Suggestion- Credit reward per Combat Missions completed in TB
One of the big complaints circulating is the lack of Credit rewards in Territory Battles.
My suggestion would be to reward Credits per an individuals number of Combat Missions completed. This would a) fill the player desire for Credit rewards, b) provide motivation for some players that don't put much effort into their Combat Missions, and c) help offset the mod swap costs that the majority of players are having to spend on Territory Battles.
I think a roughly 3 million reward for a completion of 120 Combat Missions would be reasonable. This would amount to 25k Credit reward per battle completed. Rather than a flat 25k per battle, this could also scale so players that only do 50 battles, get 10k per battle, whereas players that complete 90 battles would get 20k battles and those that complete 110+ get 25k per battle, etc.
My suggestion would be to reward Credits per an individuals number of Combat Missions completed. This would a) fill the player desire for Credit rewards, b) provide motivation for some players that don't put much effort into their Combat Missions, and c) help offset the mod swap costs that the majority of players are having to spend on Territory Battles.
I think a roughly 3 million reward for a completion of 120 Combat Missions would be reasonable. This would amount to 25k Credit reward per battle completed. Rather than a flat 25k per battle, this could also scale so players that only do 50 battles, get 10k per battle, whereas players that complete 90 battles would get 20k battles and those that complete 110+ get 25k per battle, etc.
0
- 60.8K General Discussion
- 9 Developer Q&A Archive
- 2.6K New Players
- 30.5K Arena and Character Strategy
- 4K Individual Events
- 4.6K Guild Events
- 4.6K PVP and Rivalry
- 50.1K Guild Recruitment
- 731 Art and Media
- 4.1K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
Replies
Once you hit the star target though (and are nowhere near the next), there's literally no reason to do your battles anymore.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to, but with the amount of time this game already takes, I can't help but just tick that box and move on.
Regarding participation... I've already noticed a few members just dump it & run. Deploying the lot on one zone and not fighting at all.
Incentive would fix everything.
WOW!
And wow spelled backwards is...
WOW!
Like others already said, there is no motivation for some people to do the combats. Individual rewards (credits) would fix that, but it could also affect the platoons - "Why should I deploy in platoons and get no individual reward?"
That being said, I am also a guild officer and getting guild mates to follow strategy can be challenging at the best of times, if some members were given individual incentives to go outside guild recommendations to do other battles, that would further frustrate our leadership group. But, I do agree that a credit reward would be an Incredible boost to TB whatever it looks like, even if it adds challenges to getting the guild to follow stated strategy.
this idea, though nice, goes in the opposite way of that concept.
id like more credits of course, but in a different way maybe
adding the credits as an overall guild reward at the end is a good idea
That being said, I'm always a fan of more credits
As a guild leader, I was preparing to post my agreement with the sentiments quoted above. I actually quoted them with the intention of saying 'I agree!' Upon better analysis, however, I think anything that gives players an to incentive to better participate in the combat missions is a good thing, even if it's an individual reward.
Here's why: Collectively, there are 450 million points available to be earned through combat missions. That is virtually 50% of the maximum possible score. Theoretically, if a guild had only 15 million GP, but every member had three awesome 90k teams (and 1 mediocre Ship team) capable of maximizing combat missions, that 15 million GP guild could earn 25 Stars. Alternatively, if a guild completed only 4/6 (33% less) of their combat missions, they would need approximately 56 million GP (365% more) in order to achieve the same 25 Stars through deployments. I think it'd be much easier to allow an incentive to encourage members to build teams worth 15 million GP than it would be to recruit or build 40 million GP and micromanage deployments until you've a migraine.
I realize there's a very clear relationship between combat mission scores and galactic power ("but Meatbag, a guild with 15 million GP couldn't go 6/6 on all the combat missions!") Not in reality, no, but my point is that combat missions are a demonstrably easier way to improve your scores than meticulously micromanaging mission assignments, which is like herding cats.
Our guild earned 25 Stars last TB and we were pretty active in updating phase-by-phase strategies, even modifying them regularly based on current scores. Based on our score, if we had the same total in each phase, but had been able to micromanage every member into maximizing their resources efficiently into the correct phase, we could have achieved 3 additional stars. On the flip side, if we had enough increased and improved participation in combat battles that every guild member averaged just one more wave per combat mission, that alone (with no additional micromanaging) would be enough to achieve 29 Stars!
So guild leaders and officers should ask themselves this: would you rather have a carrot that makes your horse walk for 4 miles or would you rather spur him and whip him with a stick so that he runs for 3? Maybe with a lot of carrot and little bit of stick you can get 5... and both you and the horse will enjoy the ride much more.
Meatbag approves any reward that incentivises players to participate in Territory Battles!
Lol. I'll take the carrot!