Actually it's only by doing every method of gaining a-coins while gaining what they do from tournaments could most people hope to keep up. It wouldn't overshadow them as much as you think. Maybe for certain high level players it would. But that's only maybe. And no, Ruffles hasn't been playing much longer than I have. I've been playing longer actually, since before global launch.

Like I said, people get bored anyways. That's why plarium adds new things. And you're calling me greedy? For wanting more from the company whose CEO is on vacation for half of every year? Not plarium, for making the game pay to win so players can fund his half year every year vacations?

The game contains have increase very rapidly.  There are many mechs and weapons for us players.  The ideally for the company is that the resources gain is just below for players to catch by gaming alone.  For us players, to unlock game contains and UG them from playing the game.   For someone do use real money for resource and do play nearly everyday. The progression is very slow.  No I am not someone spend large amount of real money into the game, but the number do added up.   I do feel the resources gain in numbers are quite impressive, but the real UGs do take a lots.  I do feel the rewards is imbalanced toward players needed to do more, or towards more for the higher ranks players. ie, vary high rewards for the top players and way too low for players do do well but not at the top end.

The mistake was accidentally giving us big a-coin rewards in the first place. Now there is 99% unhappiness. If this would have been the original update, we'd be mostly happy.

The previous a-coin rewards were too much. Nobody would ever have to buy a-coins. We'd upgrade 10x faster. I actually thought they might have raised the a-coin price of everything to balance.

What is unfair is the large reward reduction on the winning team. It might promote teamwork to distribute more evenly. Just because you are 4th or 5th on the winning team doesn't mean you didn't contribute.

I guess these changes they did makes sense. They finally were moving in the right direction with the tournament with the first changes they made. I wouldn't say it was perfect, but in the right direction. Then they changed it yet again, and all that is destroyed. Again, they like to self sabatage. 

all they had to do to fix things was decrease their rewards by 50% or 70% whatever, but instead they changed the whole system introducing ways to cheat and mass unhappiness, i dont remember a single person to be positive about changes. And there were negative comments even about initial version. 

If they want more money they can make new robots and weapons and concentrate on things where they are good at and not things like balance and matchmaking where they sux.

There can be 100s of robots, not saying its great, but laws of physics dont forbid them to make multiple versions of abilities with variations, if we start phantasise we will find 1000 ideas for new robots that are not going ro break any balances.. 

Leys say:

robot1 will be able to become invisible for 20 seconds but cant move anywhere until you use ability again. so a variation of shadow but even less visible.

robot2 will heal 1% for every 10% damage to enemy bot. does no extra damage. variation of stalker.

robot3 rushes and hits target into direction you looking at with rocket engines, so can fly into direction and hit enemy. variation of slingshot and lancer

robot4 explodes so makes a suicide. useful when you nearly dead and enemy is hitting you close combat. you may take enemy with you

robot5 you can never target it with guided weapons. or ability duration is 30 seconds something. variation of eclipse with no protection from debufs or speed increase.

robot6 can climb the walls. variation of arachnos

robot7 heals instead of freezing when enemy is using EMPs on it

robot8 gains damage increase if he hits the target, clears it if missing

the list can go on FOREVER. thats how you can make money. also make nice skins and make colors visible at distance.. 

I'm calling you greedy because you don't appreciate the balance of it, because you simply see 'more acoins == better', because it's what you want and you can't see outside of that.

Maybe if you were a game dev yourself you'd actually be able to understand what I'm saying.

If GM 1 can get you 600 PER DAY, that would be 3000 in the time I takes you to get the weekly tasks. As I ALREADY said, that is obviously MUCH MORE than said weekly tasks, like 15 times more!

If Plarium drops a new mech & weapon set every 3 months, you would have enough to buy a legendary mech at full price in 15 days - 2 or 3 of the the weapons will be credits and 2 of which probably won't be relevant to you anyway - well, the 3 weapons you could then also get at full price in 45 days, which the total time is only about 2/3 of the cycle, leaving much time to gather for upgrades.

