Leader incentives

Now I’m sure people have seen the top 10, so they can’t attack each other. They’re all soft. except 1 dude

 

I’m sure flare wanted them in direct competition with each other. I know they have more to come but…we’re going to have this dicussion anyway.

 

They have plenty of gems/pearls, so they will have little desire for these. What they seem to treasure most is trophies. So the leader of the alliance should get a trophy boost 50%  per raid. That should split them up and start a real war. That’s how flare want it, it’s basic game design. You want number 1 and 2 spending heavily against each other putting their gems down into their alliance via bread and stuff.

 

Now there should be ranking with in ones own alliance, names like commander/general/major. etc. These should come with their own benefits like a few gems/pearls per gold donation. It’s a small amount but if your outside the top 100 they will add up and become very useful.

 

On a plus note for the top paying guys, reading between the lines here but they seem to be sticking with Pay for victory model.

 

I lost alot of what I was going to say…it’ll come back to me.

 

Any thoughts…

I totally see where your coming from looking at the top 10 all in one alliance. Im not saying it isn’t fair or anything, if I was top 10 I would ally up too. But…damn. There really is no beating that. Not only will they win hands down with medal count (20 member alliance of top 20 players literally cannot rank under any other 20 member alliance) But they are also the types to spend $$$ for mass donations and open up slots that way too. Good luck Apocalypse, Im rooting for you guys!

 

That being said, there really isn’t anything you can do about it. Telling people that they cant ally with the only players worthy of their alliance is rubbish.

 

Don’t think the trophy boost is a good idea though, people would make their own alliances just for that and throw teamwork out the window. Any boost should be alliance wide. Defiantly need other ranks besidz leader, though that has been suggested many times already.

trust me, trophy boost will work. I’m pretty sure flare are going to do this,  it’s an obvious step,  just uncertain why it hasn’t come with the initial alliance update. Then again, a lot of things didn’t come in the update that I was expecting.

The top 10 players know that with the new gold boost feature more players will now be able to upgrade a lot quicker and rank up faster giving them more competition to keep their ranking positions, so by them staying on the same team they can destroy anyone on the rise who threatens to steal their position while still earning a hefty amount of gold from the boost. 

 

So it is no surprise that i i’m for the separation of the leading players.

 

I do however disagree on the trophy bonus, there has to be another solution, last thing we want is to play more " catch up " just to have them separate when it is clearly a no brainer that equality is not there when the rich are paired with the rich & the poor with the poor.

Even with all the gold lying around, lets say we max all towers/barricades and max spells/troops I still couldn’t get through their base without dropping gems. Now if we flipped the script they could get through my base because of castle guard points which takes a very long time to upgrade unless you spent gems on it.

 

I am all for another solution if people think of one, I’m happy to brainstorm.

So you suggest leader incentives to separate top10 players?

We know, the top players don’t need gold, they need/spend more gems and pearls than any valid incentive would get them, hence that may not work either. Only currencies left then are bread and trophies.

Though, bread can be bought with gems or achieved by watching videos and a little bit extra bread won’t be noticable compared to the amount of raids they do to maintain their ranks.

Trophies then is quite the only thing they’re definitely interested in.

Hmm… one thing that might definitely help making them split up is if the leader of an alliance would get 1 trophy for each successful (100%) raid of his members… but I don’t think this will be appreciated either by top10 players or by “the whole rest” of players.

A trophy boost for their own attacks based on member count/trophies would also have similar effects: Members boost their leader’s ranking.

But before we go on with this, let me ask a question: Shouldn’t you rather think about what you want from alliances rather than thinking what could be done to make each of the top10 want to lead an own alliance?

Also the argument that top10 might unite to defend their position is only partially useful: When all top players unite, they might get into trouble for defending their position due to a lack of opponents worth attacking. And there isn’t that much the top10 can do to delay progress of all other player. Sure they can raid us but they won’t really gain trophies, nor rob us many.

There are structural issues in any game where an elite alliance locks down the top of the leaderboard.  I have seen it play out a number of times.

