SP is too hard to get or upgrades are too expensive

Most people on the forum and most competitive players probably wont care about this, since they are somewhere north of rank 10 already, but bear with me please.

Currently, you have to play at least two hours to get a thousand SP and probably much more, if you add in lost games, games that take long to start or such, that don't actually give that much SP, like Africa FFA's.

Since you need 25 000 (Faster inf) + 27 000 (cheaper inf) + 30 000 (both AT capacity upgrades) + 2000 (ground defence) = ~90 000SP to play 2 or 3 strategies competitively you need to play roughly 200 hours to even be on the same level as a competitve player. Given that the skill curve for this game is gigantic, This makes the game incredibly difficult to get into. It gets worse, when you calculate how much SP you need to play most strategies competitively. General upgrades, the marines upgrades. etc. etc. take at least another 200 000 SP to get, and afterwards, other players will still have a slight advantage against you. So, to play on a completely competitive level, you need about 600 hours, if you want to be able to play DS, GW and MoS.

This is simply a stupid policy to grow your playerbase, fcd3, wearer of many hats. Please change this, despite how many people wont like this change, because they "worked oh so hard to get their SP". I want Atwar to grow, and one way to make it more likely to grow is to remove unecessary barriers to entry.

U lying r6 i had all decent upgrade to play competitive lowrank only take cheap upgrades instead of good upgrades

Just go gw if you're a low rank

Geschrieben von Zoe, 09.12.2018 at 09:40

Just go gw if you're a low rank

stfu noob sol.

I support that idea Tir, upgrades are just too costly.

Make new upgrades and lower the cost of the current ones.

Geschrieben von Froyer, 09.12.2018 at 09:39

U lying r6 i had all decent upgrade to play competitive lowrank only take cheap upgrades instead of good upgrades

>Rank 6
as I said, thats when you already have 50 000 SP, so more than 100 hours in the game. How many people commit this much?
But even then, Rank 6 is when you get the inf upgrades and the second AT capacity, and some are especially late since some noobs bought shitty upgrades at first.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 09.12.2018 at 13:56

Geschrieben von Froyer, 09.12.2018 at 09:39

U lying r6 i had all decent upgrade to play competitive lowrank only take cheap upgrades instead of good upgrades

>Rank 6
as I said, thats when you already have 50 000 SP, so more than 100 hours in the game. How many people commit this much?
But even then, Rank 6 is when you get the inf upgrades and the second AT capacity, and some are especially late since some noobs bought shitty upgrades at first.

Cause u already had used 10 alts u fucking dickhead.

Support this tir, don't listen at those narbs.

I agree with you, but you should also include the medals SP. It's fairly easy to get gold and silver medals, as even beginners can do it.

These upgrades would be easier to get if many of them wouldn't form huge cluster alliances.
Then there is always the option to disable upgrades if you want to make it fair.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 09.12.2018 at 09:14

Infantry upgrades have always been too expensive in my opinion, however the main challenge is keeping rank 5-6 levels engaged further as most players are likely to buy lifetime premium between rank 5-7, more incentives for smaller transactions earlier in the player journey as well as ways to integrate new players into the community, matching skill sets is also important and this cannot be asscertained by comparing sp for a number of reasons mentioned many times before. Some kind of elo score for the entire game with an algorythm to calculate alliances, seperated into different game catagories (roleplay, ww2, vanilla etc...) would do a lot to help the game eco system and prevent clashes in the community created through conflicts of interest. SP is outdated and a poor way to decide anything - as well as the present structure for clan wars, its nothing short of a joke, the game really needs an inbuilt tournament engine, for teams, clans and inviduals, with prompts, reminders and penalties for not playing games as scheduled, having both official and unofficial tournaments co-existing - with automatic escrowed player and managment donated protocoin prizes and pretty looking jpegs for awards - the chance to compete in these fairly, at a low level would definitley engage new users, especially if helped by higher ranks.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 09.12.2018 at 13:56

Geschrieben von Froyer, 09.12.2018 at 09:39

U lying r6 i had all decent upgrade to play competitive lowrank only take cheap upgrades instead of good upgrades

>Rank 6
as I said, thats when you already have 50 000 SP, so more than 100 hours in the game. How many people commit this much?
But even then, Rank 6 is when you get the inf upgrades and the second AT capacity, and some are especially late since some noobs bought shitty upgrades at first.

Ok i agree its hard to get sp to have inf upgrade trans cost and capacity + gen ups you need to be r9 to have all "good" upgrades

Geschrieben von Sun Tsu, 09.12.2018 at 19:09

Infantry upgrades have always been too expensive in my opinion, however the main challenge is keeping rank 5-6 levels engaged further as most players are likely to buy lifetime premium between rank 5-7, more incentives for smaller transactions earlier in the player journey as well as ways to integrate new players into the community, matching skill sets is also important and this cannot be asscertained by comparing sp for a number of reasons mentioned many times before. Some kind of elo score for the entire game with an algorythm to calculate alliances, seperated into different game catagories (roleplay, ww2, vanilla etc...) would do a lot to help the game eco system and prevent clashes in the community created through conflicts of interest. SP is outdated and a poor way to decide anything - as well as the present structure for clan wars, its nothing short of a joke, the game really needs an inbuilt tournament engine, for teams, clans and inviduals, with prompts, reminders and penalties for not playing games as scheduled, having both official and unofficial tournaments co-existing - with automatic escrowed player and managment donated protocoin prizes and pretty looking jpegs for awards - the chance to compete in these fairly, at a low level would definitley engage new users, especially if helped by higher ranks.

