Event difficulties, breaking communities

[vital plinth]

I like that we have more difficulties for events, however the implementation is very bad. It drives people to group by how much people are able/willing to contribute to events.

So to maximize your rewards, you have to set a goal as a guild and everyone needs to contribute exactly the same.

In my case, I wanted to do all events on extreme, because I'm capable. However I have some guild members who cannot do it. This means my guild leader had to choose who to cater. Since I didn't want to put my guild leader in an uncomfortable position I decided to just leave my guild and join another one.
And apparently the guild I'm joining removed one of their members because they had issues meeting the criteria for maximum rewards for the difficulty they wanted to do.

The issue is the minimum score to collect event rewards. This is set at 1/20th of the score you need as a guild to unlock a reward. Which means there's one weakest link in the entire guild and no one can cover for that person. So that means that if a person does not meet the minimum criteria for all rewards they'll be missing out.

I mean what's done is done. I left my guild and joined a new one, another person got removed from theirs. And at least 1 of my former guild mates has also left my old guild.

So in short the update makes it less viable to mix high contributing people with weaker in terms of how they play. So if people don't all grow linearly or start at different points people will have to choose to hamper one person over another.

This could have been partially avoided by atleast loosening up on the individual reward scores. I think 1/40th would have been more fair, then people could have done the same on extreme to obtain the hard rewards and other people could have covered for them.

Proposed change:
#1398048573496623154 message

[tulip pebble]

That's the whole point of guilds though. Everything you said is how the system is ment to work. Some higher players don't mind helping lower players so they choose to be in a lower guild. Players just need to go to guilds that fit their play style and needs.

[vital plinth]

That's not the whole point of guilds, the point of a guild is to find a group of people you like and then you form a group. Now it's transactional.

It used to be, "I'm with my friends", now it's "You're my friend, but you're not good enough, bye"

[brisk nova]

Im glad I dont have a guild who has to or wants to run that way. Although I push encouragement for my guildies to reach minimums there is no expectation to do so, no consequences if people fall short. Thankfully we have people who push beyond their fair share simply because they want to, its how they play. There isnt a one size fits all for play style. Not all of us want to stick to players exactly like us.

[vital plinth]

The problem is that if for instance they can only run 300k for DI, before they would be fine on hard. If you run extreme now, they get less rewards than before. So even if the rest of your guild runs 2M per person, the person running only 300k will be missing out.

[brisk nova]

Yes that is true but thankfully my guildies don't seem to care, as long as people try their best and the guild hits max, there no real mentions of minimums.
Im sorry to hear you and others have had to shuffle about. I agree the new extreme mode will cause some divisions, it was pretty much predicted.

[vital plinth]

I just think it's really bad, because if you don't have a community it's basically just a single player game

[brisk nova]

The community absolutely makes this game, I would not be anywhere near as invested if it was solo

[vital plinth]

For instance now you just bunch up a group of people who can all run extreme, they can run it indiviually, so there's no teamwork required

There's no need for pitching in, because everyone meets criteria anyway

If you say that community makes the game, then breaking it down is a bad thing to do. What this update does is separating the elitist from the people who are still growing

That's like discouraging people to give advice to others on this discord

[limber marlin]

To quote the old wise man

[vital plinth]

I guess that explains why guild chat is so crappy then

[limber marlin]

But on a more serious note. You can just keep doing hard mode. It is the old version and everything is the same

[tulip pebble]

Extreme just gives extra rewards beyond hard and isn't meant for everyone. It's more of a late game goal.

I get your point that guilds are for being with friends, but if your friends are way lower then you either make accommodations for them or you move to a guild that's more your level. You can still ve friends on discord or in real life. For instance my husband started playing this game 3 years after I started. We aren't in the sane guild because I want max buildings and extreme events. He's f2p I'm p2p so we are on 2 different extremes.

[limber marlin]

Nobody is forcing you to go do extreme

[limber marlin]

Ours isnt 🤔

[vital plinth]

I mean with updating and missing messages

[brisk nova]

Only extreme is new and guilds who already scored more than needed can do it, even if some of those guildies cant reach min. I dont think its as deep as some make it.

"Only new" meaning, beyond the normal levels, sorry, tired brain

[vital plinth]

Except it's not even a guild event, it's just a personal event now.

[limber marlin]

It always has been

The event itself did not change at all

Just the end line got moved

[vital plinth]

The event itself may not have changed, but the environment in which it happens definately has

before people would just do whatever they could and as a guild you would need to make sure you reach the score

now people will group and every single individual reaches the score, or else they wouldn't be in the guild

[brisk nova]

Kings caprice, our highest player was 22m our lowest was 1m
I think the entirety of my point is "not all guilds are the same" but its always been the case, some guilds push and some dont

[tulip pebble]

They added in the event levels to try and make everyone happy. The games 6 years old. Newer players need easier events, older players need a challenge. Extreme doesn't even make it a challenge for end gamers. It's still way too easy.

Sane thing happened when they changed guikd max from 18 players to 20. Many guilds folded, people switched guilds and it was chaos. You just need to give it time to settle. But 1/20th the score for equal shares is fair it should be kept.

[limber marlin]

I see what you are trying to say though. Extreme made the split between lower people and higher people a bit bigger. Either way, I am sure that you and your guild could find a solution for that.

There are multiple for that:
Keep doing lower ones and higher people take the hit on getting a bit less rewards

Keep doing extreme and try to help lower people as much as possible but they take the hit and get less rewards. (This might be the better option because even lower rewards on the extreme line are better than some rewards on hard)

But in the end, you do take a hit somewhere if you like your guild to be that way

[vital plinth]

The problem I have with that approach is that someone always gets hurt in some way or another

[brisk nova]

Lower players always got less rewards anyway so if the guild still hits max on extreme i just dont see what's changed

[vital plinth]

No lower players didn't always get less rewards, on extreme the bar is now higher for the same amount of rewards

[limber marlin]

Yea, which is a good thing in my eyes. People playing on their own level.

[tulip pebble]

Hate to say it, but that's the way things go in life in general. There is no perfect balance, situation or solution.

[vital plinth]

They could have done scaling events instead

[limber marlin]

Which also means it is a goal you can work towards. If you don't make it now then you know what to work on so you can do better next event until you make it

[brisk nova]

I understand where youre coming from Chiru, just offering other views

[vital plinth]

every person choosing a difficulty, hard would just contribute 100%, extreme contributes 50% for example

[limber marlin]

They can not do personal scaling events like ToT since its still tied to guild

[vital plinth]

people choosing hard get hard rewards, people choosing extreme get extreme rewards

[limber marlin]

Then its just an extreme people carry

[vital plinth]

no because hard people will still need to hit their individual scores

[limber marlin]

Yea but they do not contribute to the total score that much

[brisk nova]

The same as on extreme tho

[tulip pebble]

They can't do that for guild events. People just need to be in the guild that fits them. That's the great thing about this game. We have a world chat. I wish I could be in a guild with all the friends I've made in this game, but guilds would need to be 100 players large. It's just not feasible.

[limber marlin]

But I also agree with events not being real guild events though. The only thing that I need the guild for is the total score 😛

[vital plinth]

that's why there's scaling, you would just also scale down the extreme line

[limber marlin]

Would love if it changed to how bounties work. Like, you get this rewards if you craft 1.000.000 axes together

And then use the tier point system like in content passes

[limber marlin]

And you can then use the individual skill for that task to determine if someone gets low, mid, hard or extreme rewards

Still not perfect but atleast you are actually working together a little bit more

[limber marlin]

Yea but that is why we got extreme, to get something harder

Either way, it comes down to: You can not please everyone

[vital plinth]

why not?

it's just a choice not to, it's not impossible to do so

[limber marlin]

Because that is how the world works, there is always someone that will complain

[vital plinth]

I mean in this case not life in general

[brisk nova]

No no, the expression "you cant please everyone" doesn't stem from the one trying to do the pleasing, its the other way around, people will always moan about something.

[limber marlin]

Because this case is part of life

To quote the old sage again:

[vital plinth]

the point is, the design of this system of dividing communities is a choice, they could have found a less invasive design

[tulip pebble]

It's chaos Theroy and life. Doesn't matter if it's in a game or the real world. You can never please everyone. The sooner you learn that lesson the happier you'll be.

[vital plinth]

If you quote that, then there's no arguing EVER

[limber marlin]

I think it is a good and healty choice for a game

[vital plinth]

It's not healthy for the game, because you typically want new people to join

[limber marlin]

Yea and new people will play with new players

[vital plinth]

what you're doing is cutting down the tree so other people will have a harder time climbing up

[limber marlin]

How are they having a harder time?

[tulip pebble]

And the event levels make it easier for new players to join.

[vital plinth]

because they don't interact with higher level pepole

[limber marlin]

They are just not ready to climb that tree and should train more before trying again

[vital plinth]

they don't sit in the same guilds

[tulip pebble]

Yes they do in world chat

[limber marlin]

Yea, which is completely fine

And that as well

I mean, I dont even talk in WC at all 😛

[tulip pebble]

Why do low players need to be in the same guild as high players?

[vital plinth]

I've tried asking things in the guild chat, that does not work like a charm

[tulip pebble]

That doesn't make sense

[vital plinth]

the same reason we have teachers at school

[limber marlin]

That is why we have discord, but that also depends on your guild

[vital plinth]

it makes life a lot easier trying to learn things

[tulip pebble]

That's what discord for

[limber marlin]

if your guild doesnt reply or help then its time to move on

[vital plinth]

really? how many people are on discord?

[limber marlin]

The guild is just not for you thne

My whole guild is

[brisk nova]

I mean.....we all do? That's world chat for ya, plus plenty of mixed guilds

[vital plinth]

yes and how many of those people just started playing this game?

[tulip pebble]

Apparently 47,557

[limber marlin]

Why does that matter?

New players should not play with end game players

[vital plinth]

because you pick people who stuck around and not all the players

[limber marlin]

However, they can be helped on discord. Like here or on the ST Central discord

[tulip pebble]

And most end game guilds if not all reqire their players to be on discord

[vital plinth]

that's like saying, everyone has atleast 3G next to their name

[limber marlin]

You didnt explain why you think new players should be in the same guild as end game players. Why would they need to be?

[brisk nova]

I feel this train is derailing

[vital plinth]

Because "endgame" people are more likely able to help the newer ones

[limber marlin]

A little but its also good feedback for kabam to get more sides to a problem

[tulip pebble]

I've been playing 6 years, I have 2.5T invested, I worked very hard to get to end game. Should someone with 3G get the same rewards or benefits as me? I think not

[brisk nova]

We can help people in world chat, and we do

[vital plinth]

also you want to see what is possible

and one way to do that is to actually be in contact

[limber marlin]

Yea but there are so many options out there to get help for new players

They dont need to be spoon fed everything

That is the whole cool part about starting a new game. Figuring out stuff on your own

[brisk nova]

New players dont need to be on the same level as long term players.....it completely diminishes all the work we did

[vital plinth]

Not everyone works the same. Also discord is not an integral pat of the game. It's an option

[brisk nova]

So are the event difficulties and what guild you join

[vital plinth]

They don't need to be in the same level, I never said so. I only said I didn't want them to be shafted

[tulip pebble]

Yeah and being in world chat os Aldo am option

[brisk nova]

They arnt being shafted as you put it, things are getting easier and easier by the month for new players

[tulip pebble]

They don't get shafted. They can be in a guild at their level and choose a lower difficulty to get all the rewards

[vital plinth]

They are, people who only score 300 in DI and are in a guild that does extreme will get less

300k

[brisk nova]

Then change guild

[tulip pebble]

Then they dint belong in a guikd doing extreme

[brisk nova]

Its no different to the old way

Lower contributions has always yielded lower rewards

[tulip pebble]

It's called challenge and goals. Extreme is for end game not beginners.

[vital plinth]

That's the whole point, it's dividing the community, how can that be a good thing?

[brisk nova]

But it isnt tho?

[vital plinth]

It is, it's like you going to work and all the experienced people sit in 1 room and all the newbies sit in another, who would do that?

[limber marlin]

It doesnt need to divide, that is the choice of the guild leader and their officers

[tulip pebble]

Guilds can only have 20 players. How's it dividing anything? It's g8ving newer players an actual chance to earn all rewards.

[vital plinth]

You can say, well hey, you can always visit the other room, but that's very inefficient and it will surely happen that questions or advice will not be asked because of it

[limber marlin]

It is like work, if the new players do not pull their share they get fired

[vital plinth]

Ok let me put it this way

[limber marlin]

But I see what you are trying to say. It will divide guild up more and some get kicked or leave because of it. But I think that is a good thing.

[brisk nova]

Im a better worker then my colleagues thats why im getting all the rewards. And im new. (Irl, at work)

[vital plinth]

Imagine you have a group of friends, you all finished high school at some point. Then 1 person becomes a doctor and another a lawyer and 1 a gardener

[brisk nova]

Games dont exactly work the same way

[vital plinth]

You're telling me they should stop hanging out with the gardener because they cannot spend as much money as their other friends?

[limber marlin]

But I also never saw guilds as a community back when I was a new player since they didnt grow as fast as I did so I hopped to new ones really fast

[brisk nova]

But that's hanging out, not working

[limber marlin]

Untill I got the right guild that was on my level and stayed there for a long time

[tulip pebble]

Let's say I worked for a company for 10yrs I make $25hr should a new employee with 0 experience come in and make the same salary as me?

[limber marlin]

That doesnt make sense at all

[vital plinth]

It makes perfect sense if you see your guild as a friend group

[brisk nova]

New players coming into the game never, or very rarely, get taken in by mid - late game guilds

[limber marlin]

Then that friend group can surely figure out a way to make it fair for you all

[vital plinth]

except they cannot due to the rules

[limber marlin]

They can if you are friend

I would take less rewards for a friend

I wouldnt mind at all

[tulip pebble]

If you want to play with friends at different levels then that's your choice. They shouldn't get the same rewards for less work.

[vital plinth]

if i had the money i'd pay for my friend

[limber marlin]

Then what is the problem, just put the event on hard and call it a day

So the lower people can get everything and grow

[vital plinth]

the problem is that i cannot pay for my friend

[limber marlin]

No but that way you can help them

Take less rewards for yourself so they get more

[tulip pebble]

You wanted extreme, you want your friends. You left your friends for extreme. That was your choice.

[vital plinth]

The problem with that approach is that you accept what happened without question

[brisk nova]

I do, which is exactly why we are chill and just play the game without the stress. When someone left for a more competitive guild it was absolutely no big deal whatsoever

[vital plinth]

by saying kabam cannot be wrong

[limber marlin]

I mean, that is what I currently am doing in a different game for a friend. He joined later and I am doing lower level dungeons with him and get lesser rewards weekly. Just so we can play together

Nobody is saying kabam is not wrong. They did divide communities a little bit more with this. However, there are more variables to it than just that

And I also know Kabam isnt going to change it 😛

So I am just here trying to help you figure out a solution or see it from a different perspective

[vital plinth]

I don't expect kabam to revert this, I'm giving feedback

that I think this a wrong step to make

[limber marlin]

That is always ok ofc!

