Who will be the happy players?

Which hegemon with 2 fingers in front will configure that option?

Quienes seran los felices jugadores ?

Que hegemon con 2 dedos de frente configurara esa opcion ?

 it would be better if it could be adjusted by ranks. Not everyone can do the same points.

Who will be the happy players?

Which hegemon with 2 fingers in front will configure that option?

Quienes seran los felices jugadores ?

Que hegemon con 2 dedos de frente configurara esa opcion ?

A player who has not yet signed Athens because he started playing a few days ago that someone tells me how you can add at least 2 thousand points in tournament PVP coalition, previously this player with 500 points had the same prize that the hegemon (and make 500 points in a beginner is a lot of points)

Un jugador que aun no tenga firmado Atenas porque comenzo a jugar hace unos dias que alguien me cuente como puede sumar minimo 2 mil puntos en torneo de coalicion PVP, anteriormente este jugador con 500 puntos tenia el mismo premio que el hegemon ( y hacer 500 puntos en un principiante son muchos puntos )

Its a double edged sword for a hegemon

fair enough he needs to get the less active players to fulfil their share of the burden, but in doing this he is going to potentially lose his coalition a lot of troops that may come in useful later on. Just because players do have real lives and cant do this week in week out does not mean they are not committed to the cause. There are lots of instances of less active players when it comes to large tactical and strategic warfare that the hegemon wishes to task that the less active players will often back up the action with what troops they have often to a considerable amount. So I say to hegemons think again, you could be cutting off your nose to spite your face. The troops that you dont let members have in CC are lost to the coalition permanently. 

Elias said:

Who will be the happy players?

Which hegemon with 2 fingers in front will configure that option?

Quienes seran los felices jugadores ?

Que hegemon con 2 dedos de frente configurara esa opcion ?

well in the team I am in the happy players are the ones who work the hardest week in week out to gain the most points, now the lazy ones have to step up and earn some points as well instead of others doing the hard work for them 

A player who has not yet signed Athens because he started playing a few days ago that someone tells me how you can add at least 2 thousand points in tournament PVP coalition, previously this player with 500 points had the same prize that the hegemon (and make 500 points in a beginner is a lot of points)

Un jugador que aun no tenga firmado Atenas porque comenzo a jugar hace unos dias que alguien me cuente como puede sumar minimo 2 mil puntos en torneo de coalicion PVP, anteriormente este jugador con 500 puntos tenia el mismo premio que el hegemon ( y hacer 500 puntos en un principiante son muchos puntos )

~THЄ .PЦИЇ$HЄЯ~ said:

Elias said:

A player who has not yet signed Athens because he started playing a few days ago that someone tells me how you can add at least 2 thousand points in tournament PVP coalition, previously this player with 500 points had the same prize that the hegemon (and make 500 points in a beginner is a lot of points)

Un jugador que aun no tenga firmado Atenas porque comenzo a jugar hace unos dias que alguien me cuente como puede sumar minimo 2 mil puntos en torneo de coalicion PVP, anteriormente este jugador con 500 puntos tenia el mismo premio que el hegemon ( y hacer 500 puntos en un principiante son muchos puntos )

buddy, there are no new players here in glorious valley, if you see all over the forum players are complaining about no new players, including me, so this point is irrelevant, dont quote me on this, my opinion. 

Young you only play in glorious Valley ?

I like to look at everything, I play on the second server and I even looked at the third one and there are beginner players but few.

Even so, the idea is that new people will come in and keep playing if we don't give them a chance to win something without losing everything.

Now I am almost 100 level but I still remember my principles when the greats of my coalition helped me defending myself and making me collect good prizes (then for me they were great) without exposing almost anything.

Do you remember your beginnings?

Joven solo juegas en Valle glorioso ?

A mi me gusta mirarlo todo, juego en el segundo servidor y hasta mire en el tercero y hay jugadores principiantes aunque pocos.