Really interesting ideas, but If you want to overhaul SP entirely, you should think about typing them out and fleshing them out further in another seperate post.

One thing people get wrong is, that rank 5-7 consisted of newbies. They played the game for 100 to 400 hours already and most people aren't even willing to invest that much time into a AAA title like Skyrim. Expecting people in a browser game like Atwar to spend more time than that to play competitively is lunacy.

Geschrieben von Chess, 09.12.2018 at 18:24

These upgrades would be easier to get if many of them wouldn't form huge cluster alliances.
Then there is always the option to disable upgrades if you want to make it fair.

Oh come on, you can't compare the experience of one of the best players in the game, with that of some rank 5 noob. Imagine playing against a rank 9 10 times and losing every single time. You'd resort to allyfagging. I tell ya.

Also, how many games have disabled upgrades? Most people can't even host world games with extra cities and scenarios on their own.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 10.12.2018 at 04:08

That is what makes the game good imo, is the fact there is such a big learning curve and only a comitted player would really take the time to understand the game mechanics, which is why more could be done to stop alts.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 10.12.2018 at 04:10

Oh come on, you can't compare the experience of one of the best players in the game, with that of some rank 5 noob. Imagine playing against a rank 9 10 times and losing every single time. You'd resort to allyfagging. I tell ya.

Also, how many games have disabled upgrades? Most people can't even host world games with extra cities and scenarios on their own.

I also used to be a rank 5 who played against r9/r10. Certainly didn't learn the game by winning comfortably with mass alliances. Losing is part of the learning experience. If you can't take the frustration and immediately opt for ally fagging you won't have any motivation to learn game mechanics.

^^^

Geschrieben von Chess, 10.12.2018 at 14:26

I also used to be a rank 5 who played against r9/r10. Certainly didn't learn the game by winning comfortably with mass alliances. Losing is part of the learning experience. If you can't take the frustration and immediately opt for ally fagging you won't have any motivation to learn game mechanics.

You're mashing gaining SP and learning the game together. Of course you learn the game by losing, mostly, but thats not how you get SP. Playing a 10 players FFA, a low rank will either get 50 SP by losing or gain 150 by allyfagging. Either way, they need the SP, so they'll go for the higher SP option. They would gain more experience by going a more risky route, but they want that SP. They would probably learn faster, if you could have the important upgrades by rank 5 and if they didn't have to worry so much about it anymore.

I believe that the point of upgrades is to simulate a "skill gap" for the game. Having upgrades implies that to get good at the game, you have to put time into it. However, the time that you have to put into the game to get all the upgrades is way too high. So high, in fact, that it even encourages players to obtain sp by unfair means, just to play the game normally like everyone else, which is bad for the game, and makes a moderator's job harder. I don't believe in this form of "skill-gaping" the game. Having all the upgrades from the start would encourage new players to focus on learning game mechanics and on obtaining other skills that make good players, instead of making good sp farmers out of them.

On the other hand, upgrades also serve to provide players with a progression system, which encourages them to continue playing and keep coming back to play the game. However, if this were so significant, why do you have so many rank 10 and above players still playing the game, even after obtaining all the upgrades the game has to offer?

Either remove upgrades all together and simply add the boosts to the default unit stats, or make the upgrades cheaper.

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 10.12.2018 at 14:47

You're mashing gaining SP and learning the game together. Of course you learn the game by losing, mostly, but thats not how you get SP. Playing a 10 players FFA, a low rank will either get 50 SP by losing or gain 150 by allyfagging. Either way, they need the SP, so they'll go for the higher SP option. They would gain more experience by going a more risky route, but they want that SP. They would probably learn faster, if you could have the important upgrades by rank 5 and if they didn't have to worry so much about it anymore.

I disagree and this is my evidence that you can get a lot of SP without ally fagging and upgrades.
Now someone with a lower skill level needs to maybe make one or two alliances maximum and he can achieve a win. It's not hard to get SP.

Look at the game history.
https://de.atwar-game.com/users/profile.php?user_id=418895

Upgrades are only needed for competitive play. You don't need them for world games unless you are competing with someone who knows his stuff.

Geschrieben von Chess, 11.12.2018 at 12:42

I disagree and this is my evidence that you can get a lot of SP without ally fagging and upgrades.
Now someone with a lower skill level needs to maybe make one or two alliances maximum and he can achieve a win. It's not hard to get SP.

Look at the game history.
https://de.atwar-game.com/users/profile.php?user_id=418895

Upgrades are only needed for competitive play. You don't need them for world games unless you are competing with someone who knows his stuff.

