[Updated] Official 11+ Movement Thread

[King juju]

They banned his 2nd account too right? The ghost?

[smujica93]

They banned his 2nd account too right? The ghost?

Yep. Sure looks like it. Screen shot 2014-02-26 at 1.08.03 PM.png

[Sol Invictus]

Thank you for pointing out the stat difference, busteroaf. You are correct. It would make little sense to have a technically better reward for 11th place than 10th place. My reasoning was this...Northerner is an old Epic that is now fuseable. If you can spend 25k gold and get it, why shouldn't you be able to get it from war. I know you can't get a + from fusion.

That's all. Could've picked Forgestone+ or Beastmaster+. Doesn't matter. But 11-25 should get an old +.

A lot of people have brought up your objection about who should and shouldn't get what because they aren't putting in a commensurate amount of money or effort into it. I share this belief. Rewards should be commensurate with ranking, which is a result of effort.

GREE controls what armor stats are, so they ought to be a lot more precise and flexible when it comes to dishing out rewards. As long as it makes sense, I'm good with that.


BUT PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS TO 11-50 IF WAR REWARDS IMPROVE

Players from lesser guilds will filter into the ranks of the top 100, pushing out the lower-performing players of those guilds.

Overall scoring capability of 11-100 guilds increases as participation and gemspending-per-guild increases.

Competition for 11-25 increases (which naturally increases competition for that #10 spot.).



What this means is, your objections about someone not spending enough or being active enough while still getting rewards "they didn't deserve because people gambled on chests and lost" will be nullified. There will not be a top 50 guild in existence that didn't get there without spending good money and without a lot of effort.

[busteroaf]

Thank you for pointing out the stat difference, busteroaf. You are correct. It would make little sense to have a technically better reward for 11th place than 10th place. My reasoning was this...Northerner is an old Epic that is now fuseable. If you can spend 25k gold and get it, why shouldn't you be able to get it from war. I know you can't get a + from fusion.

That's all. Could've picked Forgestone+ or Beastmaster+. Doesn't matter. But 11-25 should get an old +.

A lot of people have brought up your objection about who should and shouldn't get what because they aren't putting in a commensurate amount of money or effort into it. I share this belief. Rewards should be commensurate with ranking, which is a result of effort.

GREE controls what armor stats are, so they ought to be a lot more precise and flexible when it comes to dishing out rewards. As long as it makes sense, I'm good with that.


BUT PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENS TO 11-50 IF WAR REWARDS IMPROVE

Players from lesser guilds will filter into the ranks of the top 100, pushing out the lower-performing players of those guilds.

Overall scoring capability of 11-100 guilds increases as participation and gemspending-per-guild increases.

Competition for 11-25 increases (which naturally increases competition for that #10 spot.).



What this means is, your objections about someone not spending enough or being active enough while still getting rewards "they didn't deserve because people gambled on chests and lost" will be nullified. There will not be a top 50 guild in existence that didn't get there without spending good money and without a lot of effort.

If war rewards improve. IF war rewards improve, THEN 11-50 will spend more. That is a mighty big if. Where is the proof to back up your claims? You're still stuck with the idea that IF the rewards are better, the it is FACT that more people will magically start spending and make it worthwhile. Your claim is just as hypothetical as mine to say they won't.

You still sound an awful lot like saying if you give me a raise, then I'll do more work... doesn't it? Can you GUARANTEE that those people waiting in 11-50 are just honestly chomping at the bit to increase their spending to get an old epic? Can you guarantee that those person that is unproved and asking for a raise is going to do the work?

Please, show me the proof that those guilds will actually spend, and I'll concede.

I just honestly do not believe that there are that many players that will filter into the top 100 as you've stated... to replace all those lower performing players, when many of them simply do it for free? Sure, you may have some increase, but I do not feel it will be across the whole top 100 like you seem to believe. Its too large of a group to guarantee a spending increase for. At best, maybe the Top 25. Top 50 is a stretch at best. Top 100? Huge stretch.

Of course I could be totally wrong. But since we already have Top 10 guilds with the mindset of "lets not spend anything else for a few extra boosts, no sense in wasting money" I find it hard to believe that the majority of the Top 100 don't have the same mindset as well.

[Dark Prince]

If war rewards improve. IF war rewards improve, THEN 11-50 will spend more. That is a mighty big if. Where is the proof to back up your claims? You're still stuck with the idea that IF the rewards are better, the it is FACT that more people will magically start spending and make it worthwhile. Your claim is just as hypothetical as mine to say they won't.

You still sound an awful lot like saying if you give me a raise, then I'll do more work... doesn't it? Can you GUARANTEE that those people waiting in 11-50 are just honestly chomping at the bit to increase their spending to get an old epic? Can you guarantee that those person that is unproved and asking for a raise is going to do the work?

Please, show me the proof that those guilds will actually spend, and I'll concede.

