Jump to content


What was the point of the Multiplier?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

MrFruffy #1 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 03:59

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 30886 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013

the strong clan in the top positions will always be there. it is the weaker clans that would need the help, so giving a small multiplier to the lesser positions and and huge one to the top is kinda retarded. once you pull and early lead, all you need to do is just keep pace and there is almost no way you can get passed.

 

giving the best players 100's of thousands of gold and then thousands of bonds is a sure way to have the lesser players want to stay in this game.

 

great players are really good, not taking away from them, just giving them advantages like that makes it a very lopsided situation for the rest of the plebs. not saying give bonus to the lesser, just dont give any bonuses and have a closer campaign result.



Jackson120 #2 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:05

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20324 battles
  • 717
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 21 2017 - 21:59, said:

the strong clan in the top positions will always be there. it is the weaker clans that would need the help, so giving a small multiplier to the lesser positions and and huge one to the top is kinda retarded. once you pull and early lead, all you need to do is just keep pace and there is almost no way you can get passed.

 

giving the best players 100's of thousands of gold and then thousands of bonds is a sure way to have the lesser players want to stay in this game.

 

great players are really good, not taking away from them, just giving them advantages like that makes it a very lopsided situation for the rest of the plebs. not saying give bonus to the lesser, just dont give any bonuses and have a closer campaign result.

 

I dont think i follow....Are you saying that you think they should reward doing worse? How does that make any sense? 

ClydeCooper421 #3 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:09

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13339 battles
  • 2,759
  • [LOAD] LOAD
  • Member since:
    05-18-2015

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 21 2017 - 18:59, said:

giving the best players 100's of thousands of gold and then thousands of bonds is a sure way to have the lesser players want to stay in this game.

I think that the better you do, the better your rewards should be, however I do agree with this above statement. If WG only gives the rewards to the very best (top 10) clans, then clan wars will just die off. 



Cornish_Pirate #4 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33566 battles
  • 906
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
the better you do the more rewards you should get, but this event was stupidly lopsided. It would have been better if they gave out 50% less bonds and top 3k choose between 4k bonds or a tank

MrFruffy #5 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 30886 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013

no i didnt say reward the lesser player, why do rewards for less game play, this isnt a liberal school. want i am saying is that in order for the game to stay alive, and the unicums to have plebs to farm, there cannot be a reason to reward then better DURING the campaign, they are good, they will always be at the top.

 

when a lessor player is playing them, they will most likely lose. except now the lessor players have even less of a chance to place well because the top clans will have multiplier bonuses running. makes it mathematically impossible to place better when the top clan gets more points for losing to the lesser clan and the lesser clan gets not even as many points as the unicums for beating them.

 

why even bother playing the campaign at that point.

 

the rewards are fine, do good, get good. just the during parts that is crap


Edited by MrFruffy, Dec 22 2017 - 04:31.


Zippit #6 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:25

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 18097 battles
  • 1,826
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
They should reward after the campaign, not during tbh

Jackson120 #7 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:41

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20324 battles
  • 717
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostZippit, on Dec 21 2017 - 22:25, said:

They should reward after the campaign, not during tbh

 

wym? reward is after.....

Edited by Jackson120, Dec 22 2017 - 04:42.


MrFruffy #8 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:48

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 30886 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013
the multiplier is a reward during.

Sweaty_Crayfish #9 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:51

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3818 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:
    08-23-2015

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 22 2017 - 04:23, said:

no i didnt say reward the lesser player, why do rewards for less game play, this isnt a liberal school. want i am saying is that in order for the game to stay alive, and the unicums to have plebs to farm, there cannot be a reason to reward then better DURING the campaign, they are good, they will always be at the top.

 

when a lessor player is playing them, they will most likely lose. except now the lessor players have even less of a chance to place well because the top clans will have multiplier bonuses running. makes it mathematically impossible to place better when the top clan gets more points for losing to the lesser clan and the lesser clan gets not even as many points as the unicums for beating them.

 

why even bother playing the campaign at that point.

 

the rewards are fine, do good, get good. just the during parts that is crap

 

THE solution, start geetting better and stop playing as garbage. All top clans will tell you thanx for that

Zippit #10 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:54

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 18097 battles
  • 1,826
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostJackson120, on Dec 22 2017 - 13:41, said:

 

wym? reward is after.....

 

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 22 2017 - 13:48, said:

the multiplier is a reward during.

 

Thats what I meant, sorry, the multiplier. 

Jackson120 #11 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 04:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20324 battles
  • 717
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 21 2017 - 22:48, said:

the multiplier is a reward during.

 

the multiplier is to multiply the bonds earned during the campaign. which are then added after the campaign ends. the multiplier i assume you are mistaking that multiplier for; are the fame point multipliers your clan can buy. which are unrelated to clan placing....

Edited by Jackson120, Dec 22 2017 - 04:57.


MrFruffy #12 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 05:06

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 30886 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    06-24-2013

thats the multiplier i refer to, the FAME points one.

 

this isnt about taking away the skills of the good players, they are good because they are good. bad players can only try and get better. that will always be.

 

just adding the fame points multiplier is like adding a couple feet to the stick and dangling the carrot even farther from the lesser players.

