The new way they pick rivalries promotes tanking

I have already explained everything in this and neighbour thread. You either. We have already discussed it few times.
I don't see a reason to start it over, seriously

It is okay when people can't accept each others arguments, so I don't care much

 

Lol chill out dude, people are gonna disagree. Both of you have good points, honestly. Keep it friendly.

 

He meant the rewards from the rivalry itself. 1st place is 42k regardless of how many quests you do. The tokens you get from quests themselves are not relevant to his argument.

I say you both have good points because I agree that more quests should mean more from the rivalry, since you beat a more elite guild. And I also agree that in the end, it's better to do more quests regardless.

 

Sorry, man, but I decided to hide your posts. It is not interesting for me to read them, and you can't accept it with honour, like a real man should do

Here is how the forum looks for me now, I like it.

 

Think of it like the League rewards. 1st place for Nightmare is much better than 1st place for Challenger. This is true, despite the fact that you also get more rewards per battle. The same should be true about the rivalries. The rivalry reward should be better in higher level rivalries, despite the fact that you get more rewards from doing more quests.

 

I don't know if this was said because it's 1:50 am and I'm not back reading...
But the fact is if you complete just 3 boards, you get over 60k tokens from the boards alone. If you really wanna be so lazy and do no quests for an easy win, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Fact is working your butt off will earn you more rewards then being lazy. Win or loose.

 

I've seen screenshots in other threads proving that people are doing this anyway. Maybe it's beneficial in lower levels? It's just weird that the rivalry rewards themselves are static.
Personally, I can't take a side in this. The only reason I'm here responding is because I understand the logic that both parties are giving and I'm trying to get everyone to be on the same page since there's a ridiculous amount of disagreement.
Yes, you still get more rewards for playing more, regardless of what place you get in the rivalry.
Yes, it's weird that the prize is 42k no matter how many quests you've done.

 

I honestly don't care about those mini guilds ranked 30,000 doing one quest Lol.
Just do your best and let the lazy fools do their thing...
My guild, (The Southern Stars) hasn't had a problem. This rivalry is very close, all 6 of us. And so was the one before. (We're ranked 44 global)

Although for each board completed, 5-10k tokens should be added to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd end of rivalry reward.

 

Funny how nobody really sees the big picture. Which is this:

THIS UPDATE IS A ROVIO MONEY GRAB.

The rivalries are now based on what guilds spend the most money. By infusing more competition each week, they are encouraging all of the guilds that spend money to spend MORE money for the sake of competition.

I, for one, have cancelled my subscription because of this.

In NO way is this new rivalry system “fair”. When you have a guild ranked top 25 against a guild ranked 400, there is a HUGE disadvantage to the 400 guild. Higher infamy means better gear. Better gear makes it easier to complete the guild quests. Period. You can not argue this. It is fact.

We’re not talking about 3000 infamy vs 2500 infamy. We’re talking about 4500 infamy vs 1500 infamy. THIS is your current matching system. And it is terrible.

Rovio does not care about “fair”. They only care about filling their wallets.

Thanks for ruining the best part of this game, Rovio. I hope your money grab goes well. I, for one, will not be a part of it.

Subscription - CANCELLED.

 

Hence, why I'm not picking a side. I don't care about winning the rivalry, I'm plenty satisfied with the quest rewards alone lol.

 

How do you get 42K prize without completing quests? First one to complete 0 quest?

 

Not 0, as many as they want. Inactive guilds are matched with other inactive guilds, so if you complete at least one quest you're guaranteed 42k tokens no matter what. Then they tank the next one and repeat. I assume this is only happening in lower levels, where 42k is a significant amount of their total tokens recieved during a rivalry. I doubt it's worth it, though.

 

So Guild A does 48x the work, but only 3x the rewards? Is that what you call fair? Let me guess—your guild hasn’t been very competitive.

I like everything about the new update, except the matchmaking. It’s like putting a featherweight boxer against heavyweights just because the lighter boxer has been successful. It’s not done because it’s not a fair fight. Guilds should be matched based on potential, not on results. If infamy-dropping is a problem, then fix that problem. Don’t break an aspect that was working.

 

The sad thing is that many overachieving guilds (i.e. guilds that were more inclined to spend money) will be turned off by this change and will stop spending. It’s not worth spending even more if you’re only going to be matched with guilds with even bigger, stronger players the next week. Even competitive players have a breaking point.

I love this game and I don’t mind Rovio trying to profit, but I think this is going to ostracize many of their biggest spenders. I’m not a big spender, but I will concede that big spenders are more important if we want the game to continue to improve (as it has).

 

I still don't understand why infamy needs to be a part of it when the contest measures quests completed and nothing else. Literally, nothing, else.

If you want infamy, it sounds like you want it used as a backstop for a more fair rivalry. In that you must believe that the current system incentivizes guild tanking to get to easier rivalries... which it does. It's not a huge incentive because the quests normally pay better than the wins, but because the effort required to complete more quests is exponential while the reward remains flat, it's a deterrent to trying harder every week.

 

Yes, I want infamy as a backstop to a more fair matchup.
But no, I do not believe that guild-tanking is incentivized in any meaningful way. Most players I know in competitive guilds want to win battles so that their contributions count. If anything, their infamy is already naturally lower because they are encouraged to use weapons that they normally wouldn’t and therefore lose more often than normal. My guild is ranked around 200-ish...maybe guild tanking is an issue at other levels but it’s not something we experience. Plus, if you tank infamy too low, the dreaded penalty zone will set you straight soon enough.

And the increased effort of completing harder quests is felt by all rivals, so it’s fair. Part of the thrill of competition is finishing first that week...it’s not all about the tokens.

Rivalry groupings should be based on potential, not outcomes. It’s like student population sizes in high school sports divisions, or age brackets in races, or weight classes in boxing. Don’t penalize guilds that overachieve! Infamy might be flawed, but it’s a more fair indicator of potential or opportunity.