Abandoned Teams in the Top 100 - Needs a Solution (glory decay?)

[Prodigal Clint]

So I have noticed a growing "trend" that needs to be addressed. Teams that are abondoned (all but a few players have left leaving the alliance near empty) in the Top100. There are currently 3 examples in the Top 30, and 4 in the Top 100. The ability for alliances to freely abandon their teams in a high position on the Leaderboard leads to stagnation overall (will get worse as more teams start doing this), and being that making the Leaderboard is a huge motivation/goal for many teams, I don't think this is good for the game. It's kinda a farce to look at two teams in the top 10 that have 1 and 4 players in them. Not saying they didn't earn their way to get to that position, or that they shouldn't be allowed to leave the alliance and do what they will for the sake of their alliance or fun. Not at all. We all make the decisions which we think are best for our alliance.

But there needs to be some kind of Glory decay built into the system, where after going so long without starting a new war, a team begins to lose glory. Perhaps the loss increases with the amount of inactivity as it strectches on longer and longer? From Nexon/BHG's perspective, they should want teams pushing hard to get there (this will lead to increased rev from thier end as people/teams spend $ to accomplish this goal), and from the players perspective we want the board to be as reflective as possible (if everyone can look at these teams its pretty demoralzing and kinda a joke imo). Having these abadoned teams hurts the game. Additionally, these players are going somewhere, so I've heard of and seen matches from friends against the newly created alliance, where rediculous amounts of glory loss are at stake because this team was just created from players leaving the above mentioned alliances. This can't be helped i think, players can and should be allowed to do as they wish. But if doing this was at the expense of the "main" or "old" alliance falling off the board due to glory decay, I believe they would think twice before doing it.


Ps- No we aren't facing one of these teams right now, lol, just something I have noticed that needs to be addressed.

 

[Quovatis]

I don't see the problem. Who cares? The other active teams will keep increasing their glory and the inactive teams will go down in rank.

 

[LordJestix]

I assume you are talking about they alliance that gets top glory, puts some low level alts into the alliance and starts a new alliance to make the top leader boards?

there was mention of this in another thread and discussion leading to the thought that this alliance is trying to expose sandbagging issues and or they just liek beating up on easier alliances.

 

[Prodigal Clint]

How will the inactive teams go down in rank (esp that highly postioned w a lot of glory)? The only way currently is for all teams to war, get more glory, and leapfrog them in the ranks. That teams glory remains static, and my point is that it shouldn't. The shelf the reach the board has been raised from like 20k to around 22K over time, but no way the shelf gets that high w wins at that level amassing how much glory Quovatis? You would know better than I would, and frankly I'm suprised you are not totally in favor of this. If your team faces KA and loses, then loses the next match because of disconnects (I'm sure this rarely if ever happens to you, just presenting a scenario), how would you feel having to win 5-10 (a guess) normal wars just to get back above these abandoned teams?

 

[Prodigal Clint]

No LordJestix , thats not what im talking about. Look at the top 10 and take note of certain teams with single digit members. IMO they are enshrining their teams in a very high position, then leaving them and creating another alliance to do it all over again. Matches aren't effected by either teams glory. I'm just saying that after a few weeks, these inactive alliances that aren't participating in wars anymore, should slowly start to lose glory. It's very common in many other games.

 

[Quovatis]

Again, I wouldn't really care. Everyone else will keep going up in glory, and they will slowly go down in rank. New skilled teams always have a chance to get to the top because of how the glory system works.

 

[Prodigal Clint]

Fair nuff, your entitled to your opinion ofc : ) And your point is valid, I just think that at certain levels with the amount of glory able to be gained and conversely lost, that this would take months and months to happen. If it ever really did. TBH, tho we are on the boards, I have Zero self interest in writing this post on the matter. I really don't care about our position or how these teams effect it, its just something I have noticed that big picture, I dont think is whats best for the game. More from the standpoint of teams trying to reach the board.

 

[Horsepower]

So the question is motive. Is it a clear manipulation with the purpose of taking advantage of the system? Is it borderline cheating? I suspect yes. Why else would they do it. If it's allowed what's to stop a team from doing it over and over and cementing numerous positions among the top 100 leaderboard. I agree with Clint that this should not be allowed and Nexon should investigate.

Its amazing and sad that some alliances and players continually try to cheat the system.

 

[benjieland]

They went to look for four-leaf clovers

 

[Vixen]

I care about this.. one day when we get good enough to be there.. I want to be climbing against active teams... not floating shells just being a placeholder for past efforts long gone

 

[Motaz Tarek]

a better way to do it is monthly reset of glory and monthly rewards to top 100 exclusive reward for #1 and exclusive rewards for #2-10 and rewards for rest of top 100 would make it much better as alliances who sandbag will grow much slower than who don't sandbag and won't make it to top 10 in 1 month even if they win all their wars due to glory punishment of sandbaggers
that solves both stagnation and sandbagging which makes it much more competitive

 

[Player Killer]

Do what they do when seasons end for player medals. They lose their position on the leaderboard until they got to war.

 

[Wendy]

Quovatis Imagine tomorrow KA does it, you match with them at 12k glory, you lose 1500 glory the glory you probably earned in moths of playing..how would you feel? Then imagine you match them a second time and maybe a third. would you be happy to lose over 3k glory in 3 wars that normally would make you lose 200 glory each?
We matched twice the korean Alliance RESET currently 68-70 in leaderboard. fresh new alliance, every war made us lose 750 glory. we lost the first and won the second for tiebreaker. So basically we beated a leaderboard alliance and were rewarded with 10 glory. We should have won 600 the second war and lose 150 the first.
Not fun at all

 

[Blacknife686]

Monthly reset seems fair, also gives new teams the chance to be showcased with each new "Season".

 

[Prodigal Clint]

I like this idea a lot as well.

 

[Michele Nx]

I agree that glory decay makes sense for abandoned alliances, but not all almost empty alliances are truly abandoned. I know of at least one 50v50 civil war going on right now, and the people involved moved to two new alliances so as not to mess with the glory of their real alliances. My understanding is that the people in a top ten alliance with just 4 right now will be back soon. I wouldn't want to penalize that kind of situation. It sounds like fun to do!

 

[Max_imus]

I agree that glory decay makes sense for abandoned alliances, but not all almost empty alliances are truly abandoned. I know of at least one 50v50 civil war going on right now, and the people involved moved to two new alliances so as not to mess with the glory of their real alliances. My understanding is that the people in a top ten alliance with just 4 right now will be back soon. I wouldn't want to penalize that kind of situation. It sounds like fun to do!

Totally!
The glory decay maybe after two "missed wars"? Like 4 days, then more after week, two, three. Not sure, I still think there are still lot more important issue to solve unfortunately

 

[SiuYin]

Instead of Glory Decay, I would said a participation glory would be better idea
ie offer a small amount of glory same as war size: 5 / 10 / 15/ 20 /25 to 5v5 / 10v10 / 15v15/ 20v20 /25 v25

in long run, active alliance will gain more glory, and it will encourage to war more

 

[Equal]

they could not reset, or slowly remove the glory, but do the same thing they are doing with medals. just take out of the rankings if after a 'reset', no war is started and if a team comes back, they have their old glory back.

 

[Prodigal Clint]

another good idea