Think we are at the to agree to disagree stage now

So I wil take my leave, thanks for the discussion!

[vital plinth]

I mean I know we can deal with it, I did, but that doesn't mean I like what I did

[tulip pebble]

Feedback is fine. We are all giving feedback as well and trying to help you see things from another point of view.

[brisk nova]

I hope you find a guild who fits you very well and vice versa. Night.

[limber marlin]

You can still go back to your old guild, I am sure they would love to have you back

[vital plinth]

I wouldn't want to do that either. The point was that I had to pick between 2 things I didn't like. Also the damage is done, atleast 1 other person left, and 1 person was removed from the guild I am in now. Even if I leave it'll be a mess. Also there's no guarantee that no one else joined my previous guild

• the people from my new guild asked me to make a commitment so leaving them just like that wouldn't exactly make me feel better either

[tropic tiger]

So what happens when an end game player retires, or says "I need a 3 month break from this game due to ?reasons?".
It's really hard to replace like for like, especially when an end game player leaves and there's nobody with 1T to replace them.
My guild is not end game, but completed all events before.
We had to take on a low/mid tier player, because there wasn't anyone who met our investment criteria. Maybe 3/4 of our guild will claim all rewards on Extreme. If we dropped to Hard, there's 1 or 2 that still wouldn't claim all rewards. We want to push ourselves, and go for Extreme, but it's not fair on the players that can't do it and so get less rewards than they would on Hard, and we are never going to be able to recruit players to replace them because recruitment is a full time job and sucks.

[limber marlin]

I dont have any trouble recruiting for my guild, we even have a wait list of people wanting to join so I can't help you there

But either way, seems like you need more patience and invite people on the same level

[tropic tiger]

In the past, we've waited 4 months to find someone, because nobody wants to join a guild with level 20 buildings at 50G invest, when they can join a guild with level 22 buildings for the same. Every time we have needed to recruit in the last 2 years, we have taken players that were worse than the one being kicked. We then work for a month to get all the buildings back to where they were. We've probably had 5 consistent members in the time I've been playing- everyone else has left the game to focus on life, or whatever. I like the people I play with, and we get good results. It's been fun progressing as a guild, from not completing events, to completing Extreme. I don't think anyone has left our guild to go to a better one.

[brisk nova]

Investments are not mutually exclusive to event scores. Im 3rd in my guild for investments yet blown outta the water in events by those under me in invests

[vital plinth]

I don't think he's asking for help, he's just saying it's unfair for those who join his guild (temporarily) because they get less rewards

[tropic tiger]

I know. But by and large, event scores are usually somewhat linked to level and net worth, and thus investment. Most people in my guild are level 70+, but we've frequently had to take on a level 30-40 player because there is always huge interest in level 60+ from every half decent guild with a space.
It's then very difficult for those lower level players to gather rewards if the guild chooses Extreme, unless they grind endlessly on Caprice and LCoG, which makes the game less enjoyable (for me at least). Thankfully we can help on DI through guild requests.

[harsh grotto]

This would REALLY lead to single player events.

[whole grove]

They could add a multiplier to people running lower difficulties. On record for max achievement, keeps their nonmultiplied score. For events their score is multiplied, make 200k points on personal hard = 375k points guild extreme on DI for example

And then just remove guild reqs for stretch rewards. Make it so as long as the guild clears main reward then extra bonuses get unlocked. Let people run the stretch individually based on personal points and add higher stretch rewards.

[harsh grotto]

Aelisk? Do you mind going a bit more into detail for me-dumdum?

Only Extreme difficulty has additional rewards.

I understood: all rewards until Grand prize - total of 20. All after that indivual scores - yes would be nice.

That wouldn’t change a lot though for guilds with players in .. lets call it several stages of development - one doenst even manage the grand prize - not to talk about anything else while others can and do (because they like big numbers) contribute for 3 which might lead to frustration and looking for a new home.

BTW - I dont see such a split inside the community. There has always been player migration the new extreme rewards just set a new incentive.

[twilit bloom]

i like the addition of difficulties, extreme could of been a bit harder and more rewards, don't think it divides people too much, even if we take in a newbie they'll still be benefitting from good level buildings and guild perks. Probably wouldn't take much longer than 4-6 months for the newbie to compete to finish extreme KC and DI.

[vital plinth]

You can simply add a negative multiplier for people doing extreme, making them get for instance half of the score other people get.

So if you would score 750k in this DI for extreme you would only get 375k, but at the same time the grand prize+3 extra rewards would still be at 5M.

What this effectively does is that people doing hard not needing to score 187.5K or whatever for their 25 prize but they still would only need to score 136k.

This way people can help lower level people.

In the current situation they would need to score 375K.
There's a huge gap between 136k and 375k.

As a consequence extreme people would need to score over 1/20th if hard people don't 1/20 the event.

[harsh grotto]

So you basically would appreciate to set zero incentive for extreme?

I done close to 600k points this DI - and I am not at the very top. Why should those throw in their 1 mil points?

Extreme difficulty is not only a difficulty but also a statement of both: the player wanting it, the guild going for it.

[vital plinth]

Extreme will still give the extra challenge and rewards

hard people would get the hard track rewards and extreme people the extreme track

Currently the extreme difficulty is about the player wanting, not the guild going for it.

It only becomes the guild going for it if you somehow have people not meeting the personal requirement score, in which case they wouldn't be doing extreme

Well maybe for DI they would still be doing extreme, but not for the other events

[harsh grotto]

If the guild is going for it but one doesnt manage there is no harm in communicating with the GM/fellow guildies, right?

[vital plinth]

The problem is that if half of the guild can manage extreme and carry the other half it's a little bit less, screwing over 1 guy in favour of 19

it could be 50:50 for example

[harsh grotto]

I guess I am the wrong person to discuss that because I left a guild before because it was 5/10/5 - and LCoG and KC took the full length due to that and I didnt want to take it any longer.

And i left em loooong before this

[vital plinth]

The problem is just that in mixed guilds where not everyone is the same some people can score a lot higher than others it'll rip the guild apart

[harsh grotto]

I understood that. And a guild is not the GM though the GM has the power to set the difficulty.

[brisk nova]

My guild isn't being ripped apart, we're just fine, as we always have been, with the score divides

[harsh grotto]

I asked my folks whether we want to go for extreme as a test run and then check afterwards what they want.

[vital plinth]

the problem is that now people will be losing out in the mixed guild, especially in DI because of the loss of the final 3 rewards for hard

[harsh grotto]

Which final rewards on hard are we talking about if I may ask? The extremes or the last 3 on hard?

[vital plinth]

the last 3 on hard are missing compared to last DI

[harsh grotto]

Thats what I meant, that extreme is both, a difficulty and a statement.

[brisk nova]

I imagine a lot of guilds will do as Nuess just said. I picture this as being the same concept as before, as in people can only get better. Those who used to fall short on what's now hard worked to get better and clear it, now they'll do that for extreme

[harsh grotto]

So far its been 200k damage to pick up all rewards - hard is „only“ 136k

[vital plinth]

yeah and then you lose the last 3 rewards too

the gap is huge between 136k and 375k

also I don't agree with extreme being a statement

because it's not a guild effort, it's a personal race to hit the score

unless you for whatever reason have less than 20 people doing the event

[harsh grotto]

You can hardly reduce the points and keep the rewards, can you?

[vital plinth]

I don't see where I suggested that at all

[harsh grotto]

Actually I just checked out top contributor is at 2.2 mil points - I have no idea why, but I will ask em .

And yes, we also have fellow guildies struggling this time.

[vital plinth]

Actually if you want guild events to be to be guild events you should place the personal score at 1/20 of the minimum required score, because this way there's never any reason to go over the minimum

[harsh grotto]

You are aware that previous - and this is I guess (since I never checked) still valid for all difficulties BUT EXTREME: you need less than 1/20 of the total to pick all rewards up.

[vital plinth]

you're not helping anyone getting more rewards when you get a higher score (assuming total score will be reached)

Yes that makes it a guild effort, people work together, strong people help weaker ones. That's basically like a team sport.

Now it's a "help yourself" situation

[harsh grotto]

Since I am not at the top spot in events but over average I DO help picking up the lot EARLIER. Which is - at least to me - a relief.

DI cannot be brute forced that’s why I am grateful that our retiree still throws in stuff.

KC and LCoG CAN be brute forced easily

[vital plinth]

The thing is, with extreme there's no need to brute force anything, there's just meeting the absolute minimum as long as all your members do it

i don't know if anything is more solo than that

[brisk nova]

You are. If 5 people fall below min contributions and you get extra score to the value of the shortcomings then everyone else who does hit mins gets all rewards, because the guild hit max

[vital plinth]

if 5 people fall below the minimum contribution, you're shafting 5 people

[brisk nova]

How so lol

[vital plinth]

because they don't get all rewards

[brisk nova]

Which is the same as its always been

They can get better

[vital plinth]

no it's not because now for extreme they need to ge 1/20 instead of 1/30 or whatever it was before

[brisk nova]

It was always out of 20

[harsh grotto]

There is no solo in DI.

We currently got a few struggling, will I shaft them for that? Why should I as long as those who want to pick up all manage that?

[brisk nova]

15 people should not miss out cause of 5 who can and will improve month by month exactly as they did/would have with the old setting

[harsh grotto]

Any GM can run they guild as they wish. There will very likely be ones willing to release struggling guildies.

[harsh grotto]

Exactly that. If those struggling do not make the impression they want to get there - that’s a different story.

[vital plinth]

5m/20=250k

[brisk nova]

10,250,000÷20=512,500

Its a smidgen over double the points needed for guild

Anyways, all GMs and/or guilds will work differently, have different preferences etc but people always moved around for events. I just dont see how anything has changed beyond perception.

[harsh grotto]

Earlier it was „event clear“ - this is no longer a thing since the easy difficulty can be cleared by some players on their own.

Now its easy/medium/hard/extreme - and for some the required time needed might play a roll. Like one can assume: crafting a whole KC through is not my thing, I would get the whip out if that was needed.

[whole grove]

Sorry busy and not checking here as much.

What I meant is this way, difficulty is set by individual rather than guild. Its like everyone is actually hidden running extreme, but those that choose lower difficulties get a point multiplier along with the corresponding low difficulty rewards.

Extreme runners wont have any change, they'll still see the boost rewards after the main reward. Non extreme runners won't see that.

It would just make it easier for people to stay in the same communities when they are lacking time or not as invested in the game

[vital plinth]

Yup this is what I meant exactly, math may differ but this is the most community friendly thing to do.

[whole grove]

An issue I see with it is people intentionally choosing lower difficulty so their guild can rush leaderboard

But that can be just fixed by setting a hard point cap on people who choose lower difficulties. Like after getting the max points for the final reward, future points aren't added to the guild total or something

[vital plinth]

Well you can always set the leaderboard to match the actual score without multipliers

[whole grove]

That too.

[jolly heath]

... I play the game for my own enjoyment. My playstyle is to push for best rewards. I recognize, that's not for every one or every guild. Or that what is the reward varies, from game items to relationship intangibles, among players and guilds.
I like the guild event difficulties coding.
I like that the game gives many options for how I and others can play.

[blissful copper]

ok, so, last DI i got 2.5 mil, i did really well, my guild finished extreme on day 4, but, i only needed to score 512,500 right? so rather than my score going to waste, why can't i just help my guild with there cont points? the whole point of guilds in the teamwork factor, me and my guild work really well together, but, i know i am way more powerful than them, so, it kinda sucks seeing them not getting all rewards, so long as we clear all the reward markers, why are they not given all the rewards too? same result either way, taking dragons event again, the dragons are all defeated, shouldn't matter how its done so long as its done, same as the gold event, so long as the gold is collected, is shouldn't matter how its done, so long as its done, i'm not going to get mad about having to do a little more if my whole guild benefits from it, so can we at least have a talk about removing the cont counter???

[harsh grotto]

Would you also be cool with it if someone just logged in every week to pick stuff up others put in effort to achieve?

I personally wouldn’t.

[magic stump]

I agree that 5% personal contribution for extreme is fine, but maybe they could make a guild setting for it like change from 1% to 5% on a guild by guild basis

[vital plinth]

That's a bit on the extreme end, but I wouldn't mind something like that. Obviously if you're not fine with that, then you can kick them from the guild.

If I'm on vacation for a month or so or even 2 weeks and I don't have a lot of access to internet or don't want to spend my time on vacation too much grinding, I would like to still be able to get the rewards.

The way I look at it is, I contribute a little more here then I should be able to contribute a little less there. I don't think it's so much as, that I don't want people to get the reward, I feel like everyone contributes to something and if they do, they can compensate elsewhere.

If you truely feel people don't deserve things in your guild, you can always remove them.

But I think that's a guild issue, preferably I wouldn't have the game to tell me how our community should run

[brisk nova]

I personally have never understood the view for newer/lower/less able/less active players to be handed things on a silver platter or that those of us who actually worked to get better should carry those who havnt yet. Teamwork is a huge part of being in a guild but players should still get what they earn. Part of the point of this game is the journey, the growth, the levelling up, unlocking more content etc. Myself and anyone who has ever been in my guild has had the pleasure of seeing their own growth month by month, seeing the guild grow and reach a point where we clear all events easily. Those who couldn't even get minimums are now getting far above and others will achieve the same success. It gives you a huge sense of achievement and pride along with a true reflection of personal gain. I see no issue with how events work. I dont agree its breaking apart the community and if any individual guild falls apart from the changes then they most likely had other problems already.

[harsh grotto]

Sure my example is on the extreme end and you are also right that any GM can run their guild as they wish. Well, sort of. I am one of 20. If 19 left … for reasons … there wouldn’t be much guild left, would it be?

Just because you made your choice (and there is nothing wrong with that, just to be clear) it doesnt mean that the new difficulties break up communities. Thats an extreme as well.

[blissful copper]

as an active GM, i don't have people like that in my guild, the problem my guild has is souls, in 2 weeks, they have gone from level 20 before i took them in, to level 65 now, the power is being capped by souls atm, so they have been working hard, but, once again, its about something limiting the growth, its only going to take them a year (with the double titan souls) to catch up...... yeah, remove the cont levels

[limber marlin]

You do not need souls that early in game to progress though

Sure, it is an easy upgrade to a hero but having the right skills and correct gear at that level is going to do more

[blissful copper]

no, but it limits growth, you should limit power or rewards, not both, then you are actively trying to screw people over, so are you saying that even tho they are active and put in the work, they should still be punished by only doing low level events? like i say, i don't see the problem here, the event atm is to collect gold, so long as the gold is collected, the whole guild should get the rewards

[limber marlin]

How are they punished? They should just do the event that is on their level

That is how gaming works. If you can't do the bigger one yet then you progress more until you can

Why would a lvl 65 instantly be able to do extreme events?

