Number of Assault fights

We’re thinking about lowering the number of fights each player can contribute to an Assault. 20 might be a bit much, especially since that number can increase, depending on alliance level.

This will probably not be the only change (e.g. fights will also give Gems/XP), but we’re interested in your opinion: How many fights do you consider ok (10 being the lower limit)?

20 feels too high, but I also think 10 would be too little. 15 is a good middle ground between the two.

Between 10 to 15 could be awesome, and exp+gems is amazing!

keep it at 20 imo

I def agree with this change. I can barely find the time to do 20 duels for the ladder, 20 Allied Assaults, use my light AND liveplay. Fewer Assaults would be great and would add to the “randomness” of the decks you fight in other alliances.

15 would be fine with me

Well if you lower it too much, you might as well get rid of flanking all together. 100 up on your opponent will be near impossible. And if we’re going to get gems and xp, I don’t want them lowered at all. But they should not increase with rewards. Rewards should be more reputation gain only… maybe make it so you get 2 rep per swarm kill as a reward in place of more members or more fights.

I suggest we do 1 fight per member with a minimum of 10.

This way we would fight everyone once instead of some people once and others 3 or 4 times as it does currently.
Secondly, this would balance fights between alliances as long as they had 10 or more members.
For example, if Alliance A with 12 members fights Alliance B with 10 members:
Each member in Alliance A would have 10 fights (10 × 12 = 120 total fights)
Each member in Alliance B would have 12 fights (12 × 10 = 120 total fights)

This would also necessitate a change in the way rewards are done.
I don’t think flanking really makes sense, so that should just go away.
Rating could still be based on a 100 point scale, just add a “+5” for +100 or more.
Instead of gems/xp per fight, do gems and xp per alliance rating point gained.
This rewards you for having a full and active alliance where everyone participates.
Suggesting amount of 300 gems per point.
XP seems unimportant here, as you’re not leveling, but if you want to it could be in the form of xp crystals.
Gems per point could increase with alliance level by 10-25% per alliance level perhaps?

I would be content seeing the number reduce to 15 (because of a lack of time Monday-Friday, as pointed out by Wildwest99), though no lower. Then, at alliance score of 500, it could return to 20 (rather than the proposed 25).

If the number is lowered though, the points scale will probably need to be modified unless the aim is to slow progress.

I quite like Phool’s idea of rewards based on assault result rather than personal result; everything else in the game currently rewards the best players more (see duels daily rewards for example). Whilst it makes sense to reward the best players, who are after all the best, it coincidentally serves to widen the gap between the best and the rest, reducing overall competition (see dragon league). This “alliance reward” makes sense in an alliance scenario, at least to me. Though it should be scaled based on participation, so that players have an incentive to complete their assaults, thereby aiding their alliance.

Good call Rosie, I completely left out the part about participation!

Your reward would be a percentage of the alliance reward based on your participation, i.e. you do half your assaults, half reward, no assaults, no reward.