And ofc that's assuming you buy the items for full gearhub price instead of getting an AT LEAST 2k discount by getting it from an ecr.

I'm discussing the maximum possible here, but surely you get it, right?

The maximum possible, is more than the old maximum possible. 15 days? For the most premium of items, that being a legendary mech? 15? You think that has longevity??

Not to mention, having such income available will significantly deflate the value of acoins. Just like irl, prices will go up instead of coming down, because, well, from a p2w perspective, why bother buying 1000 acoins from the store with you REAL MONEY when playing for a few days could get you that?

Plarium still has to make money, which is obviously the primary motivation for a change like this.

The weekly tasks serves as a benchmark because it's the main source of consistent income outside of the tournament, and has been relied upon by many for a long time.

Not since the global launch, over events & vault blitz gave a better amount tbh, not that you would know. Everyone here has been playing "since the global launch", or rather that's what many of these people who apparently are just smarter than everyone else, will say. Like you :3

In honesty I just wish they went back to the previous tournament version and just cut acoin rewards, even in half, that was the only thing that was needed, in terms of the tournament itself (matchmaking for example is an issue across all modes). 

My personal biggest annoyance is my beloved Salvor finally became viable owing to a recent buff, and I had plenty of games on it where my heals on top players in my team were a big winning factor, with me not getting even half their kill count in the round - but it was TEAM PLAY, and that's what the game is meant to be, but now? Now if I still focus on healing and staying alive to keep healing and my kills are only there to enable the guy I am healing to survive long enough for the next heal, I get fuk all acoins even if we win...for me this is the thing that absolutely must change, at least back to what it was.

To me this tournament is a showcase of everything that is wrong with this game. Everytime they make changes to the game for supposedly "balancing" or to improve the game, they actuall ymake it worse. I have lost 10 straight tournament battles cause the matchmaking is still a joke. My team is full of bots that just fire walking around in circles while the other team is full of actual players.  If limiting the rewards is the goal then goal achieved. I get more from daily and weekly challenges than this tournament.  

Lol I don't know many else on this forum who claim to have played since before global launch. I have testified to my time playing on multiple different accounts though.

I still don't get why weekly tasks has to be the benchmark.

And by the way you're forgetting a few things. You forgot pilots and implants, and rank upgrading, and you need blueprints which are hard to get and cost a-coins. You forgot that the vast majority of players won't be touching the maximum amount. You forgot the tournament was 3 weeks on two weeks off. So that weekly amount is more like 60% of what you calculated. Theoretically getting the entire maximum amount now still wouldn't have you keeping up with the release cycle of new items. Even with all your daily tasks and ev else. And it just occurred to me that I wasn't even considering weapons vome with multiple energy variants so you might not keep up with getting the theoretical maximum even. Though most of this I already mentioned but you still overlooked. And for the record, I don't think I'm smarter than everyone else. But I'm clearly smarter than you. I'm smarter than ruffles too. At least I'm better at math.

So you pose the question "why would anyone purchase 1000 a-coins from the store with real money when I can get it in a few days of playing the game. Well first of all that's still much longer than the amount of time you would spend working a job to get the $10 it costs to buy that. And secondly if that's really a major concern then plarium could just sell bigger a-coins packages and/or offer better value purchase. And if it's really a problem that it's so much better than weekly tasks then reduce the tournament rewards by about 10% and make weekly tasks give more than they already do.

Not that I don't appreciate the delicacy needed to balance the rewards system. It's that they got it right and then they trashed it. And if you actually did the math and facored in all the variables you'd realize the only way to truly keep up would still be to pay. That's if you included the best rank rewards from the 1st season and 2nd season and used the 1st season scaling.

And listen I'm not as fussed about lower rewards at lower brackets as I am about the changes to scaling. Top gm1 players would get close to the theoretical maximum regardless. The new scaling just punishes everyone who isn't getting that.