[harsh grotto]

Or if one cannot claim all rewards its a progress to get there finally.

[limber marlin]

Yea, I remember the first event releasing. It was LCoG. My guild couldn't clear it. It motivated us all to do better. We worked on heroes together and then next time we did clear it. That is what is so lovely about it

[blissful copper]

at 65 you unlock t15, so thats legend end game gear, my guildies pay to play too, so, they already have stacked heros, 65 you should be clearing events, but, i also know people have lives outside of the game too, personally, i think it should be left to the GM how rewards are dished out, either by cont or by taking part, i'm already at 30k, let me donate my cont to them then, let me have an overload cont so i can help my guildies when they need it

[harsh grotto]

Unlocking T15 on the market is far away from „Endgame“ if you ask me…

[limber marlin]

That is very far away from end game indeed

[harsh grotto]

I am lvl90 since recently .. Endgame? Nah, doesnt feel like it.

[limber marlin]

This all comes down to what lvl your training hall in your guild is at lvl 65

[blissful copper]

mystic exp potions bypass the level restrictions, training hall means nothing

[limber marlin]

And even going by level is a wrong way to access if you are end game or not

[limber marlin]

Ah yea because everyone has 100s of those laying around?

[harsh grotto]

I needed years for my collection…

[limber marlin]

That is actually not even a great hero in terms of combat, nice for leaderboard though

We are going off topic though

[harsh grotto]

It seems off topic - but might help understanding things?

[blissful copper]

teamed with a lord, they are amazing heros, primal glacier keeps heros alive, but, it is off topic, so long as the event is cleared, all people who took part should be able to claim all rewards

[brisk nova]

Why can't people just play the game...thats the point...to play.

[blissful copper]

the best way to do this is to test it, next event, just don't add the cont counter, see how the players react, if they react poorly, just put it back after... they 100% won't react poorly tho, any benefit to a guild is a good thing, so this is a no brainer

[harsh grotto]

For sure they will not.

Seriously! Who refuses free stuff?

[brisk nova]

How does a guild benefit from lower achievers getting freebies

[blissful copper]

keys, bp, sets them up for later, its doesn't all have to be a now thing, but, its a guild event, not a solo event like tower, personal cont should matter in a guild event

add more solo events if you want the cont limit, but, a guild event is brother in arms stuff, everyone does there own part, rewards dished out for all

[harsh grotto]

„Everyone does their own part“ Yes, that’s what the personal contribution is set for. You dont get there with your personal contribution you dont get stuff.

Sets an incentive to get there some day

[brisk nova]

People get what they earn. And by your logic tower rewards help the guild to.

[limber marlin]

They will react poorly but not in the way that you think.

The players that carry these lower players are going to slowly hate them.

Slowly people are going to do even less for rewards, why grind for it if someone else in the guild can do it for me.

That is why we have personal event scores. So people actually do the event and have a motivation to do it.

[harsh grotto]

There are even people WANTING their guild to set minimum contributions - and dont join if a guild doesnt have that. Happened only once to me though, while recruiting.

[twilit bloom]

souls won't be as much of a bottle neck with oscars collection card surely?

[vital plinth]

Let me summarize my view on this.

1. I see quotes of guilds just being a place where you get benefits.
   In my eyes that's fundamentally wrong. In that case if you have no connection to your guild, then they might as well have just cut all investment milestones by a factor of 20 and make it a solo game.
   By the same reasoning, people who do not do enough bounties should not be getting guild buffs.

2. Building on from that, all difficulties (except for extreme) have personal score requirements which are NOT 1/20 which extreme does have. This system was great and there's no reason not to implement it for the extreme quests as well.
   Some(one/people) have mention, that's it's a part of extreme, it adds to the challenge, gives you boasting rights. But this is actually a fallacy, because it's not a guild event if you need to hit the of exact fair share if you're in a full guild. In general I think guilds should be seen as full, because that's the goal for most guilds.

3. Some people are saying, these things are the way they are, deal with it. And I don't disagree that we need to deal with it, but on the other hand it also doesn't mean we cannot question whether it is good that they are the way they are or that they can be improved or changed.
   By just accepting whatever they (kabam) sets, we'd still be having almost no chase cards and we wouldn't be getting chase cards with buffs before you gathered a score of 200 of them. There are more instances in which feedback leads to different outcomes. In some cases these are improvements.

4. As for people saying new people shouldn't get help, I don't agree on that. That's my personal opinion though. In my eyes helping other people in general (not just in this game) is a positive thing. I mean if someone gets a lot of rewards, that doesn't even affect you that much. Yes people will grow faster and become a competitor on the market faster. But that's it. It doesn't make you require more crafts to master blue prints...

[brisk nova]

Just to clarify on point 4 there, I personally am not saying dont help new people. Im saying we dont need to coddle them either. People who have been playing this game 5 / 6 years have made it clear it is by far easier then it used to be. New people now dont know how good they have it but still we hear yelling from the rooftops for them to get everything better, faster, now now now. Where's the marathon i see mentioned all over if you can just log in 5 mins a day and get as much as those who had to bust arse for months and years. Where's the sense of pride in your growth. And sure, what other players get doesn't affect my own personal gameplay. But neither does it the other way around, someone having more than me doesnt affect me so why should I get an easier ride from their efforts.

[whole grove]

This. There's a type of people that will do the absolute minimum and won't improve unless motivated by the game. They'll be stuck in the t9 and under zone forever while the rest of the players are end game t15. Won't progress heroes and all that. All the new updates to the game just push them further behind since they aren't at the highest tiers to take advantage of new things.

I saw lots of improvement with the new extreme changes, previously people just didn't have the reason to get better. Now they do.

I know people will say you should just remove these player types, but its not bad. These people are super stable, they will probably play longer than everyone else if they build their account up more. Versus the ones that grow fast and burn out fast, having both types of players is good for guild stability. But they still do need to be not too far behind to prevent high achievers from losing hope... which is why I like the 1/20 reqs.

[blissful copper]

all this tells me is i just now need to hit the required amount and stop, i can just hit 10k, done, this event anyway, its just less reason for me to play at all, i'm at 30k right now, going by the same logic everyone is using, players should get what they put in, so i should get 3 times the rewards i got right? thats not going to happen XD i fail to see why helping players in my guild is considered with such distain during a "team" event

[limber marlin]

You can help them but in different way. Help them make better heroes so they can compete better. Help them get better gear for their heroes.

But yea, most people play to get 10k. They continue if the guild didnt reach max rewards yet. They stop when that is reached.

[brisk nova]

I stop when we hit the end goal as a guild, so anyone who clears their own minimums get the rewards. After that I go back to whatever gameplay I would prefer to focus on.

[whole grove]

My guild started as a few carries hard pulling a lot of people who couldn't hold their weight. Its necessary at early stages but a bit like sitting on a ticking time bomb.

Stable guilds should be able to not depend on any one person. That should be the goal, that it can lose the GM, the highest carry, any person in there... and the rest will still be able to finish events and not scatter.

It just takes time for the people at bottom to grow. Gotta aim to build them up so they can support themselves. It also prevents burnout for people doing the carrying.

[vital plinth]

To me that's the saying, well I had a rough time so everyone else needs to have a rough time too. I'm 100% against it. Because I don't want to start from scratch when I don't have to. I don't want to have to invent the bicycle that people didn't have 200 years ago.
When I started playing, all we had were t9/t10 as highest tiers. Now you can make, craft and sell t15. Do I want people to spend atleast a year to unlock t12 and then another to unlock t13? No, I'm not bitter about it.

Also the 1/20 requirement i still bad in my opinion. it forces unity and leaves no room otherwise. Assuming you start playing and are starting with easy. When you outgrow your guild you need to leave to one that can do medium, but you need to pick one that suits all 3 events.

If people outgrow you and the guild, they will leave, in which case you will likely need to find a new recruit, which is then probably on the bottom. You then grow and you leave because you outgrow them. This induces a constant joining and leaving guild at lower levels. Which means you will likely never reach a stable guild situation until you end up with extreme events.

Hopping guilds and finding new guild members is not all that fun. The game needs an influx of players to stay alive. The longer people stay, the better it is for the game. Having to constantly change your guild/find guild members is not fun. Also the progress you get from helping people (cleaning energy bonus) resets every time you go to a new guild. This can be frustrating because you have the feeling you're building something and then you leave and burn it to the ground.

I agree that growing very fast can burn people out, which is why I think it's important that there's some leeway. The gap from hard to extreme is quite big. in DI it's 3x hard, in LCoG it's about 1.8-1.9x hard. I have no clue what it is for KC probably about 3x. Driving people to make that jump at once is not great at all. And generally when you are in a guild that can does hard, the upgrade is likely to go to a guild that does all extreme.

[brisk nova]

I didnt have a rough time actually ive enjoyed my entire time on this game - growing naturally, not with hand outs - and in actual fact have had it much easier than those who came before me - it did not take me a year to unlock all tiers - sounds to me like you had a worse time of it then me.
Guess we'll agree to disagree because I see absolutely no need for someone who starts today to avoid the grind when its part of the gameplay.

[vital plinth]

I'm not saying I had it worse, I also don't think I had it worse. I'm just saying people being able to get rewards for GUILD events they contribute to should be rewarded and I don't see a solid reason why that contribution has to be 1/20

it never was and now for extreme it is

Since it's a guild event it only seems right that the minimum you need to do doesn't equal to the average that needs to be done.

Also I'll agree to disagree when you finish the following sentence:
Guild events like LCoG, KC and DI should have a minimum contribution of 1/20 because..........

[spare herald]

The game should feel progresive. If you cant do the minimum personal score. It means you are not meant to join that level yet. I remember my first time managing through hard event was on level 67. I unlock my first T15 at level 73 along with the AR. It took time to get there. So on your point about weakest link, In my guild we have that weakest link and still stays in our guild because my “strongest link” can cover for their score. So its honestly about team effort, it sounds like your team cant actually reach the last rewards because no one can carry the weakest link score.

My previous guild was having an inactive people that didnt contribute to event making it impossible to clear extreme KC and I decided to move on to another guild. Its that simple really

[vital plinth]

Except, you're wrong, in extreme, there's no carrying. So I could (theoretically) solo an event and no1 would benefit anything from it. Unless they also meet the minimum, which is 1/20.

Well that's no entirely true, they would get more rewards because the total score would be higher, but basically it still means they need to hit the same personal level to get the same reward as that level

the only carrying that would be done is if you would have slackers that make sure your guild does not reach the total required score

the last person would not get all rewards even if they scored 9.99K this event eventhough our total score is way over 200k

[whole grove]

Carrying in extreme is opening up the path to keep morale high.
Keeps your high achievers not looking at who is not making their score. And lets the lower ones have space to grow

People also like early clears, going waaay over the 1/20 mark helps with that. It feels more like doing it for guild maintenance rather than for any reward tbh

Anyways, doing individual difficulty with multipliers along with the corresponding rewards is the way to keep everyone happy. I still like 1/20 but set it up so players can grow from newbie state while reaching it.

Also higher ceiling of stretch based on personal points for the overachievers. 😛

[tropic tiger]

I dont want to give people handouts.
I think it puts guilds in an awkward position when half of the guild can do extreme, and half can't.
There's no reason for the grand prize (the blueprint) to be awarded for 7K points on Extreme when those playing on Hard get the same reward at 4.4K points.
The multiplier idea above would balance this out, whilst still making it a team event.

If (for example) the multiplier word such that:

• Easy: x2
• Medium: x1.5
• Hard: x1 (no change)
• Extreme: x0.5
  Then everyone can set their difficulty to what suits them.
  The rewards can be tailored to everyone. Eg, at 4K indibidual points (after multiplier) Easy and Medium will get get an Oppulent BP, and Hard and Extreme will get the Platinum.
  All other rewards would be scaled- better keys, more shards, whatever, but the reward is always the same item type across all tiers.

[tulip pebble]

I'm with the majority. No handouts. If you don't make the score, you don't get the rewards. Gives you a goal to work towards.

[vital plinth]

Yup, might as well make ToT a guild event too and have your GM determine the difficulty.

You're not constructive at all nor are you bringing in any argument or adressing what people are writing.

If a multiplier applies, people still have goals to work towards.

[tropic tiger]

The guild would still have to hit the target as a whole (in this example, 80K for the BP).
Leader board can be handled through raw score (before multiplier), and there will always be guilds with players who are less active, or on holiday, or just want to complete the event faster so they can get on with their normal play style.

Let's face it, 10K isn't difficult to achieve for mid/end game players- I've just hit it after beating the level 9 boss, running 2 quests at lvl 12, and 6 quests per round of heroes. I'll keep playing until I get to the level 12 boss, because I want keys.

[vital plinth]

The issue isn't there for endgame players in an endgame guild, the problem is there when you have a mixed guild that contains people who cannot do extreme.

[tropic tiger]

I know, that's exactly what my guild has.

[vital plinth]

it's one of the reasons I left mine

[whole grove]

Very easy and scalable in the future to make the baseline to the hardest difficulty. So maths, the multiplier would just be like extreme required/hard required (7k/5k = 1.4x for hard difficulty). So that the old 5k personal = 7k on extreme.

If in the future we have extreme+, then just add an multiplier for extreme using the same method

[brisk nova]

Before the events changed, adding in extreme all of these perceived issues already existed and people just got on with it. You started the game, worked to get better, cleared more content as you went. You would go from not clearing the event to easily clearing it, as a player and a guild. People still carried, people still changed guilds if they wanted more or less expectations. Now they've added extreme and some yall are losing it, ive lost track of why at this point. There is no need for lower players to get an easier ride. No big deal if they're in a guild where that's an option but no one owes them that for doing less.

[vital plinth]

Except the enlarged the problem, because before the requirement wasn't 1/20

[whole grove]

Its the same ride

Just make it dependent on individual rather than guild difficulty. Hard players do the same effort for the same result, extreme players do the same effort for their new better result

Its not difficult to implement at all

They just chose a complicated method lmao

The problem is always going to be late game has far easier event than early players. Either cater to the newer or to the older. The way they do it now isn't scalable as the tiers get bigger

Some players still say its too easy

[vital plinth]

Also please stop bringing up the no hand-outs argument. By that definition of hands-outs, there were hand-outs before the update hit.

[brisk nova]

With the old settings we all had players less and more capable, those of us in mixed guilds i mean and some players simply didnt clear minimums yet. That in context hadnt changed. Keep playing, get better scores, feel that amazing sense of achievement at clearing the event.
My heros are in their 20s right now with crappy skills and low gear and I've been busy. With the new LCOG settings I swear this time around (extreme) was way easier then last months "hard" setting with my level 40 heros.
If anyone cant clear extreme then they can just get better. The exact same as before.