 

in the end, there will be a closer top ten, making the games for the top clans even more important making. no more so far in front dont have to try. every game will mean something right to the end,

 

 

kinda like if they would give would give basket ball teams a multiplier for winning a quarter.  20-18 after the first, 75-26 2nd, 158-55 3rd, and they would win 3587-80



M0nkE #13 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 05:37

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20531 battles
  • 135
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    03-12-2011
Completely agree. It's one thing for somebody to place in the top 1000 because he's that good. It's quite another for someone to take the spot because he's in Mahou and showed up for 6 games after the rest of his clan ground out the boost so that he could get 10000 fame points per battle by playing on the Elite Front.

YourLieInApril #14 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 05:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 1871 battles
  • 91
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    02-15-2017

View PostM0nkE, on Dec 21 2017 - 23:37, said:

Completely agree. It's one thing for somebody to place in the top 1000 because he's that good. It's quite another for someone to take the spot because he's in Mahou and showed up for 6 games after the rest of his clan ground out the boost so that he could get 10000 fame points per battle by playing on the Elite Front.

 

Its actually 26,000 per battle in mahou, not 10,000 get ur quick maffs rite son.. lol jk :3

SlushyKat_Gaming #15 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 05:54

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 337 battles
  • 36
  • [TOMAS] TOMAS
  • Member since:
    08-15-2015

View PostYourLieInApril, on Dec 21 2017 - 20:44, said:

 

Its actually 26,000 per battle in mahou, not 10,000 get ur quick maffs rite son.. lol jk :3

 

^A person who got kicked from KANTO because he whined about not playing battles on Campaign with an ALT account.

Buck_Magnum #16 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 06:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11426 battles
  • 40
  • [-W-W-] -W-W-
  • Member since:
    01-03-2014

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 21 2017 - 18:59, said:

the strong clan in the top positions will always be there. it is the weaker clans that would need the help, so giving a small multiplier to the lesser positions and and huge one to the top is kinda retarded. once you pull and early lead, all you need to do is just keep pace and there is almost no way you can get passed.

 

giving the best players 100's of thousands of gold and then thousands of bonds is a sure way to have the lesser players want to stay in this game.

 

great players are really good, not taking away from them, just giving them advantages like that makes it a very lopsided situation for the rest of the plebs. not saying give bonus to the lesser, just dont give any bonuses and have a closer campaign result.

 

He’s obviously been drinking the Bernie koolade, free stuff for everyone! Yay!

 



M0nkE #17 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 06:50

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20531 battles
  • 135
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    03-12-2011

View PostC00li0, on Dec 22 2017 - 05:23, said:

 

He’s obviously been drinking the Bernie koolade, free stuff for everyone! Yay!

 

 

Well, I mean, Republicans need Russia to win. So I guess that more people have been reading Bernie's playbook than yours...



FeelMy_APCR #18 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 07:33

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 30462 battles
  • 868
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012
oof

Tedster_ #19 Posted Dec 22 2017 - 21:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 40471 battles
  • 4,413
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    09-25-2011

View PostMrFruffy, on Dec 21 2017 - 21:59, said:

the strong clan in the top positions will always be there. it is the weaker clans that would need the help, so giving a small multiplier to the lesser positions and and huge one to the top is kinda retarded. once you pull and early lead, all you need to do is just keep pace and there is almost no way you can get passed.

 

giving the best players 100's of thousands of gold and then thousands of bonds is a sure way to have the lesser players want to stay in this game.

 

great players are really good, not taking away from them, just giving them advantages like that makes it a very lopsided situation for the rest of the plebs. not saying give bonus to the lesser, just dont give any bonuses and have a closer campaign result.

 

The problem with the multipliers was that the percentiles appear to be based for far more participation than what actually occurred.  EU and RU had far more clans with multipliers because of the population.  There were a lot less people on the Alley of Fame this campaign than in the past too, with only 6402 people on it.  With 3000 tanks being "awarded" like usual, that means a whole 44.9% of the people who played a game on the map were given the option to get a tank.  This is far higher than in any previous campaign WG has done, and is part of the issue.  With more participation, the system would have worked much better, but here we are.  I don't think that the system isn't dumb, but it was made much worse by the lack of participation in this campaign compared to previous ones.

M0nkE #20 Posted Dec 23 2017 - 00:33

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20531 battles
  • 135
  • [NICO] NICO
  • Member since:
    03-12-2011

View PostTedster_, on Dec 22 2017 - 20:42, said:

 

The problem with the multipliers was that the percentiles appear to be based for far more participation than what actually occurred.  EU and RU had far more clans with multipliers because of the population.  There were a lot less people on the Alley of Fame this campaign than in the past too, with only 6402 people on it.  With 3000 tanks being "awarded" like usual, that means a whole 44.9% of the people who played a game on the map were given the option to get a tank.  This is far higher than in any previous campaign WG has done, and is part of the issue.  With more participation, the system would have worked much better, but here we are.  I don't think that the system isn't dumb, but it was made much worse by the lack of participation in this campaign compared to previous ones.

 

Bit of a catch 22. System is [edited], so no one wants to play. System is made worse by no one playing. Of course, I think most of the issue would be solved by Belarus giving the servers more autonomy. Since it seems they're totally out of touch with NA.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users