Aun asi lo que se pretende es que entre gente nueva, como va a entrar un jugador Y SEGUIR JUGANDO si no le damos la oportunidad de ganar algo sin perderlo todo ?

Ahora soy nivel casi 100 pero aun recuerdo mis principios cuando los grandes de mi coalicion me ayudaron defendiendome y haciendo que cobrase buenos premios ( entonces para mi eran estupendos ) sin exponer casi nada.

Recordais vuestros comienzos ?

well all I can say is in my team, we smashed the 20 mill with 24 hours to go and this time everyone stepped up to the plate, it cost the top earners less and the ones that didnt used to do much realised that with a little plan and prep you can hit the target set without coining 

looks like this feature is having divided opinions, both of which are quite logical.

if a coalition majority prefer the minimum scoring to go higher, then they will and those who dont can remain at 2,000, simple.

5,000 is made easily in plenty of ways, just by adding swords to training, buildings, auto-battle feature for guardians battling warlords, etc.

which an average player can do easily without having to spend more than even 5 minutes in game in those 3 days coalition conflict is running.

my coalition accept players who are 80 and above, and each member does this quite easily, but for any coalition that accept 'new players' (which are not literally there in glorious valley, even if they come they quit quickly due to major unbalance in game and alot of game features currently running which will take them years to even up) who need alot of support and assistance, this would not seem as a viable option, which is also correct as soula addressed earlier, so it depends from coalition to coalition, i was going to set a limit for 10k where my pole suggested we start with 5k, see how it goes and if it goes well we increase it but later on, which seems quite fair to me, but again it depends from coalition to coalition, and everyone has their own preference on this, this topic has nothing to do with remembering your 'beginnings'. 

morteee

spoken like a true in house plarium moderator.

I have differences here, so we get one player not that active (or busy elsewheres at weekend) He plants most of his defense in capital or pantheons for the cause, if online will undertake offensive actions with the coaliton with the offense he has saved (conserved).

Another player has no defense in capital or pantheons, wasted nearly all of his troops that weekend on persian or elysian positions but scored good pts with this in coalition conflict.

The question is which player is more beneficial to the coalition especially if pantheons or capital city comes under attack.

Which player deserves the coalition conflict rewards??

Its a double edged sword for hegemon as I said earlier, and they should think again before they throw away what could be valuable troops in the coalition cause. Is the position player going to plant the rewards into capital city or pantheons, I leave that for your judgement.

I still think its a tax on coalition troops they way I look at it.

honestly there are SO many ways to earn the minimum points with zero effort its unreal, leave a equipment item breaking so it finishes during CC, time your building and agreement updates so they finish during clash, add extra units into your build queue so they finish during clash, divine quests earn you points, stick some defence in other coalition members cities so if they are hit during clash that earns you points, one of our team went on holiday for 2 weeks and still managed to earn points during clash due to forward planning

SOULA said:

Its a double edged sword for a hegemon

fair enough he needs to get the less active players to fulfil their share of the burden, but in doing this he is going to potentially lose his coalition a lot of troops that may come in useful later on. Just because players do have real lives and cant do this week in week out does not mean they are not committed to the cause. There are lots of instances of less active players when it comes to large tactical and strategic warfare that the hegemon wishes to task that the less active players will often back up the action with what troops they have often to a considerable amount. So I say to hegemons think again, you could be cutting off your nose to spite your face. The troops that you dont let members have in CC are lost to the coalition permanently. 

The more cynical me thinks that its plarium ploy to tax the rewards once again, re coalition acolyte tournament and several past instances of this.

Hello Soula:

I very much agree with you in the first part, that's why I advise the hegemons to put the point limit very low so that the players obtain benefits. For me, the more troops and inventories we all have, the better! As for the second part ... I tell you that the point limits was an idea proposed by hegemons of coalitions, a specific request that came up from the players.

Which hegemons proposed it?