[vital plinth]

What is your point?

[brisk nova]

What is yours

[vital plinth]

That the way they set it up now, breaks guilds apart

[brisk nova]

Exactly who has broken apart cause youre the only one ive seen say anything of the sort

[whole grove]

Shhh don't talk about how easy this new lcog is

Tbh though, its only easy for people clearing lcog12. The people who couldn't even clear lcog11 I'm not having huge hopes unless they're motivated to improve. Hoping a 7k target instead of 5k is good enough motivation.

[brisk nova]

I couldn't clear 12

And with the normal quests I couldn't go beyond 7

[whole grove]

🤷‍♀️

[brisk nova]

But we dont talk about that 🤐

[whole grove]

I'm enjoying this infinite craft spree funded by lcog12 spam

[vital plinth]

I'm sure I and my situation aren't unique. I answered your question, so how about you answer mine. And while you're at it, explain why 1/20 is a good idea.

[brisk nova]

Ive said plenty, you just dont agree with any of it, which is fine, no obligation to, but anyways, good luck i guess

[vital plinth]

good point really

[limber marlin]

Because it promotes progress in the game. Something to work against like Rhyme said. She is spot on. That is how gaming works 🤷

[vital plinth]

So you're telling me without the extreme events there was nothing that romotes the progress of the game?

I'm asking why 1/20 is a good idea, not why a requirement is a good idea. Why not pick 1/3 or 1/40 or 1/1?

[limber marlin]

Because there is 20 people in a guild...

Yes, it is a new progress goal added to the game. I like it

[vital plinth]

So you're saying that before the game added extreme the whole setup of the event was flawed?

[limber marlin]

No that was good as well, now its even better and more fair

[blissful copper]

then make them all solo events, in a team event, you shouldn't need a limiter for rewards

[vital plinth]

I approve of that, then you're not depending on whether all your guild mates show u or not

[limber marlin]

It is still a guild event, you are just working on your own to a common goal to reach

Its not perfect, I agree on that point but its better than nothing

[vital plinth]

It's not a common goal though, it's a personal goal

It doesn't have to be either 1/20 or nothing

I would prefer solo event over 1/20 eventhough it changes nothing for me

[limber marlin]

No the goal is to reach 20/20 together

[vital plinth]

Why should you suffer for other people not doing their part for their own rewards?

[limber marlin]

I don't suffer, I like to do it together with my guild mates

That is a you thing

[vital knoll]

last minute, when you remember 👀

[limber marlin]

That hasnt happend in a while, keep up buddy

[brisk nova]

Actually solo events would make everyone much worse off. At the moment you only need a percentage to claim rewards. A flat solo score for hundreds of players wouldnt even get close. Ive claimed all rewards, i sure as heck didnt get the (guild) total of 200k i can tell ya that. Why you think it needs to be easier then that escapes me.

[vital knoll]

but solo events would let each individual person select their own difficulty, so unless someone was trying to reach beyond their means everyone would be able to get all the rewards available to them in a certain respect

ah sorry for the tag Vanellode

[tropic tiger]

Actually, I'm going to change my stance on this. I just did a comparison of old rewards vs extreme rewards for my lowest ranked guildie in the event.
At 2K points, gets:

• 35 scrolls
• 50 shards
• 15 champion coins
• 35 chunks
• 165 opulent gems
• 170 Platinum bangles
  = opulent keys
  = chest keys
  = card packs
  -4 Lux keys
  -1 Minor artifact key
  -150 gems
  -30 sigils.
  -1 Lux BP (but he might already have it anyway)

I'd say it's probably an upgrade running extreme.

[brisk nova]

True, if it was implemented that way, but again you still (presumably) wouldnt get more than you're getting now with a percentage of a larger score. It would vastly depend how it would be set up.

Also I dont care about being pinged lol its fine

[limber marlin]

Jup it is

[whole grove]

Sometimes you climb mountains because they exist 😂

We didn't need it since we surpassed by over 50m. But after showing something like this no one in the guild will have worries about people not doing their share 😛

[tropic tiger]

I wish Extreme still had minor artifact keys though. I stoll don't have any blueprints apart from the one from the content pass, and now I'll barely get any keys.

[brisk nova]

My highest guildie rn is 69k my lowest is 1.8k
And none of us care
But all of us put work into our growth

[limber marlin]

Yea, that is annoying

[spare herald]

my guild lowest is 0 and highest is 40k+. And no one bothers because they already said they are on vacations for a few week.

[spare herald]

How am I wrong again? Like I said it is progresive. If you can do an event solo and your team cant means you have level gap and should move to each different difficulty by being at a separate guild. If a level 20 can access all the extreme rewards right away just because it being carried by others, it would not be fair to others too.

[blissful copper]

its a "guild" event, if your guild finishes the objectives, no matter the level or anything else, the "guild" as a whole should get rewards, if its a "solo" event, you should do it on your own merits, adding "solo" cont to a "Guild" event is just dumb, either you want teamwork, or others to carry, if people can't finish the event because of level or whatever else, the people who do the extra work should at least know the effort is worth it

[spare herald]

But the personal contribution has been there since the early days of shop titans? They merely making extreme difficulties so the personal req is extreme too

how is it dumb

[still harbor]

Event system hasn't changed, as has already been pointed out, only the lines have moved.

Personal requirements stop unfair carrying advantages for lower players, help encourage personal growth in players, and ensure each guildie is contributing a fair share. It promotes a sense of community where every player should aim to contribute equally. Those who may not can still be covered by over achievers, for the benefit of everyone who did reach equal share.

It makes perfect sense, seems ridiculously fair, I can't see a problem personally

[tulip pebble]

I can tell you one big reason they would never implement it so lower players get all rewards even if they can't do 1/20th. It would create an issue with players making multiple accounts and feeding the new account rewards. They already have enough issues with people breaking the rules and creating second accounts to funnel gems. Just imagine fueling a second account with rewards.

[harsh grotto]

I was tempted to go down that road…. 😄

[vital plinth]

So on your point about weakest link, In my guild we have that weakest link and still stays in our guild because my “strongest link” can cover for their score.
The strongest link cannot cover for the weakest link for the weakest link to get more rewards, they can only contribute to the total score so they themselves get more rewards

[vital plinth]

Does not work on extreme, you cannot get covered in extreme not to any extent at all

[harsh grotto]

Agree to disagree!

A guild needs over performers to reach the final rewards if there are fellow guildies not making it there.

[vital plinth]

In that sense over achivers, people who cover, are people who do it for their own gain, not to help the people who cannot reach the limit by their selves. So that basically means the rich help the rich and the poor stay poor.

[harsh grotto]

They help themselves - because if no one covers for those nobody will reach the final rewards.

The poor don’t HAVE to stay poor.

[vital plinth]

Yup, that's the way it is, whether that's something that's desireable is a personal opinion, and my opinon is that it's not desireable to an extreme extent.

Well they certainly cannot choose their own difficulty now unless they're an officer and just pick a difficulty and then the rest has to deal with it.

[harsh grotto]

I experienced how fast some players early on can get used to be „fed by their guild“ giving the impression: I am looked after so why bothering?

[vital plinth]

I don't know if that was the case in my old guild, but there was always a minimum score and there still is, it's just not there for the extreme quests, which makes no sense to me especially because you cannot individually pick

[brisk nova]

There is a min score

[vital plinth]

In the worst case you can always make it that you pick your own difficulty and then you need to 1/20 it based on the difficulty you picked, then there's no slacking, you need to perform what you chose or you suffer, now someone else chooses it for you.

[harsh grotto]

Would THAT not REALLY turn guild events into solos? I dont know how many players like the „together“ more than solos?

[vital plinth]

But that's already the case for extreme

[harsh grotto]

I mean it would make recruiting a LOT asker

[harsh grotto]

It’s not

[vital plinth]

why not?

you need to 1/20 it for extreme

[harsh grotto]

Because if the guild does not reach to the final reward no one will be able to claim it.

And „extreme“ is a choice of the guild management. A FREE choice.

You need 1/20 OWN contribution to claim the reward yes. What if lets say 5 members not make it to the final final reward?

Then you can wave your final reward goodbye if you dont put in more than that

[vital plinth]

then 15 members didn't and maybe they would have gotten more from hard

[harsh grotto]

Still, extreme is a CHOICE … no one HAS TO go for that.

[vital plinth]

except it's not a personal choice

I mean it's basically the same as saying, well we now turn ToT into a guild event and the GM gets to pick the difficulty

[limber marlin]

The first few rewards in extreme are already better than the full hard reward tracks

[vital plinth]

Not if you cannot get the blueprint

[limber marlin]

The blueprint is not the best reward in the reward track but that is a matter of opinion I guess

[harsh grotto]

If one doesnt like it the first to be contacted should be the GM/officer in case they chose „too hard“.

[brisk nova]

Guilds had literally loads of time to fully discuss, compare scores, call votes etc. Extreme is a choice and any guild choosing it already knows what they can reasonably achieve. They already know who might fall short. They already know who will fly ahead because they can. All players will be able to collect what they earn literally exactly the same before. Nothing has changed. Unless youre suggesting that every single GM from a guild started today to the top guild of all time all collectively went tyrant and chose extreme regardless of what anyone wanted or could do.
It. Is. A. Choice.

[vital plinth]

Yes currently the situation. What is your objection to having everyone picking their own difficulty with a multiplier to the score correlated to the difficulty they picked?

[harsh grotto]

Can someone help me when that reward track rework was on YouTube?

[brisk nova]

You mean the video telling us?

[harsh grotto]

Thats no guild event any longer = no community = exactly that what you think extreme is doing

[harsh grotto]

Yes

[brisk nova]

I think its that one

[harsh grotto]

That when it went live?

[brisk nova]

Lemme check

[harsh grotto]

I mean the one before that

[vital plinth]

Why is it not a guild event if everyone still needs to contribute?

[brisk nova]

My mistake then sorry. Multiple things to remember 😅

[harsh grotto]

Established guilds had months to get ready

[vital plinth]

people doing hard would still need 1/25 or whatever to get to the end of their reward track

[brisk nova]

LCOG - extreme
200,000 guild, 10,000 player
Which is 1/20

LCOG - Current hard
110,000 guild 4,400 player
Which is less than 1/20 (5,500) but still falls within the fair share between 20 players

LCOG - Old setting (hard)
110,000 guild 5,000 player
Which again is less than 1/20 (5,500) but still falls into that fair share between 20 players

[harsh grotto]

How would it be a guild event if every member has an own reward track?

[vital plinth]

Because total score would still need to be met

[brisk nova]

Yea....so exactly as it is now lol

[harsh grotto]

Which total? Easy? medium? Hard? Extreme?

[vital plinth]

multiplier

So you can pick any, it doesn't matter

[brisk nova]

Youre basically asking for a solo reward track with the same/more rewards as what is currently available. So basically youre just asking that lower levels get more rewards without restrictions.

[harsh grotto]

So those ones capable of clearing easy rewards get a multiplier to reach the extreme rewards?

[vital plinth]

No so the ones clearing easy get easy rewards, the end. Scores from easy that go over the limit don't carry over to other players

[brisk nova]

How is that different to them just getting the rewards they qualify for now from hard/extreme.

[vital plinth]

atleast not out of their own difficulty, so easy can help easy but not medium

[harsh grotto]

So as I assumed earlier - make guild events solo events

[vital plinth]

No because you can still 1/30 your medium or whatever

and people from hard or extreme can cover for you

[brisk nova]

But why....why why why

Youre describing how it is now tho?

Im so beyond lost right now. I dunno what happened with your guild but its certainly not a reason to recode the entire event settings.

[harsh grotto]

One shouldn’t forget that for some guilds running on extreme only there is more effort for many guild, not for some, but for others.

I have seen burn outs when DI first dropped and we were a rather medium guild.

Small/medium roughly

[vital plinth]

Well speaking of burn outs, then more flexible would be better.

And thus more sustainable

[harsh grotto]

Which boils down again to the guilds management making the right decision for their folks.

[vital plinth]

I don't get why making it hard for people like GM is a step in the right direction, it's a game, shouldn't we want it to be as relaxing as possible?

where it's hard to step on people their toes instead of adding more opportunities to do so?

[harsh grotto]

So you really think you can save guilds from breaking by adding more soloing?

I can just speak for myself: If I need a solo-solo game I play something else.

[vital plinth]

No I don't think more soloing would save guilds, but I don't see it as soloing and apparently I can't explain to you why it's less soloing

[brisk nova]

So agree to disagree

[vital knoll]

So essentially, just trying to clear things up for ya Vannelode

Chiruchiru is stating that they'd prefer the system to work as it does now, but instead of the guild as a whole selecting the difficulty, each individual member does instead

and as such their respective personal contribution and totals would be different from player to player, but each player would still contribute to the total

if a player chose Hard instead of extreme, then they'd see hard values, and a player who chose extreme would see extreme values

but each players contribution would have a multiplier, so it doesn't negatively impact anyone
if say Player who chose hard earns 500 LCOG Gold, a player who chose extreme would see them earning 900 LCOG Gold instead and thats the contribution that would affect their reward track

damn its actually pretty confusing to try and explain

but I kinda see where they're coming from

that'd essentially be a way to appease everyone? but it'd also kinda take the whole fun and point out of the guild event for me personally

everyone would get rewards appropriate to their chosen difficulty, and people who choose harder difficulties aren't penalised if everyone else chooses a lesser one

[brisk nova]

Thats.....how it is now....

[vital knoll]

It isn't

the guild as a whole chooses the difficulty

[brisk nova]

No im saying the way points work, the rewards, the contributions....its already like that

[vital knoll]

yes but with the current system, if you're capable of earning the rewards for extreme, and your guild chooses hard instead
you lose out on rewards

and vice versa, if you're not capable of providing the equal contribution for extreme, then you're also out of luck if your guild chooses extreme, as you're not able to keep up

[brisk nova]

So move guilds. The way it has always been. I say again, nothing has changed. Either stay and get better or leave and still get better lol.

[vital knoll]

Well thats not exactly helpful for a discussion lol 😅
what would the negatives to this new system be for you personally?

If you're already in a guild that selects the extreme difficulty and easily achieves it with every player, then it literally has no effect on you at all if things are changed in this way

[vital plinth]

Snype, I know it's up to you, but personally I wouldn't put in any more effort into people who have their fixed opinion and aren't willing to listen

[brisk nova]

My guild is unaffected one way or the other tbh. But nothing has changed. Getting "more" rewards on a lower difficulty because you got "further" down the line doesnt get you more because the quantities are also lower. But getting "less" on a reward track with higher quantities of those things.
It is literally the same.
You get what you earn.

[brisk nova]

I was just thinking the same thing. This conversation has been exhausted and all parties are essentially repeating themselves now. Have a good day.