 

Consider:

 

  • When an alliance becomes an outlier and clusters at the top of the leaderboard, their options for earning trophies are fewer, and those options that do present themselves yield fewer trophies.  As a result, it’s much harder for these players to climb higher - especially since they can’t fight each other (unless they circumvent that restriction by leaving temporarily, etc.) - while the players that are lower than them have it comparatively easy.  
  • This group of players also have to work much harder to maintain rank.  For example: #5 might earn 3 trophies from raiding #20; but #20 - who is probably of similar hero level - will earn 8 from #5.  Given a long enough series of raids, the higher ranked player is at a major disadvantage.  Over time, not all (but many) of these higher ranked players will naturally move lower because they have to work 2-3x harder to stay where they are.  So, this balancing mechanic in the game’s trophy algorithm ensure things remain more competitive than it might seem.
  • Similarly, these Alliances have very few competitors; and they compete among themselves to attack bases that offer an attractive number of trophies (yes, with almost all/all their base features maxed, they have nothing to play for but accumulating gems in tournaments and trophies).  Lower-ranked players have a much greater diversity of bases they can attack that - again - offer more trophies.  

So, there’s a kind of “planned obsolescence” built into the game here.  Sure Apocalypse or the alliance I’m a part of (SK: United Realms) has certain major advantages, but they aren’t insurmountable and over time - left alone - most alliances will change structure and membership because players get bored, have disagreements, want new challenges, decided to strike out on their own, etc.  

 

  • Interestingly, the higher the trophies, the higher the gold boost.  This is funny, because there’s a very, very tight inverse correlation between the number of trophies a player has and their need for gold!  This gold boost is a great attraction for lower level members (which may bring cause a lot of secondary/proxy accounts to join these guilds as they level in order to benefit from the huge boost), but it gives very little benefit to the players in these Alliances, on average.
  • A trophy boost sounds better, but how should it be applied?  It would need to scale with each individual’s trophy level - getting smaller the higher the player is ranked - and so I’m not sure it’s practical at an Alliance level (cool individual perk, though, or idea for a “boost”).  Besides, as we mentioned, RR2’s trophy algorithm is designed to create clustering at the top because those who are almost at the top are of comparable strength to but will always (unless they’re over-grazing certain bases, which screws up the game’s assessment of their strength) get more trophies than the very top-ranked players.  

My intuition tells me that what the game designers are trying to achieve is. the top 10 players (don’t take the numbers literally) acquire their own alliance and they would compete for the next 500 players (50 in each alliance right) These players would possibly be able to give bread/gems to people below them to make them a stronger alliance. As a reward they would they would win the single player leaderboard.

 

(Maybe for the bread they give us, in return they get half the trophies we win and half the gold, we basically become a feeder to the leader rather than them doing hundreds of raids to maintain at the top)

 

It would probably be the top 100 people fighting for the top 5000 to be in their gang.

 

This would allow them to give the top players another task and give free/small paying players a chance to stay involved. Albeit a different leaderboard, rather than get bored when they realise they can’t progress much further.

 

They have hundreds of thousands of players and want more. I get they don’t want to change their business model completely but I see that they are trying to accommodate free players some how, hence alliances but it needs more incentives.

 

I would even everything up and try to get millions of people playing and survive on ad revenue/few transactions rather than small % of premium paying customers

 

I guess we will see soon, I wonder why flare are so secretive on their intentions, I get why tripple A’s do it, but we are such a tiny audience you would think they would keep us in the loop. I’d like to think we contribute quite a bit of useful feedback and suggestions, it’s the least they can do. Plus it gives us stuff to talk about rather than speculation.

 

I’m not trying to split the top 10 players up at all. I’m just making suggestions for better gameplay, I only see trophy boost as a solution up to now.

 

It’s actually hard to become creative when you playing in their narrow parameters.

Isn’t that what alliances are about? Team up to get even stronger?

Well, that’s exactly what happened here!

 

And about “breaking it up”: Good luck with that! :wink:

The SKs are not only players teaming up in an alliance but they’ve know each other for a while and lots of them consider each other friends. Which should be even stronger than some incentive.

 

And btw., when should this requested alliance-destroying stop? Break up one, then the next one will be at the top…

@Weebo … or maybe the top 10 player have become a little bored of just attacking one another night after night, day after day. The trophies they can gain in general come from other top players alone. A, takes 15 trophies from B in three raids, B goes and gets them back again. Its the same players in general playing against each other, most of the time having to use scrolls to get the 98-100% success that they need to actually gain trophies not lose them.

