Here's how to fix the Syndicate imbalance: "The Super Bowl model"

[JBE]

Who likes the Super Bowl?

The Syndicate battles have become boring because Fight Club has won every single one and no-one can compete. The winner's map, showing their dominance across the whole city, makes me yawn, and must be embarrassing to Gree. Any new player joining the game looks at it and thinks, ‘why bother’?

There's no sense of competitiveness when you're watching a team with unlimited money put trophies on their credit cards. How do we fix this, and make the wars interesting again?

Here's one proposal for fixing it. Many of you might hate this, fair enough, but give it some thought.

In the last 20 Super Bowls, 12 different teams have emerged victorious. How and why has this happened? How can one team not build up total dominance? In part, it's because of the draft system. The team that finishes worst gets the first pick of the best new players, and the team that finishes top (the Super Bowl winner) gets last pick, giving them the most disadvantage.

Somewhat adapting this, here's what I would propose:

The team that wins each war gets compulsorily disbanded for the next two wars. Each team member is distributed into the runner-up teams by order of their IP performance in their winning war.
So say Fight Club has 60 members and wins a war:

Fight Club as a syndicate gets disbanded for the next 2 wars (lasting roughly a month). The top-ranking FC player (who is also probably the guy who spent the most gold in battle) gets moved to the #2 team (Silent Assassins) for the next 2 wars. *This is compulsory* - he cannot leave and they cannot refuse him. He gets some kind of a crown or medal icon showing that he has been a Syndicate battle winner.

The second placed FC player gets moved to #3 Rogues Gallery, the third placed to #4 Indian Nation, etc. The 60th placed (least contributing) FC player joins the 61st placed team, who would likely still welcome such a strong player to their ranks. The boost for them would be huge.

After two wars - which would be necessarily guaranteed two different winners - FC can reform their original line up if they want to. But already the playing field has become more even, because it's not all the same players winning the three mega modifier items each time.

And let's assume that Silent Assassins won the subsequent war (and you would assume that they would, as they have all the 2nd place players plus the top FC player) - they would then get disbanded and dispersed within the top 60, for two wars.

The ramifications for this are huge. Within two wars, every team in the top 60 could gain two players from the two strongest teams.

The top FC players are still incentivized to spend lots of money as their individual performance counts now, as well as their team performance - they have to think of their long-term careers.

I'm sure this proposal will infuriate the top 3 syndicates, but it'd make the game so much more interesting for the remaining 99% of us. Maybe it wouldn’t make economic sense for Gree... or maybe it would. I think players would actually spend more gold if they thought there was a realistic chance they could actually finish top three.

When the trolls are done trolling, I'd welcome suggestions or ideas from others about how the syndicate system could be freshened up to make the results a bit more diverse. Because they're boring as hell right now.


JBE

[recruiter]

and you expect me to read that?

[scott(ST6)]

[jopdermod]

Maybe it wouldn’t make economic sense for Gree...

You gave the answer ..

I would have loved the idea, when they would have set up the game like this from the start. But now it's just NOT going to happen. It's TOO complicated to change now, especially with the baby syndicated and swapping members between them (willing to buy 1 war for the good items and sitting out the next) Gree has trouble enough to make the current game work right and making mayor changes like that would probably screw up the game bigtime .. putting it out for a couple of day's before they turn it back to the way it was because that sort of worked ok

[Ben Weston]

its not difficult to read......


nice in theory but I don't think it'd work as people wouldn't spend the cash when not in FC for example, they might slow right down as whats the point in ploughing gold into 61st place when the same amount would normally get you to first.

[Madsonovich]

I have to ask. A quick glance over your wall o'text looks like you want Gree to disappoint a group of customers who have hooked up their collect credit lines directly to Gree's bottom line, right? For the benefit of the rest of us who have not allowed them free access to our wallets?

I understand the motivation from our side. Why would Gree do it?

[JBE]

I have to ask. A quick glance over your wall o'text looks like you want Gree to disappoint a group of customers who have hooked up their collect credit lines directly to Gree's bottom line, right? For the benefit of the rest of us who have not allowed them free access to our wallets?

I understand the motivation from our side. Why would Gree do it?

Gree would do it because:
1) It would encourage some of the 99% who haven't hooked up their collect credit lines directly to Gree's bottom line to do so, since we would now have a realistic chance at hitting the jackpot in the wars.

and 2) The sad truth is that Gree can disappoint the top 1% of customers who have already hooked up their collect credit lines directly to Gree's bottom line, and they will still keep coming back.

When crack gets weak, a crack addict doesn't stop doing crack - he buys twice as much crack in a bid to get the original high.

[Stooboot]

Only read the first sentence but do u think gree really gives a $hit who wins? All they care about is how many commas are on there check that month

[JBE]

its not difficult to read......


nice in theory but I don't think it'd work as people wouldn't spend the cash when not in FC for example, they might slow right down as whats the point in ploughing gold into 61st place when the same amount would normally get you to first.

That's a good point, and here's where the logic of the system could lead to more money for Gree, rather than less:

While the guy in FC who has to be in the 61st placed syndicate might slow down the amount he is spending in the game (doubtful, see my crack addict theory above), each FC player reducing their spend would likely be replaced by three or four players spending MORE as they see a more level playing field and a chance to actually win.

Remember that anyone in a top 100 syndicate is already a gold spender, for certain. You can't finish top 100 with spending gold. So while the first placed syndicate may spend a little less for one month, teams #2 to #100 would spend considerably more.

The theory is that those teams are under-spending at the moment because they look at FC's dominance and think, 'what's the point?'

[Gingeasian]

would never work
#1 because as you said it would not make economic sense and we all know that Gree wants the money
#2 would take way to much coding to make a syndicate unable to battle and to reassign players and make them stay
#Then it would just be the same 3 rotating winners instead of just 1 winner

[nazgul]

would never work
#2 would take way to much coding to make a syndicate unable to battle and to reassign players and make them stay

No doubt, and given the recent troubles with people being booted from syndicates, do you really have faith that they could get what you proposed right???

[Gingeasian]

Remember that anyone in a top 100 syndicate is already a gold spender, for certain. You can't finish top 100 with spending gold.

False all top 100 syns have gold spenders but not all players in a top 100 spend gold a smart and committed gold player can put up 30,40 or even 50K IP

[Madsonovich]

When crack gets weak, a crack addict doesn't stop doing crack - he buys twice as much crack in a bid to get the original high.

It does seem like top level syndicate players would spend less on a decent crack habit than they do on this game.

I enjoy it, but as an old console gamer, I have trouble continuing to pay more for a game beyond the initial purchase. I'm getting better at being willing to put money in now and then, but hundreds or even thousands per player? Good to be Gree.

[GU7 F4WK3S]

OP-Based off your subject which is all I read you're close to figuring out taking down FC. NFL pays its players. You need a similar method to attract talent. Consider creating a syndicate or take ownership of a current one and talk to a company, lets say Red Bull, get them to sponsor the team $30K. In return you put their name on a few leaderboards.

Note: this could backfire when you start going to these companies only to find they're owned by members of FC.

[Randolph]

Most definately the worst idea ever!!!!