[vital knoll]

it wouldn't be getting more rewards or less, it'd be people choosing to get the rewards that is appropriate to them as an individual, rather than the guild as a whole

I mean, just to clear things up, I also don't really see any reason to change it, can't see a reason not to, but I don't think that guilds and people encountering obstacles that they can't beat and working towards overcoming them is a bad thing

I just don't like it when people clearly misinterpret or misunderstand a suggestion and then take a hardline stance against that suggestion without actually providing anything constructive to the discussion at all

[limber marlin]

Arent you doing the exact same though?

[still harbor]

I will give my final thoughts on this thread which is, to op, pretty conclusively the game population commenting here disagree and so likely it will not amount to anything. Try if you may, but I foresee it being in vain, and only in vain

[whole grove]

Not useless, the threads that have more replies get more attention. No matter what the views are, 488 replies means the community cares about it 😂

There's eyes on it probably, but whatever Kabam decides to do with that knowledge is up to them.

I think Snype's summary is pretty good

[vital plinth]

Nope, the people I try to discus this with come up with arguments, sure we don't have to agree, but atleast you for example are answering questions and coming up with things other than, "it should be like this, there's no problem, it is no problem because I say so"

[stuck shell]

What do you guys think if instead of instead of a guild choosing the difficulty if individuals could do? Like would it cause any problems for lower people to be able to have the reward track of easy/medium/hard and higher people get rewards based on extreme? Since you need the personal contribution alongside the guild contribution then it shouldn’t really matter if your personal track is different right?

[tulip pebble]

If they could do that I personally wouldn't care. As long as the player is getting the rewards equal to what they individually earned. I just doubt that they would make guild event difficulties player selected by individual choice.

[stuck shell]

Yeah they probably wouldn’t do this change but if a player earns 5k points on lcog when they really try and their guild gets 250k they should be able to choose to be on hard so they aren’t punished for being in a higher level guild

It would just be a small change

[whole grove]

Its a small change, allows people to do lower activity they want without affecting guild performance... and makes it possible for stretch to be decoupled from guild performance too. Extend it higher, base it on personal points for only those running extreme. Everyone can be happy

[tulip pebble]

It would allow for a more mixed guild, but that's why we all need to make the choice of what we're looking for in a guild. Personally I prefer a guild with players all around my same lvl. But there are high players that like to make new guilds to help new players. We can all still be friends in world chat.

[coral nimbus]

Not sure if I understand
But I'm totally against giving a t15 plat BP to a lvl 20 merchant

[whole grove]

Lvl 20 merchant wouldn't get plat unless they can do 5k individual points at least
Which doesn't happen until lv 57 usually

No different than how it is on hard now

Easy and medium don't see plat blueprint

[stuck shell]

Yeah

It wouldn’t make it easier for lower level players, it would just make it so their personal contribution could go towards a reward track of their choice so they don’t need the extreme requirements just for being in a higher level guild

[coral nimbus]

Just make everything individual then, remove guilds altogether

Lowbies are benefiting from high level guild perks and building lvls
Extreme difficulties would be the tradeoff

[stuck shell]

Why do the new event difficulties need to be a trade off that hurts “lowbies” I don’t think that was at all the intent of the new system

[coral nimbus]

That's actually a nice idea, make everything individual
Just multiply the player's ticks by 20 to account for the changes and eliminate the guilds. Solves every guild related problem

Each player would then benefit directly from their own investments and they can select their own event difficulty

Even issues on holding bounties would be solved

[stuck shell]

It would even though it would feel more individualistic, the fact that rewards need 1/20 anyways already makes events feel that way

[coral nimbus]

The tradeoff would be
No more gifts
No Guild requests
No upgrade timer reduction
No cleaning/energy gift

But everyone would get what they deserve in terms of
Building lvls/investments
Event rewards

And we get our own bounty board

Essentially making everyone in a "solo guild"

[stuck shell]

Why does it have to be all or nothing?

Why does changing events to not punish mean having to make everything completely solo based

There can be nuance

[coral nimbus]

Because this complaint made me realize, I could possibly have higher level buildings is everything was solo

Why would you even keep guilds at this point

[whole grove]

Because community is a thing. I'm a rare case that stayed in a single guild from lvl 50 up to lvl 94. 0G up to 2T+, rank 1500s down to rank 300s.

Its a fun experience, I probably wouldn't still be playing this game had I taken the easy path of jumping guilds for ez time

[stuck shell]

Me too, I’m almost level 90 and I’ve been in the same guild since 45 and now my dad and gf have joined and we have a nice community

[whole grove]

Its fun, I think the community really makes the game.

[limber marlin]

It does, and that is why swapping to single player events is not a good idea

[jolly heath]

In my guild, Extreme has led to renewed discussion of event strategies, offers of assistance with components & moonstones to keep things going, celebrations of individual successes & our collaborative successes with the event, etc. We chose Extreme together, we review effort vs rewards together. We also are now talking heroes development.
Community isn't coded. It's created by people. Awkwardly.
And what Vuaux said.

[stuck shell]

Would you consider letting players choose which difficulty of rewards to get be single player events? Or were you meaning someone else’s idea

[limber marlin]

It is basically the same thing isnt it?

[whole grove]

Not really, theres still a guild portion to it

In that guilds can't be just full of invest pillars doing zero, people will still be active and doing community things, getting help

Just the community includes everyone and not only people at similar levels

[stuck shell]

No there would still be guild contribution, you would just get to choose what difficulty your reward track is

[limber marlin]

That is also going to create problems in guilds. People tend to stop doing the event if they are doing with their personal score. The players that now do more because they havent reached extreme personal score yet are going to stop early. Making it harder on the people that do need the extreme personal end.

Personally I don't care because my guild is not one of those. But others do care about that.

Which makes this end up in the same result again. You need to adjust your guild to fit in people that are on the same level or on the same plan. So not solving the original problem that the original poster has.

(which is unsolvable, you cant please everyone)

[stuck shell]

It’s true that you can’t please everyone but it’s possible to please a higher % of people still and you have a good point that some people would stop when their own personal, usually this wouldn’t be a huge issue in this scenario because it’s the people that can’t contribute much anyways that would be choosing lower level event tracks but still

[whole grove]

The multiplier idea is that someone who stops when they hit their own personal, due to multiplier is equal to 1/20 on extreme. Everyone is happy, can think of it like a percentage

100% personal pts req to finish reward track on whatever difficulty means you've completed 1/20 for the guild total

They themselves will get whatever reward they selected for their difficulty, and extreme players don't need to worry about them as long as they are active players

[spare herald]

I was saying “cover their score” as to reach the end rewards for the guild. As you know Dragon Invasion have a set of limit to get the score. The weakest link just accept it because they dont play as often

[vital plinth]

You're not covering them, your covering their score for your reward that way. So you don't help the lower people, you'd be helping the ones that can finish the event if it were a solo event.

[coral nimbus]

If being in a high level guild does not help a low level player then the way it is now is all good. A low level in a high ranked guild should expect extreme events. Nothing is out of line

[rain perch]

Actually, I didn't find it difficult. It was easy and I got more rewards

[whole grove]

Rather than high or low level, I'm more worried about burning guildmates out. Balancing the people who will get bored when content isn't challenging enough with the people who don't have much time to play

Game can't give us even more challenging things without burning out a bunch of people as it is now. And yeah, breaking communities further. If people can have their own choice of difficulty, then we can go higher

[twilit bloom]

LCOG this time round has been the easiest its ever been. Think most active players could surpass extreme requirement with in 2-3 months of playing. If day one players can complete extreme event where is the acheivement

[vital knoll]

no one is suggesting they should be able to 😛

they're simply stating that if a day one player ended up in a guild that the majority of players were capable of doing extreme, they should be able to also select a difficulty for the event that'd be appropriate for themselves as an individual player

so they'd be getting the rewards of the lower difficulty event, and the other guild members would be getting the rewards for the higher difficulty one I'd maybe read the thread a bit

[vital knoll]

well actually I suppose there could've been one or two people who did, but you're right, that would be dumb 🤣

[coral tide]

We honestly had a guild member leave because they couldnt collect all the rewards. I feel like the individual requirement is set a bit high. Most guilds are going to have a few people that go over the top. Then the majority of the guild is going to be right in the middle, and you will have a few people that do their best but they are under performing. The advantage of being in a guild with higher level people is that can Carry the lower people in the guild and help them achieve the final bonuses.

Currently the Extreme difficulty is Attainable for the guild but the lower level people cant get the 1/20th of the total requirement. Causing them to feel like they need to leave. I would say the Extreme Difficulty goal for the guild is set appropriately But the Individual requirement needs to be atleast halved to allow some of the lower people still be able to get the end goals!

[vital plinth]

So it's not to beat a dead horse, but I think the community event shows multiple things.

It's very much possible to complete this event in the required time. for even 20k players (assuming that's the amount of active players playing this game (my old guild was around rank 1000 and had 17-20 daily players at the time) that's 10k herbs per player. Spread out over 10 days. That's 1k/day. My regen is about 6 crafted herbs per minute so assume for the average player that will be 3, that's 180 per hour. There's a 20% multicraft chance in the ascension, so I'm just going to assume the average player has exactly 20% multicaft chance. So 216/h. So that's a bit over 4 hours a day. Not taking talents and dismantling into consideration.

1. We're currently going towards 80ish M out of the required 200M. So we're not making it as it is.

One reason could be because the rewards aren't "great" and the other could be, because there's simply no will to do it. This seems very plausible.

Another reason could be that the event is so big, thinking your own contributions don't significantly affect the number as a whole.

Another reason is that there's simply no sense of community at all. Which is not weird because that's what kabam is pushing for. I've seen 2 different quotes from Kabam people saying people in your guild are just people who are just as rich as you. And loyalty to your guild is stupid because it's not a biker gang.

If you don't even promote the sense of community within a guild, how can you expect people to feel a part of the community as a whole?

The event as is, is just a number we see on our screen.

Also it's a community event, yet there are no set required minimum scores, so even people contributing nothing can still collect things (3 times), yet I see no complaints about that.

So in short, Kabam should promote building communities and by keeping guilds together that would at least help.

[leaden goblet]

The experienced people may be in a room working towards their bonus and the inexperienced people aren't able to contribute enough. They are no under no obligation to sacrifice their own gain for the newbies. But outside of work, many of them take personal time to help the newbies get ahead- not obligatory, either. Some newbies have the drive to succeed, others don't. Those that work at it will eventually gain the experience and higher compensation. Those who don't aren't entitled to it.
Also going to take this opportunity to shout out a big THANK YOU to the discord contributors and st-central.net

[vital plinth]

That's all for personal gain. As a company it's better for all of your teams to have a 100% succes rate rather than one team 100% and the other 80%. And the 80% in this case wont be improving much because they have to reinvent the wheel.

So yes it may be better for the individual, but it's certainly not better to the group as a whole.

Also to me that's sounds very american, we've got plenty of jobs here where you get 0 bonus based on your personal performance. So that isn't even a thing. In my previous 2 jobs there was either "you perform sufficient or we don't extent your contract if it is temporary".

[limber marlin]

Those 2 quotes you mention are not from Kabam staff. They are from Laterus, the original creator of ST Central and GOAT of the community.

[vital plinth]

I didn't know, I just assumed orange means kabam staff

[limber marlin]

Nah, its quotes from ST Central discord where we have orange as mods

No worries, just wanted to clarify

[vital knoll]

founders* 👀

you fancy fucks

[limber marlin]

Oh yea that is the name of it 😛

Laterus actually made that name iirc 😄

[strange forum]

Personally I am a fan of the 1/20th requirement for extreme events. It means that everyone in the guild has to do their share. In a way I would even prefer it if the new "bonus" rewards (the 3 beyond the old end point) would require more than 1/20 individual contribution, so people actually have to work for those final bonus rewards.

I really dont understand why this would have any impact on the guild or community. If you cannot make the points needed to collect a reward you shouldnt punish the guild by making the rest of the group do a lower difficulty, you should see it as a challenge to get better. 🤷‍♀️

-# I am sure this probably came up already but there are a lot of words in the 500+ replies on this thread. 😬

[stuck shell]

I think one of the counter arguments was that if everyone needs at least 1/20th why should it rely on everyone else doing their 1/20th? people also liked the idea of beyond the grand prize having it just be dependent on individuals. I’m seeing some people in my guild burning out while others are enjoying the challenge

[whole grove]

I just question why call the bonus rewards stretch if they have no difference from main rewards. If they are supposed to be a challenge, then make it depend only on personal points and really make it a challenge. Boost stretch requirements much higher up.

Right now 'Completes events' means completes the stretch too

[golden spade]

I just question why call the bonus rewards stretch if they have no difference from main rewards

It's a marker that Kabam can use to say "okay, we consider the event done here, carry on for some bonus stuff if you want but you already won the grand prize"
LCoG for example the blueprint is at 140k, anything past that will never be another print
KC and DI give their currency but in smaller amounts than the grand prize milestone

[whole grove]

Yup so they set the main reward as what they consider reasonable, stretch being for overachievers

And then we all treat the stretch as complete. Might as well be setting the main reward up at the top because we are all overachievers -.-

Guilds that don't complete events can't compete with those that do for most recruits who complete minimums

If they wanted to use the main reward lower to prevent burnout, it doesn't help. But making the stretch into personal would, and also make the people asking for special challenge happy too. The stretch rewards don't even have to be that good

[coral nimbus]

Only Kabam consider the event done at that point. Releasing info on their version of "done" on update notes is just 🤦 🤦

[harsh grotto]

Seriously: WHO has ever considered the last 3 dragons of DI as a „bonus“?

When the expression „events clear“ was used it was for complete.

[vital plinth]

Well not me, but they did, because at some point they were hiding it.

[harsh grotto]

They did, yes but I mean who of us did?

[vital plinth]

As a side note though, if it's extra, I don't mind 1/20, but for the guild event i still mind 1/20 for extreme

[harsh grotto]

From the patchnotes:

Extreme is suited for established guilds of advanced players, wishing to face steeper requirements in exchange for greater rewards. In addition, it features a few extra bonus rewards beyond the Grand Prize, for guilds who want to go the extra mile.

[vital plinth]

The thing is, if it's on the reward track and it's not repeating, it's not extra. atleast not for me

if for instance you have DI and your final reward is at 10M and you make the bonus rewards at 11M, 13M, 16M, 20M, 25M, 31M, 38M and so on for the same reward, I would call the event done at 10M

bonus rewards for example being 25DM

[brazen vortex]

May I ask, why in a group of 20 is doing 1/20th a problem?

No one's stopping other players from doing more or less if they want to

[dark sigil]

I love the update, I just wish it was a bit more balanced for example in our guild we had 3 people not able to complete extreme lcog and 5 not able to do extreme DI so we left with a choice to either punish 15/17 guild members by reverting to hard, less rewards for all, or punish the 3/5 members with less rewards when we run extreme,

if we run extreme theres a chance that a majority don't get the platinum bp, which means splitting the guild up so people can find what difficulty they need

[limber marlin]

How far could they complete DI and LCoG? The extreme line has better rewards even if you dont complete it. Only problem is LCoG and the plat bp.