 

Bear in mind that these players can normally get an absolute maximum of 6-7 trophies off another high level opponent, its normally 2-4 though, and that they get attacked and stripped 14 trophies at a time by some lower level players gemming from start to finish, who they in return cannot get any trophies from. Many of these kings have been here since day one, so yes some do have max towers and moral etc, but not all of them. Don’t forget if and when they top out in towers and moral they have nowhere to go, as such lower players coming up will eventually catch them up. 

 

Also bear in mind not all kings want to be #1, its hard work to maintain and you are a sitting target for continual attacks from kings who you cannot get any revenge against in terms of medal trophies and worthwhile gold.

 

The algorithm used by the system will ensure that there is plenty of opportunity for any alliance to do well as it limits the ability of top players to run away with trophy gains as it tapers to 1-2 trophies per win the more successful and higher you get. I have seen it where one particularly strong king could only get 1 trophy from 3 top players the rest gave 0  Don’t forget that we are looking at todays top 10, go back four months and many names have gone missing from the top, this will happen again as new kings come through and old kings head for pastures new.

 

I’d advise you to work on your hero’s strength and your kingdom and not worry about those above you, over time you will be in a position to challenge any king, but bear in mind that nearly all high level kings have to use gems to beat another high level kings base, victory doesn’t come free. 

 

@anonymous, high level kings in general don’t care about gold boosts, they have very little to spend it on, this was discussed in an earlier post, to my knowledge they also don’t in my experience club together to destroy kings coming through the ranks, it is normally the other way around.

To me, it makes no sense that all the top players will gather under once Alliance, since: a. their trophies really suffer since they can’t attack each other, so their raiding pool is reduced to players that give them less trophies per win.

b. gold boost and gold in general is irrelevant to them

I’m sure it’s fun for most of them to be all in one “elite” alliance with familiar players but they have to get out of it at some point, or else the players just below them who aren’t part of their alliance will easily catch up in terms of trophies.

 

Also, I don’t think that a trophy boost for alliances will NOT be a good idea, since it will increase the gap between top players and those below them, by really creating the need for “elite” alliances-which i already explained why for the moment that’s not the case- , that will make extremely hard for people who aren’t part of this alliance(s) to challenge a position on the top ranks.

I think SK’s decision to team up will be the best decision once Flare roll out the events for alliance , who else can win alliance events if not the strongest alliance  Maybe not every time but surely most of the time.In time some of them might leave and form separate alliance but now I think SK doing the right thing although it limit their opponents but hey they can waste time testing each other’s defence 

I won’t talk too much about the effects of teaming at the top because they were covered already in the very detailed post by Sn1kt. I just want to mention that our group of friends was created long before the alliance idea existed, and many of us were way outside top 100 at the time, many way outside top 1000. We created a smal fb group of people with similar interests around 4 months ago and in time we become friends.

The fact that many of us happened to climb the ranks shows that the initial selection was right. Believe it or not, it is very possible to climb in top 10 with no financial investment, or a trivial one (like less than $20 over the life of the game). You just need to play smart (and a lot, if you want to level naturally). Sure, it takes time, but it is certainly possible.

That being said, there are some very strong alliances in there, and in time we will see more. We are approaching a period of maturity in the game when a lot of strong players level 80 and higher are rising trough natural leveling to the top. The next two months will be full of surprises, and the most succesfull alliance will be the one capable to detect and recruit the most promising new players.

I don’t think master e is going to settle for second. I smell a defector :slight_smile:

Take a look: SK has some significant competition.  At least check, there were 10 Alliances with over 70k trophies; and 4 with over 90k.  No one is running away with the #1 position.  Even those who spend big here in the early days and pull ahead will see their lead close as other, more organically-grown Alliances slowly level higher.  In time, the “pay-to-win” advantage will close.  

 

For now, they who spend the most out-of-pocket will prevail in the rankings. A combination of high average trophies + majority of windows/android players (at least until iOS supports $ donations) is the winning recipe for the moment.  

So the clan leaderboard  has changed, no shock there, those that know knew it would and all due respect to the current #1 clan, they are strong and worthy opponents. I don’t see any comments about them though, are they not worthy of a snide remark or two?

 

Weebo you can smell whatever you want, but if I was you I’d get my nose checked, thus far all your ‘intuitive’ guesses throughout this forum have been far from the mark. The game and its dynamic changes dramatically at a higher level, believe it or not some of us actually like, admire and respect one another.

^^ sensitive much :grinning:

 

Oh…and it seems  they are bringing gameplay changes and general awesomeness quite soon. Can’t wait.