Some congratulations are in order!

Gunmix25Gunmix25 Posts: 1,079 Chairperson of the Boards

To these guys/gals

A truly sincere congratulations on winning the Immortal Sun mythic card.

Seriously, I mean it.

**this is not sarcasm directed at these coalitions. It is of no fault of any of these players for their hard work at maintaining their top spot but to point out the poor design of an event that already pre-selected the winners to receive a prize that alienates the hard work of thousands who are not in a position to even compete.***


«13

Comments

  • Gotcha617Gotcha617 Age Unconfirmed Posts: 88 Match Maker
    Thanks I’m looking forward to using it
  • ThuranThuran Posts: 454 Mover and Shaker
    So,why arent you there? ;) we dont do anything special, anyone can do it.
  • MachineMachine Posts: 395 Mover and Shaker

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

  • IM_CARLOSIM_CARLOS Posts: 586 Critical Contributor
    You are right. I can do, but my company can't or will. I only skip the 2 points from '20 or  less' battle until now. So we have 288 points total, 208 done with almost N3 cycling  alone.

    Coalition events sucks. Coalition in this form sucks.
  • Gotcha617Gotcha617 Age Unconfirmed Posts: 88 Match Maker
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
  • bken1234bken1234 GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 2,482 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2018
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
  • madwrenmadwren Posts: 1,822 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2018
    Bil said:
     
        What kind of teammate would drop his team in the middle of a game because the oponent has better chances to earn the cup ...? 


    Honestly, in most sports, players frequently leave noncompetitive teams (via free agency) to join teams with a chance of winning a championship.

    I dislike the exclusive nature of the reward, as I've stated, but what you're discussing is a different animal altogether.
  • babar3355babar3355 Posts: 1,128 Chairperson of the Boards
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    I I'm torn on this one. You can't beat top bosses in most multiplayer games without a full team of fully participating members. However, there seems to be a barrier to entry in this game that leads to the same teams dominating every event.

    Even being part of the top team, I understand that a lack of mobility is bad for the games health.

    It is almost like they tried to fix this problem by removing incentives, driving away top players, Etc. Now, They're bringing back some excitement but at the same challenge to deal with.

    I appreciate the OPs comments and actually agree with his stance. However, I still think that the way to make this game broadly fair is to make the cards much more easily collectible by the masses. It's one thing if you you don't have 20 players participating, it's another if they can't actually meet the objectives regardless of how well they play.
  • LarsLars Posts: 33 Just Dropped In
    Well, look, after the teams at the top have won The Immortal Sun this time around, they'll be swapping other players into their rosters the next time the event is running so they can win it too, so I'd apply for one of those spots if I was you.
  • ZW2007-ZW2007- Posts: 805 Critical Contributor
    edited March 2018
    bken1234 said:
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
    But there's the rub, he knows how the rewards work and has the ability to reap the benefits but chooses not to. I'm not saying I wholly disagree with Machine but you can't say it is utterly bad design. The entire purpose of coalitions is to bring people together to play the game. They want us playing the game. Being in coalitions and making friends with other people playing the game makes us more likely to continue playing the game. If there is little to no incentive (i.e. meaningless coalition rewards) for being in a coalition besides the people in the coalition, why would people join coalitions in the first place? A circle has no beginning...or something like that. The reward structure may not be ideal but it is a necessary evil.
  • KinesiaKinesia Posts: 1,548 Chairperson of the Boards
    ZW2007- said:
    bken1234 said:
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
    But there's the rub, he knows how the rewards work and has the ability to reap the benefits but chooses not to. I'm not saying I wholly disagree with Machine but you can't say it is utterly bad design. The entire purpose of coalitions is to bring people together to play the game. They want us playing the game. Being in coalitions and making friends with other people playing the game makes us more likely to continue playing the game. If there is little to no incentive (i.e. meaningless coalition rewards) for being in a coalition besides the people in the coalition, why would people join coalitions in the first place? A circle has no beginning...or something like that. The reward structure may not be ideal but it is a necessary evil.