And keep calling me greedy. Tell me I don't un the balance. I don't think you even realize what you don't understand. But understand this. I'm not demanding that plarium makes everything the way I want. But I just don't want players talking like plarium is being too generous to then when the grind was just brought back down to what it was at the very beginning. You should just be like "TY plarium for the a-coins". And like "welp sucks they reduced the baseline rewards for lower ranks from first season cause I really appreciate it and I'd like if they just lifted people up but oh well, at least master and grandmaster got a higher baseline." Not "I think maybe plarium was maybe being too generous". For letting you progress at the same pace you could before?

And I will admit I do want as much as I can get. I know plarium is probably never going to make it feasible for f2p to stay totally caught up with the latest META equipment. But I'd like anything I can get up to that. You still can't even get that.

And I'm a bit upset because I was planning out how I will progress. I was planning out multiple dfferent builds to optimize hangars that could generally keep me in a decent bracket and earning an alright amount to make reasonable progress. But now all of that is shot because I need top of the META for any given season and limit myself to only those builds as to spend as few as possible resources to make any sort of reasonable progress again. Call me greedy for it if you want. I've just considered what all these changes mean for me as a player. Plarium are the greedy ones. But apparently I'm the bad guy for wanting this game to be fun.

BTW look at your proposed reward percentage scaling structure. It's got the same problem as the current one. You need to put winning above all else with the reward structure to encourage team play.

There is a close relationship between winning and performing well, but one doesn't always imply the other. I see nothing unreasonable in suggesting that high performers be rewarded. In fact that's how it was in tournaments before this new format. If you were a top scorer but lost you would still earn a high number of points.

A case can be made for your stand, too. Neither stand is wrong or (on its own) a problem. Personally, I lean towards the performance argument.

Apart from that, on a lighter note, I wouldn't ask Plarium to encourage team play. I'd ask them to not discourage it. The distinction is necessary, lest Plarium start punishing us when we play solo and justifying it by saying we asked for it ;-).

See the thing is the highest performers were always rewarded the most. The problem is the difference between the top and the bottom.

And therein lies the problem. It's not rewarding high performance. It's rewarding it so much compared to lower performers that it does what you say plarium shouldn't do, discourage team play. And to not discourage teamplate would mean to do the opposite, to encourage it. It's the same thing.

You want people to aim high while at the same time prioritizing victory over everything. If you want to do that then you can't have taking 1st place on your team in a match then forfeiting another earn more a-coins than taking last place on your team in two matches then why would you not just do the former?

I will say pogster's laid out system doesn't do what I just described. Instead it encourages taking the top spot over anything else. If your team throws you still get rewarded. But still you get less reward for taking last on a winning team?

I was saying already the reward scaling from the first system was perfect as it was. They didn't need to change it. All they need to do now is revert. Call it ridiculous. For the health of the game, not even for the flow of resources into the economy because they can make the baseline whatever, but to have people playing to win and hopefully take the top spot on their team.

You didn't read my comment, at least not all of it.

I specifically said I was talking about the maximum, and acknowledged it was only the maximum not the average. Implants only cost acoins to buy, and are either 600 acoins for 3k acoins depending on where you get them. As I said you can get 3k in a 5 days had you to get the maximum.

Also, the tournament doesn't take 2 weeks off after each season, that was only the first time, apparently at least. Not that you bothered to actually research it.

And I did mention upgrades, and 9k acoins spare (again, speaking maximum), is probably enough to cover blueprints given you're smart enough with you crates.

And I did mention the fact there are more than one of each weapon, though with the caveat of saying 2 of which you wouldn't spend acoins on, either because they're credits or not relevant to you.

And you forgot about the ecrs, where you can get things on average at a 3x discount, making the theoretical maximum MORE than enough.

