Is winning Nick Fury still an option for my alliance?

Unknown

Cryptobrancus wrote:

People who are loyal to their alliance are loyal to the game. As much grumbling about the state of the game is going on right now, if I were in an alliance that decided they no longer needed me and kicked me to the curb for any reason, I would find that an excellent excuse to stop playing completely

From reading the forums there seem to be a lot of people who right now are solely still playing because of their alliance. I've been debating stopping or slowing down, but I want to wait until after season one ends to make sure I can help the rest of the group get the Fury cover.

I know the forums are a very vocal minority, but I'm curious how many people are feeling the same way.

Unknown

j12601 wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

People who are loyal to their alliance are loyal to the game. As much grumbling about the state of the game is going on right now, if I were in an alliance that decided they no longer needed me and kicked me to the curb for any reason, I would find that an excellent excuse to stop playing completely

From reading the forums there seem to be a lot of people who right now are solely still playing because of their alliance. I've been debating stopping or slowing down, but I want to wait until after season one ends to make sure I can help the rest of the group get the Fury cover.

I know the forums are a very vocal minority, but I'm curious how many people are feeling the same way.

This is why I wonder why the devs openly admitted they wanted a system where alliance member turnover was high to encourage "competition"
If alliances are about building community to promote player stickiness promoting alliance loyalty would be a much better driving force than assuming non stop competition is the only reason anyone plays the game.

Twysta

It wouldn't be the first time the devs have given out mixed messages.
But from what I understand they're currently more interested in increasing ARPDAU currently than player stickiness.

As I understand the majority of spenders come from new players in their first couple of weeks of playing. Although in my personal opinion trying to build a game based on that would be somewhat... uhm... how do I put this lightly... stupid?
I don't think the devs are that short sighted for it to come to that though.
The most entertaining part of the game though is probably from the perspective of a low-mid level player as they start to develop their roster and being to start competing. At least it was for me, I'm not sure how that works now with PvE scaling however.

But anyways I digress.
I think maybe in public alliances where people may come and go and maybe not be so communicative or disappear for periods at a time then kicking that person to bring in someone better to improve your team would be understandable, but I wouldn't really condone doing it if they're active within it and they're just getting the boot because they can't get a high score because their roster isn't developed yet or end times are affecting that players score.
No one wants to be kicked, it would be a pretty demoralizing thing especially for all the people who say they can't find a decent alliance.

You would think that the object of create a unity of people is for that group of people to help each other improve and progressively build up their rosters and scores as a "team".
I find a lot of people will stay in a game longer if they have a group of friends who they play or have a bond with. Surely replacing people at any opportune moment would disrupt that?
Sometimes I think even the devs aren't sure what they really want to be happening in the game.

wade66

Cryptobrancus wrote:

j12601 wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

People who are loyal to their alliance are loyal to the game. As much grumbling about the state of the game is going on right now, if I were in an alliance that decided they no longer needed me and kicked me to the curb for any reason, I would find that an excellent excuse to stop playing completely

From reading the forums there seem to be a lot of people who right now are solely still playing because of their alliance. I've been debating stopping or slowing down, but I want to wait until after season one ends to make sure I can help the rest of the group get the Fury cover.

I know the forums are a very vocal minority, but I'm curious how many people are feeling the same way.

This is why I wonder why the devs openly admitted they wanted a system where alliance member turnover was high to encourage "competition"
If alliances are about building community to promote player stickiness promoting alliance loyalty would be a much better driving force than assuming non stop competition is the only reason anyone plays the game.

It could be they want members to split off from the alliances they are in, creating their own. To remain competitive they need to spend HPs expanding their size, and increasing revenue.

Unknown

In the alliance I am in, all we ask for is that someone is active and communicating with us. Active does mean you should be bringing in some points, at least 300 in PVP would be nice. If you have to go on vacation, just communicate with us. If you need to leave for an event, or even longer than that, let us know and we'll try to work something out.

No showing and not communicating is not okay and does not a good alliance member make.

As to the OP, I would set some goals for yourself, look at what the top alliances are doing and see if you can achieve at least half their points and then adjust from there.