USGU ?, THECOFUSED BLK.?, WOLF WARRIOR ? ELIAS ?, KAOS ?, ....

Or the Faceboock hegemons ?

Que hegemones lo propusieron ?

USGU ?, THECOFUSED BLK.?, GUERRERO LOBO ? ELIAS ?, KAOS ?, .....

O los hegemones de Faceboock ?

Archons, as you all know, this is the optional feature. Lots of players asked us to increase for everyone the minimum number of points needed to receive a reward in a Coalition Conflict tournament. While we don't want to raise it for everyone, we came to this alternative solution and decided to give it a try. 

Now, if a Hegemon believes that his coalition-mates are able to earn more points during a tournament, he/she may increase the limit. I'd like to mention here that there are different Coalitions in the game that stick to different strategies and tactics. They also vary by size, level of development, etc., and if you believe that this feature won't work for your Coalition, there may be another Coalition who is using it successfully. 

I suggest you discuss this topic with your Hegemon and if you have any doubts, discuss all pros and cons of changing the limit for your particular Coalition. 

Archons, as you all know, this is the optional feature. Lots of players asked us to increase for everyone the minimum number of points needed to receive a reward in a Coalition Conflict tournament. While we don't want to raise it for everyone, we came to this alternative solution and decided to give it a try. 

Now, if a Hegemon believes that his coalition-mates are able to earn more points during a tournament, he/she may increase the limit. I'd like to mention here that there are different Coalitions in the game that stick to different strategies and tactics. They also vary by size, level of development, etc., and if you believe that this feature won't work for your Coalition, there may be another Coalition who is using it successfully. 

I suggest you discuss this topic with your Hegemon and if you have any doubts, discuss all pros and cons of changing the limit for your particular Coalition. 

Nancy said:

Archons, as you all know, this is the optional feature. Lots of players asked us to increase for everyone the minimum number of points needed to receive a reward in a Coalition Conflict tournament. While we don't want to raise it for everyone, we came to this alternative solution and decided to give it a try. 

Now, if a Hegemon believes that his coalition-mates are able to earn more points during a tournament, he/she may increase the limit. I'd like to mention here that there are different Coalitions in the game that stick to different strategies and tactics. They also vary by size, level of development, etc., and if you believe that this feature won't work for your Coalition, there may be another Coalition who is using it successfully. 

I suggest you discuss this topic with your Hegemon and if you have any doubts, discuss all pros and cons of changing the limit for your particular Coalition. 

Coalition Conflict Rewards are the best rewards in any tournament so far.

But to get these rewards Coalitions players must be active and Overplayed to reach the max rewards.

So very few players make a lots of points and have no profit from the conflict and most of the others players make very few points but all get the same Rewards but is profitable for them.

It is good for low level players or new but not so good for the players that make the necessary points for the rewards.

There is only one solution to be all players happy.

Make milestones Multipliers.

If a player reach the limit of 2000 points get all the rewards. x 1

If a player reach (example) 20000 points get the rewards x 1.2

If a player reach (example) 50000 points get the rewards x 1.5

If a players reach (example) 100000 points get the rewards x 2

If a players reach (example) 200000 points get the rewards x 2.5

And so on

Every player would be happy and try to make more points to get better rewards.

IOANNIS said:

Coalition Conflict Rewards are the best rewards in any tournament so far.

But to get these rewards Coalitions players must be active and Overplayed to reach the max rewards.

So very few players make a lots of points and have no profit from the conflict and most of the others players make very few points but all get the same Rewards but is profitable for them.

It is good for low level players or new but not so good for the players that make the necessary points for the rewards.

There is only one solution to be all players happy.

Thanks for your suggestion, IOANNIS. 

We believe that having the option to set up a different minimum milestone is a good solution for now. Those Hegemons, who may have faced the situation that you described, could try to motivate less active players to contribute more efforts during a Coalition Conflict tournament in such a way.