    It _is_ bad design, because the design needs to take the entire playerbase into account, not just the top. There are coalitions at EVERY level, there are "just bronze" coalitions, coalitions exist for company, not to win. This is not meant to be e-sports and I hope it never heads that way.
    The prize structure does have to motivate the people at the top but ALSO EVERYONE ELSE. If everyone else goes away then the top people don't have a mountain to be on top of anymore and the company dies too.

    The design needs to make (almost) everyone happy. So this _is_ a bad design because it does not meet the companies purpose of keeping _most_ people playing.
  • bken1234bken1234 GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 2,482 Chairperson of the Boards
    Lars said:
    Well, look, after the teams at the top have won The Immortal Sun this time around, they'll be swapping other players into their rosters the next time the event is running so they can win it too, so I'd apply for one of those spots if I was you.
    This doesn't exactly help leaders who are stuck, does it?
  • ZW2007-ZW2007- Posts: 805 Critical Contributor
    edited March 2018
    Kinesia said:
    ZW2007- said:
    bken1234 said:
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
    But there's the rub, he knows how the rewards work and has the ability to reap the benefits but chooses not to. I'm not saying I wholly disagree with Machine but you can't say it is utterly bad design. The entire purpose of coalitions is to bring people together to play the game. They want us playing the game. Being in coalitions and making friends with other people playing the game makes us more likely to continue playing the game. If there is little to no incentive (i.e. meaningless coalition rewards) for being in a coalition besides the people in the coalition, why would people join coalitions in the first place? A circle has no beginning...or something like that. The reward structure may not be ideal but it is a necessary evil.

    It _is_ bad design, because the design needs to take the entire playerbase into account, not just the top. There are coalitions at EVERY level, there are "just bronze" coalitions, coalitions exist for company, not to win. This is not meant to be e-sports and I hope it never heads that way.
    The prize structure does have to motivate the people at the top but ALSO EVERYONE ELSE. If everyone else goes away then the top people don't have a mountain to be on top of anymore and the company dies too.

    The design needs to make (almost) everyone happy. So this _is_ a bad design because it does not meet the companies purpose of keeping _most_ people playing.
    If "just bronze" coalitions exist for company and not to win (which would also mean they don't care about the prizes) then it doesn't matter what the awards are and the system is just dandy for them. I'm not sure what kind of prize structure would make everyone happy. There is no good way to balance it. If everyone got participation trophies...err good rewards just for playing, then everyone could avoid spending real money which leads to that whole company dying thing you mentioned. If no one got good rewards, the game kind of wouldn't be worth playing and the company dies... Sure, there could probably be slightly better balance with the structuring but a 500th rank coalition should not get close to the rewards a 100th rank coalition gets, and the 100th ranked team shouldn't get what the top 10 get.
  • KinesiaKinesia Posts: 1,548 Chairperson of the Boards
    ZW2007- said:
    Kinesia said:
    ZW2007- said:
    bken1234 said:
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
    But there's the rub, he knows how the rewards work and has the ability to reap the benefits but chooses not to. I'm not saying I wholly disagree with Machine but you can't say it is utterly bad design. The entire purpose of coalitions is to bring people together to play the game. They want us playing the game. Being in coalitions and making friends with other people playing the game makes us more likely to continue playing the game. If there is little to no incentive (i.e. meaningless coalition rewards) for being in a coalition besides the people in the coalition, why would people join coalitions in the first place? A circle has no beginning...or something like that. The reward structure may not be ideal but it is a necessary evil.

    It _is_ bad design, because the design needs to take the entire playerbase into account, not just the top. There are coalitions at EVERY level, there are "just bronze" coalitions, coalitions exist for company, not to win. This is not meant to be e-sports and I hope it never heads that way.
    The prize structure does have to motivate the people at the top but ALSO EVERYONE ELSE. If everyone else goes away then the top people don't have a mountain to be on top of anymore and the company dies too.

