Alliance events vs traditional pve

Mikbro81

Ive seen it mentioned before,  but late event mercing is getting out of control. The fight for top 10 alliance ranking and top 100 for new releases is getting tougher every event. Last new release we had no fewer than 4 members approached about leaving for top 10 (none did)  at the expense of the alliance they call home. Im not opposed to switching alliances,  I just feel like you should be locked into the alliance you're in when you join an event.  Just like alliance events are

ursopro

I mean, if none of them left, why is an issue then? if anything they proved their loyalty to your alliance by forfeiting better rewards in order to help "home"

HoundofShadow

This occurrence is similar to headhunting. There's nothing wrong with it. On the bright side, it's a test of loyalty and every trials and tribulations overcame only serve to strengthen your alliance and your confidence in them. 

JHawkInc

You'll change your mind real fast the first time a 4-day event starts and someone's phone breaks or they come down with the flu and suddenly 20 people lose placement rewards because they're all locked into the event together. Life happens, and the current system lets you change people out to adjust. It's not perfect, but it works.

And just personal experience, but I've been managing a t100 alliance for years (as part of a group with several other such alliances), and it's definitely not getting worse. It's not even remotely close to the worst it's ever been. t10 is a little crazy, but it's always been that way, because that's how hyper competitive players get. Eventually some of them will burn out or get tired of the work and it'll die back down again. Happens over and over again. Has for years.

It's not perfect, but it's not near as bad as you think it is, either.

itsuka7

If you think players might be tempted to merc to a t10, you can tell them there are some sobering bad experiences that suggest caution. A guy in our alliance told us how he had a great score, was accepted  and then was thrown out a few min before closing to be replaced by someone with an even higher score. Not saying all t10 are like that, but that is not a risk a normal player would want to take in a new char event.

ursopro

itsuka7 said:

If you think players might be tempted to merc to a t10, you can tell them there are some sobering bad experiences that suggest caution. A guy in our alliance told us how he had a great score, was accepted  and then was thrown out a few min before closing to be replaced by someone with an even higher score. Not saying all t10 are like that, but that is not a risk a normal player would want to take in a new char event.

Which alliance? GIVE US THE JUICY DETAILS!!!

Mikbro81

I think you guys are missing my point.  Im saying to lock in before hand and let the chips fall where they may.  I personally don't really care if people come or go. It's more the annoyance of it. 

 In order to be a top 10 alliance, you need 20 people playing scl9 optimally for every event.  I'm not interested because none of the time slices work for me. However,  if people were locked in when they started an event,  maybe more alliances would have a chance to get that LT. Now it goes only to the people who are willing to shuffle around at the last minute

JHawkInc

So you're just being spiteful because you don't like how people work to gain a competitive edge?

Your solution isn't going to change top 10. It's just going to change what those people have to do to be competitive. The same number of alliances are going to have the chance for the LT no matter what. You say the LT only goes to people willing to shuffle around last minute, and if you lock people into events, that LT is only going to go to people willing to perform consistently every event to prove themselves to get invited into the alliances trying to establish themselves as top 10. The competitive people will get the LT no matter what.

And further, your solution would screw over everyone who finds themselves with an absent player that can't replace them with someone who has a better score (which is what I said in my initial post).

itsuka7

ursopro said:

itsuka7 said:

If you think players might be tempted to merc to a t10, you can tell them there are some sobering bad experiences that suggest caution. A guy in our alliance told us how he had a great score, was accepted  and then was thrown out a few min before closing to be replaced by someone with an even higher score. Not saying all t10 are like that, but that is not a risk a normal player would want to take in a new char event.

Which alliance? GIVE US THE JUICY DETAILS!!!

The player was a semi retired top player, he gave us that tale, but did not mention names. It might not even have been a recent experience, that alliance may no longer exist or under different cmd by now. He just warned us when during the last new char event a few of our top scorers were approached, which was shared on chat. As cmd of an nce t50 I was inclined to say no from an alliance perspective, but said I might be cooperating incidentally if players were very keen on trying that and it would not affect our ranking category. After the cautionary tale, nobody wanted to try, and my willingness to facilitate vanished likewise.

PS I am also against locking on normal pve, because while we do not swap continually, my players occasionally have RL problems mid event. In a boss event, other players can compensate the alliance score if necessary, in a pve, that is not possible.

Tony_Foot

I’d also like to see lock in like boss events once it starts. Works well for boss events and if you want to merc just don’t join an alliance. I don’t move regardless of points but the alliance I play with has benefitted from taking them, but still I’m happy for it to be where you start is where you end.

