Alliance Leaderboard Feedback

[Harlems369th]

Greetings Leaders,

Today is the last day you can gain Triumph in the Seasonal Leaderboard, we’ll be locking in your positions 9/1 at 11am EST! Our next season begins 9/9 at 11am. In the meantime, while you’re collecting your season rewards we want to hear your feedback on the season! What would you like to see out of future seasons, what did you like or dislike about the Alliance Leaderboard?

 

[Rafar]

The introduction of the event brought up many points of view.
Initially I appreciate the novelty. It favors more united alliances with more active players, and that makes a lot of sense, but I think it's somehow unfair for alliances to fall into the same group when one alliance has 15 members and another 50. As much as the 15 player alliance tries, it's not will outperform a minimally active 50 alliance.
In other words, it is something to consider some reformulation when setting up the groups.

I thought the award could be better. Special builds are pretty good, but accelerators, troops, and council cards could be better, especially among the biggest winners.
I also think that the prizes should vary between at least the first 5 alliances. Only after fifth place in the ranking would they form groups with the same prizes.

One criticism is about the individual ranking... I've been in first from the start and haven't received the active prizes due to a glitch that shows me in random positions throughout the event. This needs to be fixed.

 

[Mr Smalls]

View attachment 9751

Greetings Leaders,

Today is the last day you can gain Triumph in the Seasonal Leaderboard, we’ll be locking in your positions 9/1 at 11am EST! Our next season begins 9/9 at 11am. In the meantime, while you’re collecting your season rewards we want to hear your feedback on the season! What would you like to see out of future seasons, what did you like or dislike about the Alliance Leaderboard?

I’d be more excited about the last day if I could log into my account competing in the triumph leaderboard.
This is just to say, maybe there are more pressing matters to your player base than the last day of the triumph leaderboard at the present and this may seem tone deaf to some.

 

[Armitage]

Honestly?

Tiring.

The Alliance award is neat, but extraordinarily lacking for the sheer amount of time and effort it requires to rank, not to mention the resources. The big draw this month is the Zook tower, which sure, it's a massive boost to wars, but still temporary and gone in a week. Woo.hoo.

The rest of the awards? Meh.

The so-called "superior" cards will end with maybe 1 or 2 of the recipients receiving higher than rare. I've already said my piece on using chance items as a reward and my disdain for it elsewhere, so I'll leave it at...nope, going more.

It sucks, it sucks major suckage. "Here's something really nice for your hard work...oh wait, it's got less than a tenth of a percent to show up! Hope you gave that leprechaun a good time, wink wink, you'll need the luck, ha ha!"

That's how I feel about using random chance items as prizes.

The top 2 alliances in our leaderboard have been busting their kiesters for what amounts to a pissing contest, involving multiple players who literally fought thousands of battles this month. These players, and the others fighting tooth & nail across your leaderboards, are burning themselves out to stand at the top where everyone can see. They all know the prizes aren't worth it, they just want everyone to see their names at the top. Whether they want to do it again, and again, is up to you making it worth their time with more tangible rewards, not to mention a perk system that would stop flippin' glitching out on them when they try to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

And fix the damned login problem! You're not monkeys trying to write Shakespeare, you know how to do the job, so do it! Isn't this what the damned technical tests were supposed to be preventing?

 

[B like Big Bug]

Allianc leader board is a goof item in game.we can see more active players and alliances now.
Maybe reward need be better.
Group ranking is fair,as it work by alliances ranked.

 

[oddin]

Overall I would rate alliance leaderboard a positive idea.
I would change a few things:
- groups formed by # of players instead of glory rank
- better rewards, ditch the councilor cards with 0.00000003% of getting anything good. We all hate those cards.

 

[Flossy]

Our alliance has really enjoyed this and competition within the team has Been fun. As others have said, rewards are not good enough and I think many alliances will just not bother.

Maybe you could add another element that rewards an additional reward to say the top 10 in each alliance?

 

[Chasingwilma]

The event has potential but my account could not be accessed and out clan lost by 300 points to a group that had one person with almost 300,000 points. My accounts still cannot be accessed and losing to a bot makes me wonder whether this is worth the effort. Customer service is oblivious and has not responded to the numerous messages. If I had to give advice, I would tell anyone who would listen to find a different game to waste their time on because this situation has left a very bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Dracula3811]

About the good thing is that i can see what triumph numbers that others on my team have. I ignore anything with the triumph stuff except for when to claim the rewards. I'm never in a group where there's a chance of winning so why bother? It's just more of the same with this except it's with other alliances. The winning team had over 4x more triumph and there was no way we could compete.

The simplest solution is to match players and teams based on what their previous triumph numbers are. That would be a lot more competitive than what we have now.

Also, i think the most recent triumph season should have been put on pause and then extended when it was learned of the game breaking bug brought on by the most recent update.

 

[B like Big Bug]

In my opinion, the grouping of the event is fair. The alliances are placed in the group according to their rank, which indicates their strength and activity. Note that the purpose of this event is to attract more players to the game, and not every alliance is supposed to be placed in the same group with several inactive alliances without any effort، receive a prize. Although prizes can be better and create more motivation, but the essence of the matter is unique. An attractive and positive item in the game.

