Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Konveryn 2 - Campaign Rewards System


Recommended Posts

Hello Crows,

First of all, we want to thank everyone for helping us test the Campaign Rewards system for the first time!  We learned a LOT about what works (and what doesn’t) in terms of campaign rewards, and we also identified a number of bugs and balance issues that need to be addressed for our future campaigns.

reward_2.png
Some example reward cards!

Overall, in spite of the issues, we are happy with the results of the test.  As you can see from the sample “reward cards” above, this system offers a huge degree of variety and flexibility -- so it really shouldn’t come as a huge surprise that we would have a few issues the first time we subject it to real rewards in a real campaign.

Let’s quickly talk through some of those issues, and how we are going to address them.

One of the most apparent challenges wasn’t a bug -- it was an issue in making sure that players understand the difference between GUILD rewards (you get one of these reward bundles per guild) and PARTICIPANT rewards (every participant in an eligible guild gets 1 of these bundles). Unfortunately, to complicate the confusion between Guild and Player rewards, there was a bug that caused these token rewards to appear blank on the reward cards and, in some cases, caused them to be unclaimable as well.

Here is how the design was intended to work:

Guild Rewards were intended to be the primary source of rewards for campaigns because Player Rewards encourage the use of alts to multiply your rewards… which is obviously not the intended design.  A Guild Reward card could include, for instance, a limited number of rare items.  This scarcity also acts as a disincentive against packing too many guild members into one guild, or one alliance. 


To that end, the initial set of Player Rewards for this first Campaign was limited to Export Tokens only (i.e. the ability to export more of your campaign winnings back to the rest of the game).   We’re already discussing this internally, and recognize that many players will want these rewards to be more substantial to make these cards more enticing.   We’ll take a look at this, in light of the issue with alt accounts that I noted earlier.

In terms of this current campaign, however, the bugs mentioned above, we are granting an additional +25 Export Tokens to all players who were active in this round of campaign testing.  We also added a few test items to these bundles as well, to help us track down the issues so that we can fix them for future campaigns.

The information about whether a given reward was a “one per guild” or “one per campaign” was included in the mouse-over text of each item -- but we can absolutely see how this was confusing.  To fix this in future campaigns, we will update the Campaign Reward Card interface to make it MUCH more clear whether a reward is “one per guild” or “one per player”:
 

reward_1.png

As a thank you for playing, we will be reviewing the “per guild” reward bundles and increasing the rewards for this last campaign, because we understand that a lot of players did not understand the distinction between these reward types.

Additionally, we have reports that if a guild leader was not active in the campaign, they were not able to claim the guild rewards in some cases.  (In another case, we know that a Guild Leader did claim the guild reward -- but was unable to claim their own player reward, as a result.)   Gaining one reward in a given category also seems to have blocked other rewards in the same category -- for example, winning as the “Top Guild for Wealth” should not have blocked you from also getting the reward for being one of the “Top 20% of Guilds for Wealth”.

We are looking into these issues one at a time, and we will make sure that all of the guilds get the rewards they deserve.  That said, please be patient and remember that it is the holidays for our team, too.  We expect to have these issues resolved before the end of the next campaign.

Lastly, we want to thank everyone for helping us stress test this system -- Thanks for your patience while we work through this and complete the action plan above.

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.  [Rules of Conduct]

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solo rewards are definelty lackluster, Like 2nd place in power epoic chest was 100 dust and 150g is like a spit in the face for the work you have to do to secure that, i was over 250 captures to get that and i could of farmed for 10 minutes to get that lol, Should probaly have been 20 times that as a reward imo for 2nd place chests as for the top 20% rewards thats 75 dust and 125g this should be much higher to between 5 and 10 times that value.

Tbh though your rewards would probaly be better off being top 20 people on the guild score board gets the rewards this balances out rewards for large and small guilds since 20 people get it max and also rewarding top 20 players also promotes members to put in some work aswell.
having it cap at 20 people also means you can control how much resources gets injected into the game aswell since you know if a 200 man guild wins is only gonna be 20 set of rewards being injected in instead of 200 or 125 or what ever the guild size that wins is.
this also takes alts out of the equation aswell


 

Edited by veeshan

Veeshan Midst of UXA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think to balance per-member rewards you could have a primary requirement (guild takes nd place) and have an individual requirement such as the individual player must be in the 50th percentile of individual scoring to be eligible to claim, that way a character who comes in during winter and crafts a bandage still wouldn't be eligible for rewards.

understandably it's hard to balance rewards for large and small guilds to feel like everyone has a reason to try and be competitive, and I think it's headed in the right direction, but making per-member rewards pitiful makes it a waste of time to try and get those rewards (especially for smaller guilds who might only collect 20 members worth) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn´t you tell us in the 5.6 Q&As that rewards should only be visual. (Mounts, Skins, Badges...)

Imho the "Trial of X" Badges where a nice solution.


With Mats, Crafting and Exploration Discs as rewards you just snowball "Uncle Bob", the biggest Zergs can bypass the harvesting grind and they get endgame mats without any risk.

oh and I still think there should be a participation fee per member for divine favour!

GvTm2yj.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kunter84 said:

Didn´t you tell us in the 5.6 Q&As that rewards should only be visual. (Mounts, Skins, Badges...)

Imho the "Trial of X" Badges where a nice solution.


