black hulk, so take what I'm saying however you please.

Ouch that is pretty brutal.

Unknown

Skyedyne wrote:

MTGOFerret wrote:

And truth be told the only people who should be in 5 person alliances are newer players. D3 has been giving out plenty of HP in which that if players save it up the first few slots are not hard at all to obtain.

Also with that said if you have a group of friends who have been playing together for awhile then it shouldn't be hard at all to pool a few dollars each and expand the alliance to a reasonable size if not max.

Yes I understand free to play vs pay to win act but there have been several alliances already who have proven you can have a full 20 from HP given

The problem with this is why should players be forced to create a 20 man just to even have a shot at progression? Some of us don't want to be a part of a team of players and just want to be in a small group of real life friends, not some "psuedo" online friendship.

This was a problem that I pointed out before, and with luck it's being looked into. Paying to expand and getting a guaranteed cover every single time alliance rewards are offered has no place in this game considering the random nature they continuously push.

In the true essence of it, this does become pay to win now. From what I have read of the larger alliances, securing a spot on the roster means spending the 500 to open the next slot. So, that now becomes a 500 hp purchase of a guaranteed cover, typically a 3* cover (worth 1250 hp), every time. But what about Alliance members that didn't/don't have to pay for slots because they are already open? They benefit even more, they get the free ride.

In the unbracketed approach, they aren't really rewarding anything according to price of admission for doing so. Point in fact, as stated, they are indeed punishing those in 5 mans, whether that be those that want to stay small or new players that don't have any option but to join/create a new group.

The whole system in place goes against the supposed model of being f2p and have just as equal a chance at winning as those that spent money.

Now, I'm not asking to be promised a cover as part of a 5 man every time there is alliance rewards offered, just as equal a chance as any other alliance does. The same for 20 man alliances. There is absolutely no reason they should have no worries about getting a cover.

Because this system is so widely utilized by now, their options are limited on how they can fix the fairness and/or proper progression without upsetting plenty of players. The unfortunate thing is you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, but this system does need to be made more accessible to all players. If that means bracketing according to size, or keeping it unbracketed and averaging all gained points by alliance member size, or something else, there is a very distinct possibility that more players will lose interest, as stated in the thread.

F2P has pretty much always ment that you can get there eventually where as paying you gets you there NOW.
Alot of people seem to forget that aspect.
Yes people who pay can have a 20 person alliance the second they make it.
But that doesn't mean that the free player cant make an alliance today group up with like minded people and eventually have a 20 person alliance.
Sure it might take them a month or two (this is assuming you're starting from absolute zero and have no HP banked like most of us do)