I just honestly do not believe that there are that many players that will filter into the top 100 as you've stated... to replace all those lower performing players, when many of them simply do it for free? Sure, you may have some increase, but I do not feel it will be across the whole top 100 like you seem to believe. Its too large of a group to guarantee a spending increase for. At best, maybe the Top 25. Top 50 is a stretch at best. Top 100? Huge stretch.

Of course I could be totally wrong. But since we already have Top 10 guilds with the mindset of "lets not spend anything else for a few extra boosts, no sense in wasting money" I find it hard to believe that the majority of the Top 100 don't have the same mindset as well.

Agreed Imo Top 25 is where it should stop being an Epic reward.

[Dark Prince]

I'm beginning to think Skittle Stomper is Eunuchorn's 4th account. If this is the case, then use the past as another indicator that we don't want or need you here. Go away now child.

If this is not the case, then still go away.

+1 to Majestic

[Sol Invictus]

Please, show me the proof that those guilds will actually spend, and I'll concede.

Of course I could be totally wrong.

The proof is that I sent messages to people from dozens of guilds asking them if they were fed up with bad war rewards and all of them except one or two said that they were. Many, like Azure Dragon Nexus, have said that they don't spend gems at all anymore.

That is how this whole thing started. The proof is the existence of this movement.

The proof is in all the people in my guild who are tired of holding back on gemspending because war rewards aren't worth it.
The proof is in all the people in many of the guilds that you used to see in the top 50 or top 100, but now you never see them above 150.

The proof is that people will do what you and other naysayers have so condescendingly suggested, which is to recruit better, because they want those rewards. I've done a lot of recruiting, and it's not easy. If you're a guild that can reach out to an active player from a #200+ guild and say "Come with us, we can get you this 11-100 prize." then it's gonna be a lot easier to convince that person to join up.

The proof is that the same exact effect takes place in top 10 guilds.




To further illustrate my point, here is an example based on my own guild:




This only makes sense.

Scoring will increase because people WANT to spend gems on better rewards.
GREE is simply not giving people an incentive to spend.

Give incentive.
People will spend.
Points will increase.
Competition will increase.
People will spend more to keep up.

[Melibane Urambir]

The proof is that I sent messages to people from dozens of guilds asking them if they were fed up with bad war rewards and all of them except one or two said that they were. Many, like Azure Dragon Nexus, have said that they don't spend gems at all anymore.

That is how this whole thing started. The proof is the existence of this movement.

The proof is in all the people in my guild who are tired of holding back on gemspending because war rewards aren't worth it.
The proof is in all the people in many of the guilds that you used to see in the top 50 or top 100, but now you never see them above 150.

The proof is that people will do what you and other naysayers have so condescendingly suggested, which is to recruit better, because they want those rewards. I've done a lot of recruiting, and it's not easy. If you're a guild that can reach out to an active player from a #200+ guild and say "Come with us, we can get you this 11-100 prize." then it's gonna be a lot easier to convince that person to join up.

The proof is that the same exact effect takes place in top 10 guilds.




To further illustrate my point, here is an example based on my own guild:




This only makes sense.

Scoring will increase because people WANT to spend gems on better rewards.
GREE is simply not giving people an incentive to spend.

Give incentive.
People will spend.
Points will increase.
Competition will increase.
People will spend more to keep up.

Exactly. People will spend if they think there is a good chance they can get something "worthwhile" to them. Of course "worthwhile" varies from person to person, but there's no reason to think that guilds 26-100 wouldn't slug it out just like the top 25 if there was something more attractive in the 26-30 spot. Hell, moontide+, tectonic+, blazeborne+, then slide down to regular epics in the 31-35 spots. Those armors are extremely valuable to guilds in those areas of the ranking and would produce gem spending in order to get them. At this point with specter, komodo, runic, etc. that giving out these lower tier epics and plusses will hardly make a ripple in the upper echelon of guilds and their spending habits as they already have these armors sitting in their closet collecting dust.

[busteroaf]

The proof is that I sent messages to people from dozens of guilds asking them if they were fed up with bad war rewards and all of them except one or two said that they were. Many, like Azure Dragon Nexus, have said that they don't spend gems at all anymore.

That is how this whole thing started. The proof is the existence of this movement.

The proof is in all the people in my guild who are tired of holding back on gemspending because war rewards aren't worth it.
The proof is in all the people in many of the guilds that you used to see in the top 50 or top 100, but now you never see them above 150.

The proof is that people will do what you and other naysayers have so condescendingly suggested, which is to recruit better, because they want those rewards. I've done a lot of recruiting, and it's not easy. If you're a guild that can reach out to an active player from a #200+ guild and say "Come with us, we can get you this 11-100 prize." then it's gonna be a lot easier to convince that person to join up.

The proof is that the same exact effect takes place in top 10 guilds.

To further illustrate my point, here is an example based on my own guild:

This only makes sense.

Scoring will increase because people WANT to spend gems on better rewards.
GREE is simply not giving people an incentive to spend.

Give incentive.
People will spend.
Points will increase.
Competition will increase.
People will spend more to keep up.

Proof is in you sending messages? In the existence in the movement? And here I just thought it was about getting better rewards. Its actually about giving them more money. You're so sweet.