 

[theBobNamedDan]

I liked it with one exception. The glitch that kept jumping your individual ranking around and preventing us from receiving the perks for holding a position was terrible. He code needs to be fixed for that aspect.

For example, I would have walls change upgrade cost between attacks even though my actual ranking and my alliance ranking did not change between attacks. It would randomly apply varying discount percentages that were inconsistent with ranking. It also showed me as ranked -1 half the time.

 

[Dracula3811]

In my opinion, the grouping of the event is fair. The alliances are placed in the group according to their rank, which indicates their strength and activity. Note that the purpose of this event is to attract more players to the game, and not every alliance is supposed to be placed in the same group with several inactive alliances without any effort، receive a prize. Although prizes can be better and create more motivation, but the essence of the matter is unique. An attractive and positive item in the game.

I completely disagree. The grouping has yet to be fair in either the individual or team triumph groupings. My proof? The scores are rarely close.

 

[Rafar]

I completely disagree. The grouping has yet to be fair in either the individual or team triumph groupings. My proof? The scores are rarely close.

Friend,
The distance in the score doesn't prove anything other than that there are more or less active players and alliances.
Grouping by activity is a mistake for 2 basic reasons. First, the idea is to benefit more active players and alliances. Second, because overnight a player can become more or less active and this concept would not hold.
Alliances grouped by ranking is an honest way to do it. Maybe a little review regarding the average number of players/accounts an alliance has would be interesting, but it could create a new problem with alliances emptying out before the event and regrouping after the start. So the idea would be to get an average of players that the alliance had in the last month, although I imagine it's something difficult to program.

 

[Dracula3811]

Friend,
The distance in the score doesn't prove anything other than that there are more or less active players and alliances.
Grouping by activity is a mistake for 2 basic reasons. First, the idea is to benefit more active players and alliances. Second, because overnight a player can become more or less active and this concept would not hold.
Alliances grouped by ranking is an honest way to do it. Maybe a little review regarding the average number of players/accounts an alliance has would be interesting, but it could create a new problem with alliances emptying out before the event and regrouping after the start. So the idea would be to get an average of players that the alliance had in the last month, although I imagine it's something difficult to program.

You didn't read my post. I have never said to group my activity. I said to group based on previous triumph score.

 

[Rafar]

You didn't read my post. I have never said to group my activity. I said to group based on previous triumph score.

It's the same thing.
And obviously that doesn't solve the problem.
If I don't play in an event where the prizes don't interest me, in the next event I fall into a weak group and raise my activity just a little.

 

[B like Big Bug]

Grouping based on activity means that active players compete with each other and inactive players be in a group . The result is that in one group a player with 300,000 points is second and in one group a player with 10,000 points is first. Is this fair?
Grouping by alliance ranked is the best now.unless we have an advanced programing that grouping players mix.(each group :active+semi active+unactive)

 

[B like Big Bug]

Don't forget, friends, that this was the first event of the multi event. It will definitely get better gradually. Positive changes should be welcomed.

 

[B like Big Bug]

View attachment 9751

Greetings Leaders,

Today is the last day you can gain Triumph in the Seasonal Leaderboard, we’ll be locking in your positions 9/1 at 11am EST! Our next season begins 9/9 at 11am. In the meantime, while you’re collecting your season rewards we want to hear your feedback on the season! What would you like to see out of future seasons, what did you like or dislike about the Alliance Leaderboard?

The alliance event is an interesting and attractive item. First of all, I congratulate you for the idea.
This event can be much more attractive. In this way, instead of calculating the players' scores and the competition of the alliances, the cooperation of the players of an alliance is considered. sOMe missions can be completed with the cooperation of players.(Same leader board events). The missions can include ؛ Ex; destroying 100 air defenses, getting 5 stars in a certain number of attacks,destroing spacial buildings , using a special force in attacks, etc. using spacial force is important ithem. Like the weekly event, the prizes should be given step by step bY completing some ithems. This method makes the members of an alliance be active throughout the event. But in the previous event, the competition is between several alliances, and others alliances, they don't do any activity because they are desperate to win. The difference in scores shows this issue.even if you want calculate alliances score,it can be by completing those missions.not by callculating succesfull attacks.
its just an idea.maybe players like it or no.
However, Alliance Event is a great option whether it changes or remains the same.

 

[Big T]

It is a good idea and a lot of my lower ranked players were really imp with the giveaways but some of the iOS players were locked out and couldn’t claim their awards/troops

 

[theBobNamedDan]

The discounts are still not being applied correctly.

I took screen shots of it and will submit them to CS.

A description of what I saw:

Currently ranked 4th in the individual grouping. This means that I should get 10% oil discount in the university. I am on the 10th upgrade for paratrooper damage in Earhart. The base cost is 200k oil. I have the 5% discount from parliament, 10% oil discount in the library (Computing). That means 170k oil with no adjustment from the event.

The event should be another 20k oil off making the total 150k oil.

I was showing 170k oil and I tried reloading and multiple tries and it stayed at 170k. I finally just went and made an attack and it finally reset to 150k oil. I shouldn’t have to make an attack before starting research to get the discount. I don’t know why the perks are not applying 100% of the time.