    The design needs to make (almost) everyone happy. So this _is_ a bad design because it does not meet the companies purpose of keeping _most_ people playing.
    If "just bronze" coalitions exist for company and not to win (which would also mean they don't care about the prizes) then it doesn't matter what the awards are and the system is just dandy for them. I'm not sure what kind of prize structure would make everyone happy. There is no good way to balance it. If everyone got participation trophies...err good rewards just for playing, then everyone could avoid spending real money which leads to that whole company dying thing you mentioned. If no one got good rewards, the game kind of wouldn't be worth playing and the company dies... Sure, there could probably be slightly better balance with the structuring but a 500th rank coalition should not get close to the rewards a 100th rank coalition gets, and the 100th ranked team shouldn't get what the top 10 get.


    There are already tiered rewards. People do expect that and while they might want better than they get they cope. The introduction of things they _can't_ realistically get, that causes unnecessary pain though. That doesn't need to exist. The top teams getting a pack and crystals and a kiss from an angel, that's all fine because you can _technically_ get in your pack you earn over a month what they get in their pack that they get every event. It's lopsided but it doesn't feel as bad at all. But a mythic that they are _definitely_ getting you _definitely_ aren't, not even after a month, not even a chance, the emotions involved in that aren't good.

    But in terms of prizes... Maybe the whole system is backwards? Maybe the _coalition_ should have progression rewards and the individuals should only get "placing" prizes.
  • MarvaddinMarvaddin Posts: 129 Tile Toppler
    Bah! No one is forcing anyone to nothing.

    You don't need to get in a T10 coalition. You can build your own strong enough to challenge them. Maybe you need more attention to recruit people, too. I currently play for a group of like 200 players, and some of top 10 coalitions are from this group. It was my 1st xp, after months playing solo. I was never tempted to create my own coalition. But, if you like leading, improve your recruiting skills, I would say.

    That said, yes, the reward system could use some changes.


  • Mburn7Mburn7 Posts: 2,655 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2018
    I don't like how many comments here seem to be painting top coalitions in a bad light.  As someone who has been in 2 different ones over the years (I was an OG member of Deadapult and am now a usual member of Extinction), I've seen the work that goes into staying at the top.  There is a ton of turnover within the coalition due to players not being able to score for whatever reason, game or personal.  But we accept new players all the time, and I have seen people say they doubled or tripled their score for an event in one weekend thanks to the coalition's help.  I've seen people who joined having never posted a score higher than a 400 on ROTGP get a perfect score 2 weeks later.  Top coalitions put in a lot of work to get where they are, and they absolutely deserve to be rewarded appropriately.  If your coalition is low in the leaderboards, recruit better people and work on your deckbuilding.  It doesn't take a ton of mythics to do well, just a good use of the stuff you have.  Our B team coalition, which is where all the noobs and lower scorers go is still consistently top 50, despite usually having less that a full 20 members and being made up of mostly newer players.  Good rewards are definitely possible with some work.

    I should note I am saying this as someone who IS NOT getting the Immortal Sun this weekend (I got booted for not having Lily 3 for ToS and there weren't any slots open to switch back in for this event).  I will just wait until I can get it another time, whether its in a pack or a future event.  Its just a game, I can wait.  And you all can too.
  • Gotcha617Gotcha617 Age Unconfirmed Posts: 88 Match Maker
    bken1234 said:
    Gotcha617 said:
    Machine said:

    Fully agree with OP.

    @Thuran: Indeed it isn't, except for one thing. You need 20 people with the same scoring power. If you only have a few in a non top 10 coalition, you are automatically shut out from this reward. Utterly bad design.

    In fairness a lot of the players in a top ten started in a coalition just as you describe. Myself included. What I did was put a request on the forum and work my way up. Not extremely tough. Not saying the award structures are completely fair. However if anyone doesn’t want to put in the work to move up then it’s more on them oppose to a bad award structure. If you want something work for it...if you don’t to be Jell-o
    Actually, @Machine is one of the top 5 scorers out of the 340 players in ThePower9. He puts in the work week after week and leads a top 25 coalition so well there is hardly any turnover. As a leader, he probably puts more work in than 95% of top 10 players.

    It’s not cool to make assumptions about people. 
    Pretty sure that was just a generally statement. 
This discussion has been closed.