With Mats, Crafting and Exploration Discs as rewards you just snowball "Uncle Bob", the biggest Zergs can bypass the harvesting grind and they get endgame mats without any risk.

oh and I still think there should be a participation fee per member for divine favour!

hence why i was a cap on the mount of guildies that can get rewards like top 10 or top 20 score, may not completely stop the uncle bob problem but it reduces it and more fair with rewards to small and large guild since both would be getting 20.

Veeshan Midst of UXA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Campaign Exports are granted after the campaign ends, correct?

The idea with the extra 25 exports is a nice idea, but is pretty useless, since most guilds (at least I assume other guilds do it like that as well) take care of the exports BEFORE the campaign ends. This usually works like this:

  1. Everybody logs on and meets in the same spot.
  2. The guild compiles ressources on the same account to make sure you only export full stacks or don't waste multiple exports on several accounts on the same item that could be stacked.
  3. Then you distribute the items to the accounts, so everything can be exported

In theory the idea with the exports is a nice one. But in practice those 25 exports are pretty much useless, since you don't have enough space outside of the campaign to store those items. Another big problem is managing the items or even being aware where the items are and how many you have. Item management is big pain in the ass.

In order for the extra exports to be valuable you should reduce the amount of exports that are available in the first place AND allow us to access and trade the items in campaign AFTER we know if we get the extra exports or not....

Currently you can just bring extra accounts shortly before the campaign ends and get 50 exports on that account.

Hence: The extra exports are kind of useless with current game mechanics.

Again my usual disclaimer: I'm not complaining, i'm just giving feedback trying to help make it better.

In general I like the new campaign reward system very much and the latest changes to clarify how they work are amazing. Good job!

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, CrusaderW said:

Campaign Exports are granted after the campaign ends, correct?

The idea with the extra 25 exports is a nice idea, but is pretty useless, since most guilds (at least I assume other guilds do it like that as well) take care of the exports BEFORE the campaign ends. This usually works like this:

  1. Everybody logs on and meets in the same spot.
  2. The guild compiles ressources on the same account to make sure you only export full stacks or don't waste multiple exports on several accounts on the same item that could be stacked.
  3. Then you distribute the items to the accounts, so everything can be exported

In theory the idea with the exports is a nice one. But in practice those 25 exports are pretty much useless, since you don't have enough space outside of the campaign to store those items. Another big problem is managing the items or even being aware where the items are and how many you have. Item management is big pain in the ass.

In order for the extra exports to be valuable you should reduce the amount of exports that are available in the first place AND allow us to access and trade the items in campaign AFTER we know if we get the extra exports or not....

Currently you can just bring extra accounts shortly before the campaign ends and get 50 exports on that account.

Hence: The extra exports are kind of useless with current game mechanics.

Again my usual disclaimer: I'm not complaining, i'm just giving feedback trying to help make it better.

In general I like the new campaign reward system very much and the latest changes to clarify how they work are amazing. Good job!

What are you talking about?  The last 1-2 days of a campaign being administration fall are super fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ilogos said:

Am I just viewing this wrong or did they add loot crates into the game?

Your just wrong.

"Loot crates" and all the negative P2W, children gambling, and other other connotations that have been noticed as far up as congress are about buying with real money in game advantage.

These are what you earn from in game activities. Think of it as a hard work Bonus.  

The bugs were related to teams actually knowing what they were working for, not a RNG system of random loot drops. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep saying this but I'll say it again:
Exports are pointless as a reward mechanism as long as each account recieves any free exports at all.

If My account has 25 exports, and the reward is 25 exports, I can either work my butt off for 25 exports every single campaign or pull out my credit card one time and get that same reward every single campaign in perpetuity for nothing but the time it takes me to level one white vessel.

Make the free exports 10, same problem, only now it requires a greater degree of card-fu to circumvent the system.

On top of that, exports are not rewards.

They're empty boxes that require additional farming to fill. Players already face a choice between loot acquisition or chasing scoreboard position as more often than not mutually exclusive goals. You can't export loot used to rank a building, and 2/3 of the reward system requires expenditure of loot to do just that. Awarding exports effectively says "you can either farm to fill your exports OR farm less to gain an empty box that then requires you to farm more." paradoxically rewarding players a token which they are less capable to use than if they had not been attempting to earn it.

Exports as a concept do not work as a limitation or a reward unless ingame effort is the only way to obtain them, and if it is, make them of dubious value as a reward because earning them reduces your ability to benefit from them.

This also applies to imports as a limitation.

As long as imported items can be traded or consumed for institutional value, and every account recieves them for free, they are nonfunctional as a limitation as any player can simply buy more imports by way of more accounts.

The only way imports or exports can have any utility at all as a means of controlling movement of items in to or out of campaigns is if the only way to earn them is through campaign play.

For these reasons, the entire import/export system needs to be reconsidered.

If imports are to constitute any meaningful limitation they can not be traded or consumed for institutional value. Otherwise that limitation is nullified by additional accounts.

If exports are to constitute any meaningful limitation they can not be granted for free under any circumstance. Otherwise that limitation is nullified by additional accounts.

You would be better off limiting imports to gear/consumables only and soulbinding them so that imports function only as items used to prepare for play, and scrapping exports as a concept entirely and positioning rewards as an equivalent activity to farming in order to allow people who compete to limit farm and those who find themselves unable to compete (the majority of players in the campaign) the ability to bolster their readiness for future campaigns unimpeded.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...