You say you don't think you're smarter than everyone, and then also say you're smarter than a person who knows this game pretty damn well, and seem to think you're so smart you ignore half of my comment to then state how I'm so wrong, completely missing the average 3k reduction from ecrs, which as I mentioned means you don't even have to get the maximum, not even HALF OF IT!

Thing is, money isn't just for games.

Yes, people could work for potentially less time for enough irl cash to buy 1000 acoins, but they have other things to spend money on, like idk basically everything.

A thing in a game has literally no value in the real world, whereas the money does. Ofc if someone has lots of disposable income, that won't matter as much as the relative value of their money is decreased simply by having more it.

Plarium selling better value acoin packs does nothing to solve the problem of deflating acoins, because now plarium are getting less per acoin than before, which is worse value for them. It takes a basic understanding of economics to know that.

You say the first was right because you were happy with it, you say you appreciate the balance and then say the values from before were fine when they were definitely a touch excessive, as a decent number of people will agree. 

I'm not here to deny the hypocrisy - I specifically called out the fact that some of the brackets have EVEN MORE - and I think that's total bs when they say they're trying to stabilise the economy - obviously they just want to make newer players want to pay more.

And when tf was I saying Plarium was generous for allowing me to progress at the same speed as previously? If you'd read my post, I specifically said the OLD values (from s1) felt a bit much, but that the new ones were literally worse than THE OLD SYSTEM.

And as I pointed out in original post, the current values are SLOWER than the old system, and I'm in Master!

I appreciated the values & scalings from s1 because they were good, and I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm simply saying Plarium isn't totally in the wrong for wanting to decrease them, but simply this is just too much of a reduction.

I feel ridiculous having to repeat myself like this but apparently you people just don't read!

I'm f2p, and for f2p, I have a pretty decent inventory. The main meta item I'm missing atm is citadel, as I have rv10, bb12, bb8, sr16, sr12, sr10, debtwalker, blizzf**k, surge, eclipse, lacewing, outlaw along with some other less meta stuff.

Now hoopeefuullly, we'll be getting a citadel ecr in 2 weeks (apparently might be outlaw next, then 💩 adel)

You mention you don't really have any meta stuff, I don't really have that problem.

I don't have necessary the most meta hangar, and even the one I have was not too difficult to get given I'm f2p, but I can progress pretty well. Maybe you do need top meta to compete in GM1, but that wouldn't surprise me, and the old pay in lower brackets was still more than enough.

You're the bad guy for deciding you know best and others obviously don't, and for deciding Plarium should do what you want for a game THEY own...

So in other words, the current one is just as good? Even though the one I preposed gives more in almost every spot?

I don't want to put winning above all else as I, AGAIN, have already said; matches aren't black and white, and the rewards should reflect that.

The current one does not encourage team play, rather the total opposite. The one I suggested aims to help encourage team play for smaller teams, as coming second or third doesn't totally diminish the reward you get.

Yes for larger teams maybe not, but do you really think the current one does that for even small teams? And that could be changed.

It also aims to stop people who really put in effort but still lost, and aims to make leaving the game when you start to lose or not do well more punishing.

You looked at the top value, and then at the bottom value, saw they were similar to the current and decided it wasn't worth bothering with the rest.

The system I proposed still isn't great, but if you'd actually read more of my post (about 2 lines down), you'd see I mentioned that the one I suggested was at its WORST, as simply just an improvement, any improvement, over the current one.

Personally the system I'd really want to see would have some portion of reward from objective performance (scoreboard points), and another portion from relative performance (scoreboard placement)

grandmasters should have more rewards and newbies should have less, not because newbies are encouraged to spend, but because when you start with paragon and you need new mech, you can buy one for how much? 60-200 acoins? Whether if you are grandmaster with all legendaries the new mech costs around 9k acoins for you. What is the point to play a tournament to reveive 60 a-coins? not much. Want to compete without strong players? Because for them it wont make sense to play for nothing. 

