Idea for avoiding more burnout

Unknown
Unknown
edited May 2014 in MPQ General Discussion
So no idea why the other topic was locked. Just because a few individuals were getting aggressive you completely shut down a productive conversation instead of giving attention to the individuals?

Poor job on your end mr mod.

So back to the actual conversation, which has been one of the only worthwhile ones in forever (still dwelling on it being blocked. Blah) it seems every1 realized these 2 things:


Reward has remained same
Effort has increased

Every1 seems to be arguing the effort is too much.
I guess I'm the only 1 who doesn't mind the effort I just want the extra reward to match the extra effort.

I figure if they do 3 season pvp. 1 non season pvp. 3 season pvp. 1 non. 3 season. 1 non.
They could do the non season through the week when most people are working, devs included. Let the season pvp run when there's more free time. Gives every1 a bit of a break. In theory also gives mid lvl players a chance to rise to the top for a bit and help their progression.

Seems like a solid idea from Clintman. I personally would like to see the discussion continue, in a civil manner of course.

What are the benefits of this system vs changing reward structures? Perhaps there are other solutions like making seasons for individuals. Maybe even not bracketed. Alliances still get rewards for each individual event. But then the 1 month long season is for those who really wanna go all out. Would be a much better show of skill than the elite tourney. What individual player can consistently be the best without having to drag your whole alliance Into every grueling fight.

Comments

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    It could have been locked at the OP's request. I don't know if that is the case. It also was heading under the category of "the game isn't fun anymore"
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Bugpop wrote:
    It could have been locked at the OP's request. I don't know if that is the case. It also was heading under the category of "the game isn't fun anymore"

    I just know I was all into the convo then all of a sudden I couldn't talk anymore. Lol
  • Nonce Equitaur 2
    Nonce Equitaur 2 Posts: 2,269 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm letting the OP decide what to do with it. It will probably reopen.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Nonce Equitaur 2 wrote:
    I'm letting the OP decide what to do with it. It will probably reopen.

    Awesome thanks. I thought you closed it over the lil fight at the end. Good intentions. Bad follow through. Hehe. All good though. If that 1 reopened just lock this 1
  • Nonce Equitaur 2
    Nonce Equitaur 2 Posts: 2,269 Chairperson of the Boards
    I'm pondering a rule that when the first post of a thread goes green, that person owns the thread. Doesn't happen very often. So, for example, Polarity owns Polarity's Comprehensive Guide on Going From 1* to 3*.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Nonce Equitaur 2 wrote:
    I'm pondering a rule that when the first post of a thread goes green, that person owns the thread. Doesn't happen very often. So, for example, Polarity owns Polarity's Comprehensive Guide on Going From 1* to 3*.

    So, 5DV (or any other meta-alliance) gets to own any thread they want? Seems dubious.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    ZenBrillig wrote:
    Nonce Equitaur 2 wrote:
    I'm pondering a rule that when the first post of a thread goes green, that person owns the thread. Doesn't happen very often. So, for example, Polarity owns Polarity's Comprehensive Guide on Going From 1* to 3*.

    So, 5DV (or any other meta-alliance) gets to own any thread they want? Seems dubious.

    Well they would have to start making threads that people want to comment on icon_e_wink.gif I am sure they can create and gain ownership over as many circlejerk threads as they want, but the mods frown upon such abuses generally. Make a thoughtful post that sparks good discussion? What is the harm in letting the OP have some say in where the thread goes?

Categories