"Are you fed up?" YEAH.
"Do you want better rewards?" YEAH!
"Are you gonna spend more now?" Well maybe... depends on what the other guilds around me spend, what the rewards are, what the wife says I can spend... so maybe. Do we know what the rewards are yet?

No offense, but using 12k as your example cutoff is laughable. People get that while sitting on the couch on an easy gem session in one battle. Hell, people can do that in a matter of about 10 minutes. Some have gotten that much in less than 6 minutes before. People below 12k, just aren't trying. Its not for lack of prizes, its that they're just that lazy.

Also, your 25% increase? That is called having a minimum and cutting the people who don't meet it, and replacing them with people who do. That is not PROVING any increase in gem spending. I could get 12k just from logging into 10-12 average wars, and dropping full energy and not spending a cent. Increased activity =/= increased spending. For some it does, but not all. Especially not your example.

[Sol Invictus]

[busteroaf]

Also Sol,

Your math is wrong. If those bottom 17 (Damn you have a lot of leechers you call guild members) all scored the 12k you talk about, that magic 204k or 25% increase as you call it, you would actually only be gaining 111202. Yes, I did the math. Your original bottom 17 did 92798 in scoring. If you are talking about actually only ADDING 12k to each of their scores, then sure, you'd have a 204k increase. But, in your image, you said "REPLACED." That means, they, and all their original points, are gone. Replaced with people who scored 12k minimum.

So in reality, your math is actually 794,318 + 111,202 = 905,520. Which, if you do the math... wait, I did it for you... is actually only a 13.999% increase. So you're kinda right. If you replaced your bottom feeders with people who are able to log in a few times each day and actually earn points, you might get an extra 111k in points, or a 14% (yes, I'm rounding now) increase in your points. You were still able to show proof of increase in points. Good for you.

Still not showing me proof of increased GEM spending though, since 12k is nothing.

[Sol Invictus]

You're right.
But 12k is the minimum for this EXAMPLE because I went with the low figure in order to be conservative.
Surely, people would score more than 12k in this EXAMPLE. Maybe the replacements for the bottom scorers would post an average of 20k each. The points I used are speculation, but you can apply this EXAMPLE to any guild from 11-100 and it would still hold true, more or less.

The main point is the same. And it's a solid point. Every objection you make is a logical fallacy.


Hey, do we need to get a room to ourselves so I can educate you without hogging up this thread? I feel bad.

[busteroaf]

You're right.
But 12k is the minimum for this EXAMPLE because I went with the low figure in order to be conservative.
Surely, people would score more than 12k in this EXAMPLE. Maybe the replacements for the bottom scorers would post an average of 20k each. The points I used are speculation, but you can apply this EXAMPLE to any guild from 11-100 and it would still hold true, more or less.

The main point is the same. And it's a solid point. Every objection you make is a logical fallacy.


Hey, do we need to get a room to ourselves so I can educate you without hogging up this thread? I feel bad.

You said it yourself. The points you use are speculation.

You used a low figure in order to be conservative? You used your own guild. Rank 65, replacing over 40% of the people in it, and you think that is low and conservative? It doesn't look good for those 66 and down now either. Do you see why I'm skeptical of your example, and why it I don't think it would hold true... more or less?

Are you meaning to say, that people outside of the top 100, will replace 40% of the people in 11-100 rank guilds, and magically increase spending? Do you not think that many of those people being replaced would simply find slightly lower ranked guilds, or that some of the main spenders would not just move to higher ranked guilds?

Again, you're reaching too far in your examples. Filter into the Top 25 and see an increase, maybe, but 50/100 is a real stretch.

[ZERO_07]

#1
Snowstorm Platemail+ x1
Water Fusion Boosts x15
Limited Edition Keys x5
Gems x100

#2
Snowstorm Platemail x1
Water Fusion Boosts x12
Limited Edition Keys x4
Gems x 80

#3
Snowstorm Platemail x1
Water Fusion Boosts x10
Limited Edition Keys x 3
Gems x60

#4-10
Snowstorm Platemail x1
Water Fusion Boosts x8
Limited Edition Keys x3
Gems x40

#11-25
Northerner's Battlegear x1
Water Fusion Boosts x7
Limited Edition Keys x2
Gems x20

#25-50
Clayplate Mantle+ x1
Water Fusion Boosts x5
Limited Edition Key x2
Storm Sorcerer+ x1

#51-100
Clayplate Mantle+ x1
Water Fusion Boosts x3
Limited Edition Key x1
Storm Sorcerer+ x1

#101-250
Clayplate Mantle x1
Water Fusion Boosts x2
Storm Sorcerer+ x1
Fusion Stones x10

#251-500
Clayplate Mantle x1
Storm Sorcerer+ x1
Fusion Stones x 8

#501-1XXX
Same Rewards as always

If anything this would be better than the garbage photoschop proposal posted before.

[AviraM]

I am with you, it's kinda lame after level 100. And also not worth for people that burn their money into this game