Tezzeret said: we have been barking up this tree for years.... sadly I'm afraid we are just gonna have to live with what we got
Mepistopheles said: @jtwood that is a great idea! something like a weekly basis league that lets say has 8-10 levels and you can climb higher or drop lower each week.and if you encounter someone from higher tier you get something extra like more exp points or so.
Mepistopheles said: I lost one side quest in last coalition event and finished on 688th place. This is ridiculous since 687 players had perfect score and ended on first place, but you miss one objective and the whole effort goes to nothing. If this many players get all the points then how many players participate? isn't it time to get new tiers? No, it is three years too late already, but maybe the devs need to hear it more often to do something about it. I believe that I'm not the only one who wants this change and I'm well aware of the amount of work the devs need to get it done and functional, so for the start maybe changing the system to different type of pricing would be sufficient for the events.The other thing is that a lot of people just want to stay in the gold league since all the dinosaurs and grinders are in platinum playing insane combos they couldn't even dream about because they don't have the card pool.Please do something to divide the game better after five years.
Gunmix25 said: Mepistopheles said: I lost one side quest in last coalition event and finished on 688th place. This is ridiculous since 687 players had perfect score and ended on first place, but you miss one objective and the whole effort goes to nothing. If this many players get all the points then how many players participate? isn't it time to get new tiers? No, it is three years too late already, but maybe the devs need to hear it more often to do something about it. I believe that I'm not the only one who wants this change and I'm well aware of the amount of work the devs need to get it done and functional, so for the start maybe changing the system to different type of pricing would be sufficient for the events.The other thing is that a lot of people just want to stay in the gold league since all the dinosaurs and grinders are in platinum playing insane combos they couldn't even dream about because they don't have the card pool.Please do something to divide the game better after five years. Having played other apps, many use a 200 player bracket of players within your own skill level. Prizes are often gapped up to 50th place. after that you basically get mostly some mediocre reward for your efforts. This means that competition can be fierce and rewarding at the same time. The events we have should be set up this way imho. Having more players garner like rewards isn't going to sap the money flow for buying packs or exclusives, in fact they would be more inclined to do so in hopes to gain an edge (if any) in that 200 player bracket for the rewards in the top 50, especially the top 10.
jtwood said: Gunmix25 said: Mepistopheles said: I lost one side quest in last coalition event and finished on 688th place. This is ridiculous since 687 players had perfect score and ended on first place, but you miss one objective and the whole effort goes to nothing. If this many players get all the points then how many players participate? isn't it time to get new tiers? No, it is three years too late already, but maybe the devs need to hear it more often to do something about it. I believe that I'm not the only one who wants this change and I'm well aware of the amount of work the devs need to get it done and functional, so for the start maybe changing the system to different type of pricing would be sufficient for the events.The other thing is that a lot of people just want to stay in the gold league since all the dinosaurs and grinders are in platinum playing insane combos they couldn't even dream about because they don't have the card pool.Please do something to divide the game better after five years. Having played other apps, many use a 200 player bracket of players within your own skill level. Prizes are often gapped up to 50th place. after that you basically get mostly some mediocre reward for your efforts. This means that competition can be fierce and rewarding at the same time. The events we have should be set up this way imho. Having more players garner like rewards isn't going to sap the money flow for buying packs or exclusives, in fact they would be more inclined to do so in hopes to gain an edge (if any) in that 200 player bracket for the rewards in the top 50, especially the top 10. It's called Challenge of the Courts. It's great. It could be the best event. But the node charges are one billion percent screwed up, and there's not even a hint that anyone will acknowledge the issue; let alone fix it. So it's still a mediocre event.
Gunmix25 said: Its called coalition events numbering the 3000 per bracket. if numbered in the 200 instead the insane sizes that they are, they could be the best events but there's not even a hint that anyone will acknowledge the issue: let alone fix it. so we get to participate in a ridiculously unforgiving event causing players to simply quit once progression rewards are reached, if they are even worth chasing.
Mepistopheles said:I was playing almost from beginning with few pauses, but it has never been so bad as it is now.
Gunmix25 said: Mepistopheles said:I was playing almost from beginning with few pauses, but it has never been so bad as it is now. Sorry, but it was far worse awhile back and for the most part, Oktagon has done a decent job not repeating Hibernium's mistake. Cycling was an absolute nightmare. Perfect scores were the norm for events and was not unusual. There was only two rewards back then. 1st place and whatever was last. So many players were able to lock in 1st place using cycling. Once that was nerfed.The scoring as it is now has been substantially better. But... those 3000 brackets are and have always been horribly plagued by high numbers of 1st placers.