The Alliance Tower poll

The most expensive building in the game to upgrade is the alliance tower. The only value gained from this upgrade is that the amount of gold that can be donated is increased. 

Do you want other perks to be added when the alliance tower is upgraded?

I wonder why you want something in return in favor for the player when you upgrade the alliance tower to a higher level. Alliance tower has to do with alliance as the name already suggests.

You upgrade the tower to help your team, nothing more nothing less. Doing so or not shows whether you are a team player in some way or not. Doing your daily donations on time even shows it more and donations under 50k don’t really help most teams at all. By having a team with higher level (100k+) donators the team already benefits. With the shared gold you can activate boosts, get more members, win more wars, climb the leaderboard more fast and so on. The more gold your team gets every day, the quicker you can upgrade the Alliance, the more boosts you can preserve and so on.

When you have a very low donation, you can forget to join most teams, no matter how good you are as a player. So you benefit from having higher donations already more than you think.

So for me the question stands why you want even more for what you already get? You benefit already enough from it. Upgrading to the new maxes is up to everyone individually, I will not do it and also not demand it of my members.

That is why we call Genie and Master/. our “HOME” :wink:

"When you have a very low donation, you can forget to join most teams, no matter how good you are as a player. So you benefit from having higher donations already more than you think. "

I myself find this statement only to be true for the top 100 alliances.  In alliance level 101-200 you can easily join in most teams with a 150k donation as long as your trophies are high enough. This suggest that a players value in the alliance are effected directly by the amount of sculls that can be won in a war. 

The main reasons for this request are the following:

  1. It takes a lot of social motivation get everyone in the team to upgrade their alliance towers. 

  2. I find it difficult to motivate to some players the need to upgrade their alliance tower - they just do not see the value and would rather donate gems.

  3. If you are a leader or a general - you tend to see the value of a higher alliance level and will do the upgrade. If you are a soldier - there is little value - except when you are threatened to be kicked if you do not upgrade.

  4. It is very true that with a higher donation level a player can easily join better teams. I have done this. The problem with this is that I need to leave my current team (where I know everyone and understand the rules)  in order to join a better team. Why not stay with my group and grow with them? O yes, in order to grow everyone needs to upgrade.  

  5. " You upgrade the tower to help your team, nothing more nothing less. Doing so or not shows whether you are a team player in some way or not."  This statement I have found to be true up to the time I have upgraded my Alliance tower too much. Now I have a social obligation to donate - because I am a team player. I can not choose to donate less at a time. So at some point the reverse start to happen - I choose not to donate - this results in me showing that I am not a team player - resulting in me regretting that I ever was so team orientated in the past to do this bad thing of upgrading my alliance tower.  (I wish there was a way to downgrade and get my gems back) 

  6. All of the above frustrations will be addressed if there is a little bit more personal value to the alliance tower upgrade

So to summarise - this proposal is to try and remove a bit of the social tension in the game.   

I don’t wanna say that i totally dislike this idea but i find it kinda “useful” in a way…

It’s true that collect those many gems is very hard and very deafening, but i would give a different kind of improvement and not more leadership or more health or the other things you listed in the poll. I mean if spend 8k gems for alliance tower lvl 13 and i get in return 1k health is a taking in the a**…Made myself clear?  :wink:

So i’d prefer something more original or if there are some improvements upgrading the alliance tower, they must worth the cost. 

I agree with oPelle, something else would be ok. And skulls would be the worst idea ever, top alliances would start making their members to upgrade their tower to max asap just for getting more skulls at wars, and we already know they have tough enough wars.

oPelle and Karman are absolutely right. Maybe Flare should create milestones on donations and give a reward when you reach a milestone. 

For example. Every 10M in total that you donate to your alliance, you get a gem chest as reward. This certainly stimulates players to upgrade their alliance towers. Define 5 milestones and give a gem chest as reward when reaching it. For reaching 10M grey gem chest, 20M green gem chest, 30M blue gem chest, 40M purple gem chest, 50M legendary gem chest. Reset the milestones when you reached the last milestone.

The lower your donation, the longer it takes for getting those gem chests.

  

I agree for “Donation Checkpoints” 

+1 for dena’s suggestion :slight_smile:

I like the idea of creating a unique reward for the Alliance tower. Please suggest something if you can think of something original.  :slight_smile:

 

The main motivation for this idea is to promote Alliance tower upgrades with less social tension. I have to agree then that the extra skulls is going to add a lot of extra tension and is therefore not a good idea. The same will go for this “donation checkpoints” suggestion. Although it is a very unique idea, it will promote gem donations to the Alliance rather than Alliance upgrades.  

 

As I said before - some people prefer gem donations (and skip the daily donation and the alliance upgrades). I think in the long run it is better to promote alliance tower upgrades than alliance gem donations.