Mikbro81

Nope.  Not being spiteful at all.  Im happy to not try for top 10. Lol. Top 100 alliance is fine by me.  And real life things do happen, a lot. Im not trying to suggest taking things from anybody. Only to suggest if you're willing to move members for placement,  they should do it ahead of time.  

JHawkInc

You don't care about the rewards, but all the same feel the need to change how everyone else earns them, which won't realistically change who earns them, but will make life more difficult for literally everyone else who plays the game.

You haven't provided a reason this is a good change, the only thing this change seems to do is fulfill your need to make things worse for other people. That's spite.

Mikbro81

We can disagree all day.  Im certainly not spiteful lol. It's not about making it worse for anybody.  If anything it incentivizes people to stay in their alliances and perform the way they are supposed to. We carry our members all the time when life gets in the way.  

Anyway,  I don't think you need to worry.  It's not like it (or anything else) is going to be changed anytime soon

killahKlown

Mikbro81 said:

We can disagree all day.  Im certainly not spiteful lol. It's not about making it worse for anybody.  If anything it incentivizes people to stay in their alliances and perform the way they are supposed to. We carry our members all the time when life gets in the way.  

Anyway,  I don't think you need to worry.  It's not like it (or anything else) is going to be changed anytime soon

If you're perfectly happy in a top 100 alliance, then why so eager to change something that will make things more difficult for a different player type but have zero affect on you?  JHawk is correct, seems spiteful.  Just stay in your lane and stop worrying about the rest of us.

Mikbro81

Never mind. I thought this was a place to discuss thoughts and ideas.  

Mayo

Mikbro81 said:

Never mind. I thought this was a place to discuss thoughts and ideas.  

Seems some players take this game as a job and are intolerant to any questioning of their virtual status quo. This game will sooner or later end and the time and effort invested will not return. Family, health and having fun comes always first. 

JHawkInc

Mayo said:

Mikbro81 said:

Never mind. I thought this was a place to discuss thoughts and ideas.  

Seems some players take this game as a job and are intolerant to any questioning of their virtual status quo. This game will sooner or later end and the time and effort invested will not return. Family, health and having fun comes always first. 

On the contrary. I'm a commander for a t100 alliance, and get to deal with this mercing business every event. That's twice a week for several years now. I would love for it to change, and not be an issue.

But I object to actively making it worse.

I would love for alliance rewards to bet given out based on the work my team of players puts into the event, and not so much on the administrative nonsense I do during the last several hours.

I would love for normal events to be more like alliance events, too. Except instead of copying the tinykitty "lock people in" part, I would swap alliance placement for alliance progression (the round rewards).

Mikbro81 said:

Never mind. I thought this was a place to discuss thoughts and ideas.  

It is. You're the one that has failed to live up to this criteria. The rest of us tried to discuss the problems with your idea, so we could compare and contrast that with the current setup. You then told us you didn't care, and we were left without anything to discuss, except for how you were starting the discussion in bad faith.

If you want to discuss how to improve the PVE mercing situation, I'm sure plenty of people have ideas (see, I have one right up a few paragraphs in this very post).

But if you all you want to do is make the game more difficult for everyone solely for the detriment of a smaller group, people are (rightly) going to tell you to shove off. We had a discussion, and decided your motives and idea weren't worth discussing further, because you refused to engage that discussion outside of your spiteful point of view.

DyingLegend

I'm not a fan of alliance events.

The level of enemies that i have to fight isn't worth the effort for the reward. 

pheregas

DyingLegend said:

I'm not a fan of alliance events.

The level of enemies that i have to fight isn't worth the effort for the reward. 

With good communication, you can clear most events within 24-32 hours.  Enemy levels stay pretty low.

Taganov

pheregas said:

DyingLegend said:

I'm not a fan of alliance events.

The level of enemies that i have to fight isn't worth the effort for the reward. 

With good communication, you can clear most events within 24-32 hours.  Enemy levels stay pretty low.

100% this; there's something for every roster level. Round 7 and 8 are stretch goals for 3* rosters though.

grunth13

I'm all for locking alliances at start of event. Currently there is only 1 top 10 pve alliance.   We all know that.   There are 6 alliances working together to make 6 top 10 alliances and then there are another 8 alliances to make 3 more top 10 alliances.  That's right...8 to make 3.  That's just asinine.  Im all for locking them in.  There's no point of alliances if you can just fill up your alliances for the last 15 minutes of an event.  That's not an alliance.