You're playing an alt, a real rank 5 might win one of the games he plays without allies like you did. Hypothetically gaining SP is easy, yes, practically, you need 100 hours to get what you got within

The rest would have been +50 sp dieing t10

This is some random rank 5 I found by searching for players online last, and he doesn't seem like too big of an allyfag, but he needed like 20 games to even get 2k SP.
https://atwar-game.com/users/profile.php?user_id=1191526

Geschrieben von Tirpitz406, 10.12.2018 at 04:10

Geschrieben von Chess, 09.12.2018 at 18:24

These upgrades would be easier to get if many of them wouldn't form huge cluster alliances.
Then there is always the option to disable upgrades if you want to make it fair.

Oh come on, you can't compare the experience of one of the best players in the game, with that of some rank 5 noob. Imagine playing against a rank 9 10 times and losing every single time. You'd resort to allyfagging. I tell ya.

Also, how many games have disabled upgrades? Most people can't even host world games with extra cities and scenarios on their own.

When i was lowrank i was duelling opi and grom already i was raped but i was learning i kept duelling way better player till r9 when i started to play duel a lot (just found my playstyle r9 i was a noob before mauz forced me to rush D) then u know everything 22 duel vs mecoy in a row 1470 elo lost all took them back and now i have 1500+ elo (waiting eagle to farm me again im his personal elo donator) but i was a good r5 ask nic r5 rp player will allyfag cuz he sucks this is why u should remove all map except default map u get more exp in less time with cheaper upgrade are way better for lowrank but only major upgrade orrrr lowrank should have a new tutorial about the upgrade which are the best etc (went off topic a bit but its k D)

Add more upgrade options too! Like some of the rare units :D make those unnecessary things expensive and critical ups cheap

If this idea takes off I might finally be able to get all upgrades

Of course within the community we will see many high ranks who use themselves as evidence to prove how it is important for players to deal with failures (partially because of a lack of upgrades) in order to learn the game. But the voices here in this forum are only that of those who had sufficient motivation and passion to play the game despite their losses. But naturally we will not hear the opinion's of those who did not succeed in climbing the unnecessarily steep path to become a committed player. I'm sure if we review the stats its obvious that Atwar is not doing too well in player retention. Making SP easier to get / making upgrades cheaper is definitely worth looking into.

My suggestion is that we designate time slots (maybe once every week) where any game that starts during that player has an SP multiplier. Not only will this make upgrading easier, it will also help congregate players into a certain time slots and make games much easier to start.

Why havent i seen this thread. support

Yeah I agree, I always found levelling up Iong and tedious. Getting SP is not easy especially when mods and admins add a reduced SP percentage at the end of a 2-5 hour game, like wtf 2-5 hours!!! "Quick games" are not quick, the sooner the mods/admins notice this, the better!

Maybe you should just get free sp, like 100,000 sp's a game, and every other game you get an arbitrarily free upgrade, then in 10 games you could be kickin' rank 15's ass, and it would only take you like 6 games of atwar to totally conquer the ENTIRE game and be master of the whole friggin universe. would you like that? there's only one little bitty teensy weensy caveat though, EVERYBODY ELSE gets it too! congratulations, you're a strategical and tactical master! when you get done here you can join a free chess site and lobby to trade all your pawns for queens! woo-hoo! then when you kick magnus carlsens ass with all those bitchin' sweet queens, you can take on the government and trade all the world's monopoly money for real usa currency!

I'm santa clause bitches! everybody gets an sp multiplier just for logging on once a day! sp x infinity! (you can even trade them for bit currency!)

here's another santa claus gift: as soon as you log on, you IMMEDIATELY GET LEVELED UP! no surprises! act now limited time offer only available only in massachusetts, hawaii, puerto rico and guam. if you give me your debit card info and agree to our auto renewal (weekly recurring) membership rate of only $2.99 a week (that's right, i take three dollars a week out of your piss-poor checking account and you can't do shit about until you march your sorry ass up here to deleware and sue me in the county i'm incorporated in or spend 18 hours on hold with your bank). i promise that it's super easy to cancel your recurring membership, all you have to do is find the teeny weeny "cancel membership" button i've cleverly hid on the website.

No wait- i've got a better idea. silent auction for rank. pay me mo money i give you higher rank. that would work right? oh wait- damn, i forgot, the players who bitch the loudest are the ones who haven't paid for anything, just like in real life. maybe you should play fort-nite, they're always leveling up their free members with bubble gum hula skirts and super duper martian xray zappers and shit. it's like you're 4years old, emptying the entire cereal box, and looking for the secret decoder ring. you either enjoy military strategy games, or enjoy talking about your feelings with your homo friends in your scenario games, or want something for nothing.

Wait this'lll make it easier! buy the entire site from dave and make any damn rule you wanna! then you can have your cake and eat it too! or start your own site and then listen to your friends bitching about stupid things day in and day out until you forget why you started your own site and just wanna stick your head up your vehicle's tailpipe. that might be easier AND cheaper