[brisk nova]

That word "punish" as if its not just the exact same features/options/scaling as before. I dont see as many people bringing up medium and easy, no conversation about how much relief lower guilds must now feel, no mention of this being good for new and/or growing players. I feel the perspectives are not aligning with the reality (as I see it) which is that the entire concept of extreme setting is the same as the original (now hard) setting. Bigger players were always going way beyond the needed scores, carrying, wanting more. Lower players always struggled, had to push, had to grow, had to get themselves to the levels needed to clear an event (their own contributions).
The only way I can see it being an issue is if those lower players couldn't clear (now) hard and so are obviously not clearing extreme but even so its still missed rewards, regardless of what the rewards are.
Nothing has changed.

[vital knoll]

I'm not sure a "Nothing has changed" or "its the same as its always been" is a good argument personally 😛
if theres a way to improve things for people, then surely thats a good thing
and as mentioned previously, some people have been affected by the difficulty selection addition (otherwise this thread wouldn't exist or be as prominent as it is)
and some of the changes discussed would make things better for some of these situations without affecting anyone else

if a change can be implemented which will just be beneficial or neutral to people, then why shouldn't it be

the only way I can see arguing against just outright improvements to the game or the experience for players is if the feasibility from a development perspective is out of scope or unreasonable

[brisk nova]

I did say perspectives are different, which is absolutely fine, its been interesting to see how we all view this. I dont think there is gonna be a way to keep everyone perfectly happy all the time tho. I dunno why some players are being hit hard and some arnt, are people being kicked or choosing to leave etc? I guess I just dont see a difference when the old options were essentially A: stay in your guild and grow to meet the higher goals or B: leave and find a lower goal guild better suited to you.
Exactly as it is now.

[vital knoll]

the whole point of this thread is to provide C: stay in your guild and grow to meet the higher goals, while being able to choose a difficulty for events appropriate for you

which would prevent the need for B:

which is arguably a bad option, since in a perfect world people would be able to play with people they enjoy to play with regardless of what stats they may have

[brisk nova]

Yes I agree, peolle should be able to simply play, be with friends etc
Which is why in my mind its that simple. Growth will always happen, I wouldn't give up my guild because i hadnt grown yet.

Or expect anyone else to.

[vital knoll]

100%, but its a game and games are meant to be enjoyable
and personally I think its hard to argue that being able to choose attainable goals for yourself in the short term, while still working towards progressing to achieve longer term goals is the more enjoyable experience

you can still do the hard difficulty event, while working on your own progression towards being able to do the extreme difficulty events

[brisk nova]

Yes you can, I just feel you can also do that on extreme. If you wont reach the end anyway what does it matter what the end is.

[vital knoll]

because it leads to a sense of unfulfillment, which is objectively dumb, but is a human flaw a lot of people have

[brisk nova]

True enough. Doing extreme would take you much longer with your growth so would feel far less attainable. I can see that. I can imagine all the players that grew enough to finally have the end goal in sight for (now) hard and suddenly its like nope, its further away now (extreme). Just to be clear here im not saying this from a perspective of lower players having to make do, im saying it from the perspective of they shouldn't be forced out of guilds because of this change. If GMs are causing that or circumstances (like how you and i both just said) are forcing them out, that sucks

[vital knoll]

from a different angle, I'll provide a scenario

you have a guild of 19 friends, they have another friend who wants to play the game, they invite said friend
the existing guild is doing extreme events, as such the new player can't really achieve anything in the events personally because the event difficulty is set by the guild as a whole

the options currently are, the new player has to play the game and hop through random guilds until they get to the point that they are able to achieve extreme events and can join their friends guild (which would also result in either, the friends guild being 19/20 for a long period of time, or having to kick someone to make space when the time comes) this would also lead to many guilds losing a member who had no intention of staying for the long term too
or b, stick in their friends guild with a constant sense of unfulfillment and unenjoyment simply because event difficulty is set by guild and they aren't realistically able to achieve the scores required

[brisk nova]

See this is where im coming from....id add the friend anyway....and let them grow

[vital knoll]

but the friend would have a bad experience whenever events would roll around

if you think a brand new player would enjoy having to accomplish extreme events from the get go, I'm not sure what to say 🤣

[brisk nova]

Why tho, they get whatever score they get and are rewarded for it?

A brand new player wouldnt have been able to do hard either, its always been the same, new players fare better in new guilds

[vital knoll]

perhaps they'd be fine* with it, but it would be factually a better experience if they could select the difficulty appropriate to them

thats the point

there is improvement to the current system that can be made, and would have a positive impact

[brisk nova]

Contuing this message a sec - But they would still join despite the void between them and higher guilides
They still can

[vital knoll]

I don't see any reason to argue against it with the sole reason being "its always been like that, people can just deal with it, even if its less fun than adjusting the system"

[vital knoll]

Yes they can, but what is better
A: being forced to do extreme, or
B: being able to do easy, etc while the rest of the guild can still do extreme

its really not a complicated question, one is just kinda factually and objectively better

[vital plinth]

the problem isn't that you can't do more or less, the point is that you get less reward if you can't make the 1/20. The argument in favour of 1/20 is that you should contribute equal share for equal rewards. Arguments why you shouldn't need to do 1/20 is because, 1 you didn't need to do it before for all rewards, 2 you can't have people cover for you if you make slightly less. 3 if everyone is supposed to get 1/20, then everyone just chases their personal goal, thus it's not really much of a guild event unless people fail. 4 if it's a guild event then why not let loose of 1/20 and let the guild decide whether they think everyone in the guild contributed enough or not?

Sure you can have some minimum score. I just think 1/20 is poorly chosen.

[brisk nova]

Well I wish luck and good fortune to all players lower and higher and hope they find the guild for them. I will simply exist in my safe little bubble where this sorta thing doesn't touch me or my guildies.

[vital knoll]

I think the 1/20th is valid*
people should contribute their own fair share to earn all the rewards available

plus its there to prevent people from just making a guild filled with alts and pumping them with rewards

[brazen vortex]

I read all of your points and not once did I see a single downside from asking people to do their share. Maybe I'm just a firm believer of people doing their share of the work but I'm not seeing any justification for slacking off

[vital plinth]

i don't say there needs to be no requirement at all, i'm just saying 1/20 is poorly chosen.

If you're in a guild, I think it's fair the the guild decides whether you contribute enough or not. The reason behind it is that people don't balance 100% some people enjoy some content more than others.

If you have a person who mainly likes questing, then LCoG is great for them, but KC might not be so great. Therefor if you let go of 1/20 you can have them overachieve in LCoG and underachieve in KC for example

As long as the guild manages I think it should be fine to some extent

[vital knoll]

I don't think thats a great argument though, if you don't enjoy the events and as such don't put effort into them, you shouldn't get the rewards

just because people like different aspects of the game, doesn't mean they should be entitlled to the rewards from all other aspects

1/20th isn't a big ask if you could select the difficulty appropriate to you

[brazen vortex]

Well more than 1/20th makes it unfair as you're doing more to cover for people. Less than 1/20 and you have zero reason personally to cover your end.

[vital plinth]

Yeah, when you can select the difficulty it's not a big ask, but when you can't it may be

[vital knoll]

so I think personally keeping the scope of the initial suggestion more clear and concise would be more wise and conductive to a better discussion

[vital plinth]

if you need less then 1/20 then you need to complete the event as a guild

which makes sense, because it's a guild event

[vital knoll]

if you need less than 1/20th it means you need less than your entire guild to put forward their own share

thats the opposite

it just means individuals would be putting forward more effort for everyone to get the rewards

[vital plinth]

no it means the guild as a whole needs to do more than the bare minimum a person needs to do to get the full rewards

[brazen vortex]

You still need the whole guild to finish the event. As you still need 20 x 1/20th to get the whole

[vital plinth]

which is always how it's been

[vital knoll]

if anything, increasing it to like 1/10th personal contribution to get max rewards would be more along the lines of needing to complete the event as a guild 🤣

[vital knoll]

and the bare minimum shouldn't necessarily be what people should be striving to achieve in events

for it to be appropriate to call it, completing the event as a guild

surely if you completed the event as a guild, you'd put forward more than the minimum

[vital plinth]

what? if you need 1/10th, then for LCoG, then instead of needing 10k you'd need 20k, then no1 needs to do anything more than the minimum for sure even if half of the people aren't joining

[vital knoll]

if everyone did that, it'd result in everyone putting in more than 1/20th

[vital knoll]

sorry I got mixed up, I meant the other way around 🤣

make it so everyone has to do double the current minimum personal

[vital plinth]

Look I agree that if you can pick your own difficulty, 1/20 is a fair ask. If you can't, then it's not.

[vital knoll]

then stick to proposing the argument that picking your own difficulty is the better ask

since it'd solve the issue, without needing to adjust the personal requirement which is arguably just a more hot issue and arguably a bad suggestion imo

[vital plinth]

I'm not asking for anything to be honest I was just venting and I do think the system can be improved, but ultimately I don't assume they're going to read this thread and then just pick whatever they like. I assume if anything, they will do whatever they think is best, not choose 1 option

[brisk nova]

Are you suggesting that not a single guild had a unanimous agreement to the chosen difficulty
In a sense, hundreds of players did choose their difficulties, together

[vital knoll]

well they generally don't read the threads afaik, they just take the initial suggestion proposed and contemplate that, regardless of the amount of interaction a suggestion has and whatnot

[vital plinth]

But yes, personal difficulty choice and 1/20 if you do is in my eyes the best option.

[vital knoll]

no one is suggesting that 🤣

[brazen vortex]

Ok so I think I'm following the reasoning.

You want it to be less than 1/20th because not everyone is capable of doing the difficulty suggested and you don't want them to be forced into participating fully as you know they'll fail instead of just lowering the difficulty or having them move to an easier guild?

[vital knoll]

what are you even saying lol

[vital knoll]

sounds about right
I'd say that the suggestion to be able to select difficulty is just outright a better choice aye

1/20th makes sense as you should contribute your own fair share, and shouldn't be changed imo

[brazen vortex]

If you can't sustain what's asked, then just pick a lower difficulty. If you can't do that because the guild isn't going to, then maybe you need to improve or find a new guild

Everyone grows at different rates

[brisk nova]

Im being a doorknob cause yall are making it sound like hundreds of players got forced into a lack of choice
Yes some people will move guild....
People have always moved guilds for various reasons including events
So yea....nothing has changed, move or dont move, its not that deep

[vital plinth]

what is wrong with a choice for your own difficulty?

[brazen vortex]

Because it's a guild event

[vital plinth]

if the option was currently there, would you ask Kabam to remove it?

[vital knoll]

that is literally the problem lol
there is another path that the suggestion of being able to choose your own difficulty opens which is just better

[brazen vortex]

Absolutely

[vital knoll]

I think you misunderstand how the suggestion works

you'd all pick your own difficulty, and your individual contribution would be multiplied or decreased to align with others chosen difficulties

[brazen vortex]

Probably yeah that's why I'm trying to get clarification

[vital knoll]

so everyone is providing to the overall end goal

just doing so while being asked to participate and doing the event in a way that doesn't put them at an overwhelming disadvantage

[brisk nova]

And if this idea was implemented and all 20 people chose their own difficulties, people would still move

[vital knoll]

if you choose extreme and everyone else chooses hard, for you personally, it'd be the same as if everyone else chose extreme

[brazen vortex]

So extreme is the default persay, and at 1:1, hard is 3/4, medium 2/4 and easy 1/4. So they get multiplied towards the guild goal but have the lower rewards?

[iron zinc]

last event on of our members had 501k total....512k was the amount needed for all rewards...he then said it would cost several hundred gems to get that final reward...thats where the problem lies...he had a good event and was punished for just falling short

[vital knoll]

but it wouldn't be because the guild was forced to choose a difficulty that some people aren't capable or want to try and accomplish

I don't see the relevance

[vital knoll]

Aye

[vital plinth]

yes numbers for multiplying would be end reward for extreme divided by easy
and the same fore hard and medium

[brisk nova]

Im still not seeing who was forced tbh, people have always had to choose guilds/members based on level/invests/events etc

[brazen vortex]

That's not the worst idea. I feel like it would be easier for people to do less and get away with it. But if that's what the GM is ok with then that's ok I guess

[vital knoll]

the numerous people who have come forward in this thread and provided their own negative experiences

[vital plinth]

What do you mean get away with it? they get rewards based on their difficulty

[vital knoll]

even if you go with the reasoning that the current state of the game is neutral, this is literally just an improvement

[vital plinth]

do less, get less, do more, get more

[brisk nova]

Numerous? Imma have to look again cause I feel the same 4 people have kept this going and the occasional dip in from someone else doesnt represent the entire player base.

[vital knoll]

and this is what I've been personally trying to get into peoples heads 🤣 no offense or anything
its just hard to convey the point

[vital knoll]

read what I said afterwards, it literally does not matter

[brazen vortex]

If they only need to do 1/4th of the work to get the same overall contribution that someone doing extreme has to do then that feels cheap

[vital knoll]

the suggestion being put forward is literally just an improvement

[vital plinth]

no if they do 1/4th it would still count as 4/4 for the total score

[brazen vortex]

Yes but they're still doing 1/4th of the effort

[vital knoll]

but they get the lower difficulty rewards

and for them, it wouldn't be 1/4th the effort

[golden spade]

Tell you what this sounds like
An absolute hell to implement and balance correctly 😛

[vital knoll]

just 1/4th the score

I suppose

[brazen vortex]

If a GM wants a certain level of growth in a guild and you have members always on easy just coasting by because they don't need to do more. Then I'd just replace them

[vital plinth]

so basically if for instance the extreme goal would be 200k, and the easy one would be 2k, and they would do 1/20 of 2k which is 100, then that would count as 10k for extreme people.

[vital knoll]

because 1/4th the effort implies that somebody who is for example, only crafting tier 7s compared to somebody who is able to craft tier 15s is somehow putting in less efforts

[vital knoll]

and thats fair, and you'd still be able to do that

thats doesn't really affect the suggestion though

[vital knoll]

oh most likely which is why I said earlier, I'd see it as a valid argument if you came from a game design perspective and whatnot 🤣

but thats on the devs to figure out

[brisk nova]

An improvement to what lol, kabam didnt drastically change anything they just added to the already existing system which people just got on with
But now there's been a change everyone has gone into overdrive for more, and what I assume would be a more drastic change

[brazen vortex]

I guess I'm not looking at this from a perspective of a mixed guild of lower and higher players. I'm looking at this from the perspective of "everyone can do extreme, they just want to slack off"

[vital plinth]

you can't slack of at any difficulty under the system we're discussing

[vital knoll]

an improvement to the current system, where its quite clear to see where somebody might be put into an undesirably situation

[brazen vortex]

If you're capable of doing extreme easily. Then it'll take you 1/4th of the effort if you can swap to easy and don't care about the rewards.