I also think spenders dont do math or wait 2 weeks to get citadel in crate rush, they just buy what they want NOW. Or whats on discount in todays list. They have different thinking, so even if they were given 9k acoins they would still buy something for $$$. They would stop spending if they were bored, so thats a mission i would have as a debeloper (1) find what bores them and prevent it from happening (2) when they get bored find what else to sell them to get interested. 

But they are trying to apply f2p logic to p2win players.. it will never work. They have money and they spend it, i seen players spend 10s of thousands in crappy basic games. They do it to show off, so if they cant show off to other spenders then they get bored and find other games. If they can appear in some top10 by spending then they will. Thats what keeps them going. 

Assuming a 3k reduction in cost assumes a player will be getting all their gear from ECRs. And unless people fancy playing the waiting game, they likely won't be doing that. If you assume the upper limit of income you should assume the upper limit of cost assumes well.

And about solving for a-coin deflation I thought there was a problem with a-coins inflation. Inflation of amount required to progress. By a significant amount since launch. How about that?

I know the game as well as Ruffles does, if not better. Plarium isn't totally in the wrong to want to reduce the original rewards but that's different from saying you agree you think the rewards from s1 were too much. And I can acknowledge that while also acknowledging the whole reason is obviously to keep making as much money to please shareholders. While also complaining that they take priority over the players. But simultaneously respecting plarium could feel caught between a rock and a hard place.

But plarium has no shareholders.... They're not public yet, not last I checked anyway.

I mean they will still have people at the top who want money, they're just not technically shareholders 😜 

And also, actual shareholders take priority over customers BY LAW iirc (which is dumb but whatever)

Just because you assume the maximum income doesn't mean you assume the maximum cost. There's 4 total options, (min inc max cost, min inc min cost, max inc min cost, max inc max cost), I was simply making the point that more != better, max inc min cost obviously being the most out of those options. Also, it's a 6k reduction, not a 3k reduction, buts that's probably a typo. Most of the stuff that've gotten since the ecrs, has been from the ecrs. As I mentioned I've gotten everything from ecrs that I'd wanted besides citadel, which is hopefully 2w away.

You don't have to give Plarium respect or disrespect as a whole, it's made of multiple people.

I respect the people who put together the original system, they had mostly the best in mind it would seem, especially with both sides getting paid.

The person or people who tore it apart? Not so much.

And by deflation I meant the deflation of the value of acoin per acoin, which is equivalent the irl INFLATION not DEFLATION, definitely could've worded it better on my part :3

And no you're still not smarter than RuFFles, nor am I. You're waisting time bickering (as is myself, ofc) with a random stranger on the Internet, I don't see him on the forums..

Plarium is not a publicly traded company. But fheir parent company, modern times group, is publicly traded.

I don't give plarium respect for a company I give them grace for having to make a hard decision.

And I would say more is better, for me obviously. At least until a certain point but I'm trying to argue we never went past that point.

You're still forgetting that the mechs from crate rush are still 1 star rank below the rank you can get them in gear hub at. You will spend a couple thousand or so a-coins to rank it up still. You'll probably get the blueprints for that in more ECRs where you'll likely also spend thousands on the blueprints to get it from rank 5 to max.

As for the deflation of the value of a-coins to real world currency, so what? The a-coin has no real world currency exchange value. I can't take the a-coins I've earned in game and go turn them into US dollars. It's not like mech arena is a country with a functioning economy that depends on the stable value of a currenc. That makes it unlike inflation in the real world. But in the real world when cost of living increases you want your income to increase to match it. And it's very similar here. And that's what I've been trying to say. The cost to build a competitive inventory is much higher now compared to at launch. It's not too much for us to get the income to max it. Would still take us approximately 3 years to max a new account. Plenty of people would want to skip that grind.

And I did say if I'm not smarter than Ruffles I'm definitely better at math, and I know mech arena as well as he does if not better. Those things are still true.