[vital knoll]

and it could be amended with the suggestion proposed

[vital knoll]

for sure, but then you get less rewards?

oooh hmmmm

[brazen vortex]

But if you don't care about the rewards...

[vital knoll]

I see the issue

[vital plinth]

that's actually very valid lol

[vital knoll]

Aye, you've fucked me there good and proper

Every suggestion has its failings 🤣

[brazen vortex]

I'd kick that person from the guild

[vital plinth]

You still can

[vital knoll]

well I was thinking of it from a different perspective

[vital plinth]

they don't need to be failing in an event to kick them

[brazen vortex]

It's like the people who have like 200G and ask for a guild with level 23+ worker buildings. They don't contribute nearly enough to help anyone at all, but want to mooch

[vital knoll]

you'd essentially be able to have a guild where 19 of the players do easy and easily get 19/20th of the contribution for the 20th player whose doing extreme, without having to put in the effort to achieve those scores?

[vital plinth]

well you can always set maximum levels per difficulty

[vital knoll]

oh for sure, but thats a different thing, people are able to run their guild however they want, this suggestion wouldn't really change that so much I'd think

[whole grove]

Its not difficult to implement, all the framework is already there. We just act as if the baseline is the hardest difficulty and add multiplier as so:

#1398048573496623154 message

Copy pasting my example from before because people keep arguing and the explanations keep getting buried

I feel like its an argument between people who understand math and people who don't. I'm sorry. 😅

[vital plinth]

so above 40 means no easy, above 60 means no medium, above 80 is always extreme

[brazen vortex]

Just like setting minimum invest to join, id love to set minimum difficulty

[vital knoll]

it'd just give the individual players the ability to affect their own enjoyment

[vital knoll]

good suggestion, we'll add it to the pot 🤣

[vital knoll]

"you'd essentially be able to have a guild where 19 of the players do easy and easily get 19/20th of the contribution for the 20th player whose doing extreme, without having to put in the effort to achieve those scores?"
I feel like this is a valid failing to be fair

which I don't know if it was jackals intent but yeah

this bit, just a bit further up

[brazen vortex]

Minimum contribution on extreme is now 1/19 because everyone should give 110%

[whole grove]

They are also getting easy rewards in that case, theres no problem on the event end

But they will not be doing any decent investment

[vital knoll]

yeah but it does kinda remove the whole "doing guild events as a guild" and equal effort arguments

[whole grove]

So if the extreme player wants decent buildings, chances are they won't be happy in that situation

Someone who provides 100% of their difficulty equals 1/20 of the event score

Thats pretty fair

Exactly how extreme is now

[vital knoll]

true but the rest of the guild are also required to put in the same amount of effort

if they could lower the amount of effort by picking easy, it'd kinda take the whole feeling and point of guild events away

but I do feel as though the suggestion is still an improvement

[stuck shell]

Why would it though? Then you are way lowering your individual rewards

[stuck shell]

I like this idea

[vital knoll]

think its more just a personal preference thing, it definitely would for me at the very least

[brisk nova]

Or between people who are chill and untouched and have stable mixed guilds vs those whos world ended with this change.

[vital knoll]

I feel like trying to be dismissive or diminishing how people feel isn't a very good way of going about things

its not unreasonable to literally just see how someone who was caught unawares by this change could've had a negative experience as a result

[whole grove]

Even people with stable guilds, in the future may have members who have life issues and decide to drop activity

It would be nice to keep them, because community. With this they can stay as long as they're active.

[brisk nova]

Im not trying to dismiss anything but it is factual that this is terrible for some and not for others but its not the maths its the perspectives. If it was the maths then why is my guild, with a very wide range of scores, completely unphased or affected. If it was maths then us not caring wouldn't stop it breaking us up. But it hasnt has it. Cause its not that serious.

[vital knoll]

and can choose a difficulty thats appropriate to their activity

[vital knoll]

How is it terrible for some?

explain this, because I fail to understand

if you're in a guild, where everyone already achieves extreme, it quite literally has zero effect on you

actually, if you're in any guild, it would have zero effect on you as an individual really

[brisk nova]

Thats what some have been saying, guilds breaking up, people having to leave friends, struggle to play etc. Terrible. For them.

[vital knoll]

it would only have a positive impact on those that find themselves in guilds where the majority of players are at a different stage of events than they are

[vital knoll]

oh my apology I misunderstood 🤣

[brisk nova]

Its been a fast conversation lol no worries

[vital knoll]

but to add to that, your guild is but 20 people in the vastness of the games playerbase
and its not a case of maths its a case of being able to choose what you think you're capable of achieving as an individual, or being able to choose what would be most enjoyable for you as an individual

the proposed change wouldn't affect your guild at all, and if the existing way the game works isn't affecting your guild negatively either, thats fine
but the problem is that it is affecting others negatively, and there is a way to change the game to improve their situations while not affecting yours

[vital plinth]

actually it's not necessarily not affect her guild, it may improve it when some people start to climb higher than the difficulty they're in now

[vital knoll]

if I see suggestions that don't impact me, but can be beneficial to others then I see no reason not to have that implemented
unless theres a dramatic hurdle in terms of game scope, or development and whatnot

like if somebody suggestion to be able to have a setting ingame that would make it so you could go first person with your shopkeeper and walk around your shop?
does it affect me? not at all, is it outside the scope of the game and not really viable? 100%

I think the main thing (I actually used this in an interview I had recently to be fair)
is if it can change somebody's negative experience into a positive one

and the suggestion in this thread can in my opinion

but being able to go first person with your shopkeeper and walk around your shop, while cool, I don't think anyone is having a negative experience by it not being in the game

[limber marlin]

It all comes down to Kabam willingness to change something for a small amount of people that have this problem. And if they even see it as a problem.

And from being here for multiple years I can say they probably won't change it.

But I have been wrong before .

[vital knoll]

I don't think its necessarily the small amount of people that have this problem now though
its more so that it can prevent newer players from experiencing this problem in the future, and as such improve playler retention

I think thats something worthwhile to consider from a business perspective

[limber marlin]

I also think it is a bad idea though. It takes the whole progression feeling out of the game for events. That is something that should stay. But that is just me

[vital knoll]

hmm, but you'd still progress from hard, to extreme and whatnot
you'd just not be put into a situation where you're forced to not be able to complete an event due to a guild choice
I can definitely see your argument though

but I mean, theres a lot of things added that have been added purely so people wouldn't have that feeling of missing out

like the whole thing with the "Bonus rewards"

[limber marlin]

Its still there a little but not as much pressure on it. Which I don't like. I want a game to force me to get better. And force me to make decisions. Do I stay in the guild, do I leave and go to a better one and so on.

Bonus rewards just made the FOMO feeling worse though

[vital knoll]

yup, I agree

the reason they added them though, is to prevent it, it just didn't really hit the mark

and I feel the same way in terms of like a game that pushes me to get better, but I also appreciate that its a mobile game, and the majority of players are likely wanting a game where they can have fun and play at their own pace

[limber marlin]

Where did it say that? I thought it was just a fill in before we actually got extreme events so we had more to do with the old hard mode

[vital knoll]

they actively hide the bonus rewards before you get to them

or did initially, not sure if they changed that

[limber marlin]

Oh yea in the end I don't care if they would change it. It doesn't affect me in the slightest. But it is something Kabam has to take in consideration. Because having no progress will also kill the game slowly

[coral nimbus]

you probably saw a bug, not long ago

[limber marlin]

Oh that is what you are aiming at, I thought you meant the bonus rewards as a whole

[vital knoll]

nah I meant that they'd mentioned the whole issue of people missing out and whatnot, thats why they added the event difficulty thing too
they just also didn't quite hit the mark, its good but not as good as it could be imo

[limber marlin]

Yea that was useless

[vital knoll]

and as for the bonus rewards, I think its outside the scope of this thread but I think a simple solution would've just been to make them infinite small rewards that require big progress

[limber marlin]

I think its completely fine though, it is how guild and gaming is supposed to be. I get that people want to boost their low level friends and guildies but you can do that in so many different ways

[vital knoll]

so for every like, 1m of extra score (for example, assume thats a decent chunk but not super hefty) you'd get 5 ass

[coral nimbus]

lemme just butt this in
the difficulty setting's purpose was not for individuals who couldn't finish, it was for guild who couldn't, not individuals

[vital knoll]

true but by implementing it, its just made a different problem arise

[limber marlin]

Just help them actually clear the event on their own. Even we helped some people with heroes before extreme DI dropped in our guild.

[vital knoll]

now you have guild members that are in guilds that are choosing difficulties not appropriate for their level

[vital knoll]

I think this whole idea of helping people though while some might find it fine, I think it also takes away the whole feeling of progressing as an individual

like when people funnel items to their lower level friends and whatnot

[limber marlin]

That is not helping people

[vital knoll]

provide advice and guidance on how or what to progress to? make sure they don't make big mistakes, but I don't think taking away the need (or even just hastening their progress) is good for somebody's experience

[coral nimbus]

it'll sort itself out if you give it time

[vital knoll]

Yeah but the proposed change will just fix that situation, for current people and newer players in the future

[coral nimbus]

1/20 is as fair as it could get, imagine if there is a guild event where you have to pay real money, it would piss you off if you allow some to just pay 1/40

[vital knoll]

1/20 is fair

thats not the proposed change

or rather the new proposed change I suppose?

I can't remember what the initial post was proposing or arguing against 🤣

[coral nimbus]

I will not be able to pinpoint what proposed change is if not the 1/40 thing lol

[vital knoll]

ah in the inital thread it does say the issue is the 1/20th requirement lol

its remarkably hard to get to the first post

[vital knoll]

being able to change your event difficulty as an individual instead of the guild as a whole
and have each players contribution be balanced for whichever difficulty anyone picks

[coral nimbus]

well but consider this, in KC for example, a low level dude in a high ranked guild could do it way easier than say a new guild

so I think, imo, it's an ok tradeoff, you're in a high ranked guild = tougher events

[vital plinth]

The thread has been long, the latest proposed change is:

Everyone picks their own difficulty.
Everyone needs to 1/20 their chosen difficulty to obtain the rewards of the reward track they chose.
The score people get to complete the event is multiplied to match the completion of others. So if you 1/20 your event on easy that would count as 1/20 for extreme for people doing extreme.
For extreme rewards the end of the track is the end point, not the grand reward.

[coral nimbus]

You can edit and append I think

[vital knoll]

consider this, playerbase dwindles and there aren't really any lower rank guilds that are really active enough for people to be able to get close to finishing events
every new player is forced to join a medium to late game guild and as a result have a bad experience with events in the process, leaves the game
makes the new player and playerbase situation worse

[vital plinth]

I will link it

[vital knoll]

plus said new player would still need to put in the same amount of effort proportionally to the end game players

they'd just be crafting tier 4s instead of tier 15s, or sending heroes to howling woods, instead of the dinosaur zone
but their heroes would also be the right level appropriate for howling woods, and tier 4s are also their highest able to craft item

they're not putting in less effort, they're just playing the game to the best of their current capability

[coral nimbus]

But we all started there, so why is it suddenly a bad experience
I like deserved growth, it's like wanting to make Dark Souls easy for first time players
Leave it brag-able, give em a sense of achievment

[vital knoll]

1/20th of total score
if you're only able to earn a maximum of 20 points
and other players are able to earn a maximum of 2000 points, you'd expect to be able to select a difficulty appropriate to your max of 20 points

[vital knoll]

and thats a personal feeling, one that I also share

but people have also shown negative experiences with this current change in difficulty, since now you can choose, people choosing a difficulty that people in their guild won't have fun trying to achieve will obviously cause some upset

the proposed change wouldn't affect existing players who are achieveing extreme and whatnot

[vital knoll]

also, Shop Titans is like the polar opposite to a game like Dark Souls

its a mobile game primarily

[coral nimbus]

Or do better next time, making next time worth the growth.

[vital knoll]

and mobile games are primarily meant for more casual players

[coral nimbus]

all games follow the same principles of being rewarding

[vital knoll]

so trying to appeal to said casual players, while it might not appeal to you as an individual, will still affect you positively, as it'll cause the playerbase to potential get better as newer players have a better experience

[vital knoll]

yeah but dark souls is excessively difficult and caters to a very specific audience
a lot of people want a game that is fun, without the need for spending countless hours failing to be able to finally accomplish it

especially when said countless hours of failing, would be it really, because they'd just quit the game 🤣

[vital knoll]

plus, if this is how an individual feels, then the proposed change wouldn't stop them from doing that

you could select hard, when you're current level and situation is more appropriate for medium or easy

and put in that extra effort, and get extra rewards for doing so

infact, it would be beneficial for that regardless
if you're in a newer guild, with other newer players, and you're able to spend more time, or want a harder goal than they do
then you can select the harder difficulty while the rest of the guild selects the easier one

this isn't possible in the current system

a new player, in a new guild, wanting a harder challenge, is stuck with whatever the guild as a whole picks

[coral nimbus]

I do see the benefit of that individual diff
but I also think it might kill the game, when you achieve what seems like the top thing you should achieve, then they might just quit the game too, so kinda the same effect, same as an already top player quitting

[vital plinth]

but there's still higher difficulties until you reach extreme

[vital knoll]

well you'd be achieveing "Easy" while knowing that "Normal, Hard, Extreme" or whatnot is available to select

[vital plinth]

also events are a thing, but it's not the only content

[coral nimbus]

But it's gonna be a personal goal essentially separating it from a group goal, why is it so important for you to be able to keep your members when you agree it'll sort itself out with time

[vital knoll]

plus, thats possible now
a new guild, choosing the easiest event would be able to achieve what they think might be the top thing

[vital plinth]

Because if your community is something you like you don't want them to leave

[vital knoll]

except they might not even know they get a choice

so the change would be an improvement surely

for that reason

[coral nimbus]

then they'll have the goal to get back, which is nice imo

[vital knoll]

its not about me, its about the suggestion
and it might sort itself out in time with an individual guild, once the members get higher level or whatnot
but its a cascading problem that has an impact on the whole community, including new players to the game
so the problem will never go away, I just might not notice it (which to be clear, I don't anyway, I've just seen others who have)

[vital plinth]

Actually it's frustrating for new players as well, stability in guilds even lower ones may not be so bad. While I'm not saying new people shouldn't go to new guilds, I recently saw someone relatively low level confused as why to people were leaving the guild.

[vital knoll]

if on your way to work theres a massive hole in the road, but a new road opens up thats more efficient for you as an individual
it doesn't make it so that massive hole in a road isn't a problem for others still

[coral nimbus]

It was frustrating for me back when I was a new player, if this existed when I was new, it'd be very nice imo
It's also what I think is the whole point of this update

[vital knoll]

true but you could still end up in a situation as a new player now, where your guild chooses an event difficulty that you feel you wouldn't enjoy

and you could say "well find a guild that chooses a difficulty you do enjoy then"
but what if you do, and then said guilds members progress slightly faster than you do, you'll be in the same situation again shortly and ultimately have to find another new guild to join

that isn't really a good experience to be in, much rather be able to join a guild of individuals I enjoy to play with, and be able to choose the event difficulty I'd enjoy the most too
games are meant to be fun afterall

[coral nimbus]

which then just brings it back to being a "tradeoff"
High rank guild benefits = harder event
I have a friend who I invited to the game, have not heard anything from her about not being able to finish events (doing extreme)
This is mainly to keep your original community right?

[vital knoll]

its about a negative situation that can be avoided if the current system was changed

[vital plinth]

Because she has no choice within the guild, wouldn't you want her to be able to get more rewards?

[vital knoll]

and the proposed change isn't negative to anyone really either

[coral nimbus]

I want her to enjoy and grow, is all

and she is. Hooray 😆

[vital plinth]

Then if she would get for instance 30 ascension shards instead of 15, would that not be nicer for her?

[vital knoll]

and if she said she'd enjoy it if she could select her own difficulties for events?

would your view of this suggestion be changed?

[coral nimbus]

I'll get back to you, I'll ask her

[vital knoll]

or get a blueprint over y'know, not getting a blueprint

[vital plinth]

yeah definately

[vital knoll]

plus I mean, not to be mean, but it doesn't ultimately matter 😓

[vital plinth]

it'll also give her a sense of completing an event rather than swimming around

and currently it means the other guild members have to pick up the slack without the person not being able to complete getting anything for it

[vital knoll]

if this suggestion isn't something for you, then thats fine
but I'd prefer it if people would bring forward a reason why it'd be a negative addition for them as an individual rather than just going on and on about how games should be, or how they had to play when they started, or how this is how its always been, etc

[coral nimbus]

Me personally I know people wouldn't want an easy game where growth doesn't seem rewarding

[vital knoll]

but you can select a harder difficulty 😛

if you want that

infact as I said earlier, if thats something you want
this change is better

[vital plinth]

actually by being in your guild she already is ahead

[coral nimbus]

so they could join a lower diff guild, but that's also a problem for you guys

why

[vital plinth]

also if she wouldn't be in her guild she would be doing easy in an other guild

[vital knoll]

because currently if you want a harder challenge as a new player, in a new guild
you're stuck to whatever difficulty the guild leader chooses which is probably the easier difficulty

[vital plinth]

or medium or whatever so it's not different from if she would be able to choose that in yours

[vital knoll]

beccause having to change guilds isn't exactly a fun situation to be in 😛

[coral nimbus]

there is also a sense of reward when you're able to join high ranked guild and carry your own weight, I like a game where you have to work your way up or to keep up
if you like a relaxing guild then move down

[vital knoll]

you'd still be able to do that

in investments

[coral nimbus]

that's what I feel like, the sense of achievment is going to be ruined with the proposed change

[vital knoll]

but you'd still be able to choose extreme as you do now, and achieve extreme as you do now
and if your guild currently chooses extreme as a whole, as you do now
nothing will change for you

[vital plinth]

So what about the sense of achivement from being in a guild that has abysmal resource regeneration and getting out of that ghetto?

[vital knoll]

but if you're talking a new player missing out on that sense of achievement
well as I said earlier, it'd be better with the proposed change, as they'd be able to select an event difficulty that is harder than the rest of their guild, and work harder at the same level to achieve it

and if they then want to move to a guild that also works harder as they do, they can still do that

[coral nimbus]

• none of us (the 3 of us) really are having problems with our own difficulty, this is more an issue a new player should be bringing up, not you not me

[vital knoll]

just because I'm not a new player, doesn't mean I can't see how this might be an issue for new players

and how it being an issue for new players, would also be an issue for me

because if new players are quitting as a result of this, then that means there are less players in the future for me to play with

[vital plinth]

why can't i bring it up? if it didn't affect me i wouldn't have changed guilds

[vital knoll]

it is possible to advocate for something that you, yourself don't have happen to you

kind of like how I know there are children out there suffering from hunger, I don't suffer from it, but I know its happening, I know its an issue, and I'd like to try and do my bit to help

[coral nimbus]

And if they quit because they found it too easy... it's all the same then
I also want to have more players in the game, but we don't have the numbers, you assume they quit because it's too hard, I assume they quit because it's too easy

[vital knoll]

you're kinda disregarding the whole "You'd be able to select extreme from the get go" argument

like, they'd literally be able to make it way harder than it currently is

[coral nimbus]

You brought it up because a friend you like left because of the difficulty

[vital knoll]

its irrelevant

[vital plinth]

No i brought up this because I left because my guild mates were not all up to extreme level and they wanted to stay on hard

[vital knoll]

personally I've seen people complaining about it in world chat too, plus people providing their own experiences in this thread

[vital plinth]

and then another person left the guild, so it broke up one guild more than it should have

[vital knoll]

but as I said earlier, its not really that far of a stretch to see how this could cause issues

I mean, I've provided numerous examples

[vital plinth]

Also the person I replaced couldn't handle extreme so they didn't want to let that person keep missing out on rewards

[coral nimbus]

tbh I see the benefits of it, but I feel like it kills something in the game, like maybe the competitive part of it or the sense of it being a guild event. Just can't point where til it happens

Personally I loved my own experiences and I'd want new players to also have that same experience. And I feel like changing that will ruin the experience. That is all

[vital knoll]

I agree, I loved my own experience too
but the problem is you can't get that experience anymore

[vital plinth]

you can always set your difficulty to extreme if you want the challenge

[vital knoll]

because now that the event difficulty is a guild leader decision or officer or whatnot
its going to cause controversy if people choose a difficulty that others don't want to do

thats just how this change has affected the game

before you all had to stick it out, and work towards the set unchangeable goal of the game

there was no option, now there is an option, and that causes problems

*it does fix certain options too, but arguably you can't get the experience you had if all guilds select the appropriate difficulty for themselves, it'd be a way easier experience which seems to be the opposite of what you want

[brisk nova]

And do you picture it being the other way around or just as a boost to those already more capable to boost themselves

[vital plinth]

I see it as a means to keep everyone in the same guild they are.

if people want to move they can always do that still

[brisk nova]

That isnt what im asking you. Would it work the other way around / between all difficulties

[vital plinth]

it works for all difficulties

[brisk nova]

Thank you for clarifying

[vital plinth]

so if you complete medium, hard will see you did 1/20 of their hard score

[coral nimbus]

and every point helps, now you want it not to
and yeah I don't want an easy experience, I want the achievement be an actual something you achieve, not a minor nuisance
Then you'll bring up having extreme again, then I'll say again well the tradeoff is you're in a guild that has better benefits . . . . tradeoff . . . round we go

[coral nimbus]

so someone has to do 2/20 if a member skips?

[vital knoll]

no, every point would still do

help

it'd just be 1/20th of the requirement regardless of what difficulty anyone picks
the values would just scale accordingly

[vital knoll]

no, it'd be the same is it is now, that wouldn't change if a member skips

[vital plinth]

Well yes or you'd have to do 1/19 each or something in between

[coral nimbus]

so a completely individual event, like TOT

[vital knoll]

no, you're misunderstanding the point

it'd still be a group event
every member would still have to contribute

[vital plinth]

yeah but he's arguing that if 1 person completely skips

then the others have to do 1/19 on average

[brisk nova]

Someone doing a lower difficulty they can manage better wouldn't get them more rewards (I think)
The points they have are still their points regardless of which reward track they choose
Like if they had 500k points its gonna be 500k regardless
Even if the rewards aren't linear (x amount of points is the same number of reward slots) you could get a higher quantity of rewards from less slots then more slots with a lower quantity

[vital knoll]

its just if you select medium, you see the personal requirements and total requirements for medium
and if another player selects extreme, they see the personal requirements and total requirements for extreme
and any points they both get, would be adjusted to be in line with their respective difficulties
so if the total requirements for extreme was 100
and the total requirements for medium was 10
whatever score the person who chose medium had, would be seen as x10 it by the person who chose extreme, and vice versa

[vital knoll]

think it was just an example, and I gave a better one imo below

[coral nimbus]

You'll also have to change leaderboards then

[brisk nova]

Im struggling with the backreading lol
But the higher difficulties have BPs the lower ones dont
The others are the same
So linear or not they wouldn't get "more"

[coral nimbus]

and all these just to keep a member that left because he/she didn't like the guild's difficulty
which IMO will sort itself out anyways
so let it be

[vital plinth]

if you don't get 14(0)k in extreme you don't get the final blue print for LCoG, you only need 11(0)k for that in hard.

[vital knoll]

feel free to leave the discussion if you have nothing more to add, I've tried to explain to you how it will not just sort itself out in the long term

[vital knoll]

no the higher difficulties have higher requirements for blueprints than the lower difficulties do

so you might earn 500k, on hard and get a blueprint, but on extreme not get a blueprint

[brisk nova]

Easy and medium dont have the plat BPs tho, is what i meant

[vital knoll]

or earn 500k on hard and get the final antique coin reward, but on extreme not get the final antique coin reward
and its possible sure that the earlier rewards would amount to more than that final reward would, but not always the case

[brisk nova]

Ive checked, yes i see, I get it. Between hard and extreme i can see that.

[vital plinth]

there are other blueprints as well

[coral nimbus]

yes you said if the guild grew faster than you then the same problem would exist right?
so leave the guild and join a lower ranked one = sort itself out in time

[limber marlin]

That is the case for most of them, lcog is only a problem with the plat bp

[vital knoll]

and that in of itself is a bad situation to be in, which I also said

having to leave guilds is probably the worst aspect of the game

and any situation that can lessen the extent at which it happens is a good thing in my opinion

[brisk nova]

But a lot of the discussions here do centre on lower players who wouldn't reach the plat anyway
I legit dont know the linear progression difference between easy medium hard
Is the first slot on all three the same number of points? Then slot two etc?
Cause that's why I was thinking that less slots on a higher difficulty could get you more than more slots on a lower one?

[brisk nova]

Hmmm okay

[limber marlin]

https://st.ilod.org/events/You can check it here

[brisk nova]

I know, I just hadnt retained the figures etc

[vital knoll]

true but theres also the sense of achievement from "completing" something to consider

[limber marlin]

That will only be bigger when they finally do it 😛

[vital knoll]

plus the sense of distain when you're put in what you feel is a situation that affects your enjoyment of the game

[brisk nova]

Guess all my linear guessing was crap lol

[vital knoll]

maybe for us, but not for most mobile players probably lol

[coral nimbus]

Kabam should probably close this before good points become too buried or hard to find
they should just release a survey to low ranked guilds then decide from there, then the outcome would be something I'd fully support

[vital knoll]

They're not going to do that unfortunately 🤣

or rather its unlikely

[coral nimbus]

They did release a survey before tho, not sure what about since I didn't receive it

[whole grove]

We can't close this before reaching 1k replies, we are so close

😬

[coral nimbus]

I think, a better approach would be letting a guild member help out on score
But like add a handicap if the pts count towards 'help a guildie'

[whole grove]

More community interest than the community event

[coral nimbus]

Like send 10k pts to 'Mr Low lvl guildie' then tax it for 50% or something

[limber marlin]

Its more like 10 people talking over and over about the same thing

[vital plinth]

I don't mind that either, but that increases the total score a guild needs to do and to what extent do you let that happen? if it's not significant then big differences within a guild can still not work

[coral nimbus]

I think it's a way better suggestion than the current proposal, just make it not count towards PB
and no changes to leaderboards, so also better on development side in many sense

[brazen vortex]

"chat GTP, please summarize this thread."

[brisk nova]

system crash

[coral nimbus]

I'll summarize it for you
Be back in 500 years

[limber marlin]

Will never happen. It will fall in the you can boost second accounts and then take the gems and give them to main accounts category

[brisk nova]

https://tenor.com/view/aint-nobody-got-time-no-time-tiger-gif-19232363

[vital knoll]

Aye

[brisk nova]

Running one account is perfectly sufficient thank you very much lol

[coral nimbus]

I'll steal this and use it on many of the suggestions here

[limber marlin]

Go for it, it is one of the main reason why a lot of stuff doesn't happen

[limber marlin]

That is not the point

[brisk nova]

Didnt say it was, but I was amused by the idea

[limber marlin]

Ok

[coral nimbus]

Friend says no and wants to remain being unable to complete extreme

[vital knoll]

still sounds like you don't really understand

[coral nimbus]

I do, I know what you're going to say
You'll say that "ok then she can do Extreme, she can make that choice"

New players don't even want this

or are very divided as you and me

[vital knoll]

Nope, I was going to say the change wouldn't make her suddenly able to complete extreme anyway

so she'd "remain being unable to complete extreme" regardless 🤣

[coral nimbus]

This doesn't work
On DI for example, if a high level player with great heroes do easy, say they do 19/20 on easy
It then counts as 19/20 for others on extreme
That makes it easy to finish the whole event with just 2 accounts. One smurf doing easy with high powered heroes and the other doing the usual extreme

your best bet is making it completely individual

[vital plinth]

One person would get crappy rewards and the other person still needs to do 1/20. So if they would look for a proper guild their level, they would also get the same for doing the same amount of work. If it is really a concern of yours, you can just cap the contribution to 1/20 +10% so if a score of 20k is the personal contribution limit, they cannot score higher than 22k unless doing extreme.

Also there are probably very few people who can do extreme but choose to sit in a guild where there's only 1 other person. They would very likely go find a guild that would give them some kind of benefit with atleast a full guild. But aside from the smurf, everyone else still would need to do their fair share.

[coral nimbus]

That just makes it worse, with the cap, you can fail an event just because more than 1 didn't participate assuming the whole guild can do hard at best
"One person would get crappy rewards and the other person still needs to do 1/20" what I mean by smurf is 1 person using 2 accounts, there is only 1 person in my example.
Your proposal didn't account for guilds that have less than 20 members

Just make the events completely individual, that one I'd support. After that, just eliminate the guilds

[vital plinth]

guilds that have 1 member need to score 1/1, those with 4 need to score 4/4, etc etc

There's no benefit from having 2 accounts and then only get good rewards for 1, while also being able to get good rewards in a proper guild.

Because they would need 1/20 from an extreme event anyway atleast as their personal score.

[coral nimbus]

This one I'd support if they also multiply the solo player guild's investment by 20

[vital plinth]

No

[brazen vortex]

The game has guilds as a core element. They'd have no reason to support solo play as they actively discourage it

[coral nimbus]

this one...

[coral nimbus]

why support soloing a guild event, but not support soloing investments?

[vital plinth]

there are barely any gems to gain from doing easy

[brazen vortex]

I wouldn't support either

[coral nimbus]

I'd totally love to be alone in a guild, if not for investments