You said you understood the grading… sounds like you might be missing some things. The letter grade rewards are based on a percentage of damage or where you place in relation to your allies. That A could have been the same loot tier as that A+ (or theoretically higher for a rare titan 1* more difficult than previous).
Just looking at the letter grade and not the tier is a mistake.
We just killed a rare titan where poison darts were offered. I spent my titan refills to get high score where we defeated the titan. Why was it that no one got the darts? I have been trying to max delilah and cant due to darts. I finally do whats needed and yet SG doesnt let me have them? Whats up with that?
and the bonus chance is VERY small. Many of us don’t even try to bring down rares if we are can’t bring down the same class titan in under 14 hours. You will just waste battle items for a very small chance at a bonus.
If grading was associated on how much damage you deal rather then a chart, there would be probably people throwin 3-4 purple flask on the same titan just to reach the higher damage possible rather then work as a team.
Even more, people much stronger probably going in smaller alliances to do incredible high score and exploit this mechanism.
Nope, it is fine as it is.
Be proud on what you score and don’t bother if with 120k you’re first on a titan, and with 200k third.
Thats something it may happen and it just means your team performance was better overall.
Thats your reward.
I’m am pretty proud of my scores, especially for being pretty much a free player. I try very hard to be a valuable part of my alliance and help the other guys. It just bums me out when a great damage score one day is worth less than way less damage the next.
You’re helping your alliance by contributing a lot of damage toward killing the titan. Whether it’s A or A+ you’ve done more than your share. Why would you be bummed out about that?
You do know that only the highest score gets an A+, right? There can only be one per Titan. I don’t understand why you think comparing damage on previous Titans is somehow more relevant than the damage on the current Titan.
Maybe your issue is with the letter grading system. If instead of A+, A, B, C it were just #1, #2, #3 etc. would you be bothered at being #2 even though you had the second highest score? Hopefully not, because that would be ridiculous. You might be upset (at yourself or whoever you’re competing with) that you didn’t have the highest score, but you wouldn’t be upset at the rating system.
Did you even read my original post. I know there is only one A+. I’m saying one day an A+ score is 120k damage, next day a 250k damage score was only an A. Why would you be ok with a system that rewards one low score more than one high score? Why should it matter what somebody else scores for my rewards?
Are you sure about that, because everything else you’ve said seems to indicate that you don’t.
Why do you think a previous Titan fight is relevant to your score on the current Titan? It’s absurd. What you’re proposing is this: I scored 150 points in the last game and won. Since I scored 250 points in this game I should have won it too even though my opponent scored more.
I don’t understand why you don’t get that you’re talking about two separate instances. What happened in one has no bearing on what happened in the other.
Why would you want to give the best reward to someone with the second best (or worse) performance?
Killing Titans is a team effort and you’re rewarded based on your performance relative to the rest of the team ON THAT TITAN, not some previous Titan. Clearly you don’t understand the concept of a team/teamwork or discrete events and I’m not interested in explaining them any further. You seem like a pretty selfish player so maybe you’d be happier in your own alliance, by yourself, where you can be A+ on every Titan and not have to worry about being outscored. Good luck beating anywhere near the same level of Titan by yourself, but then maybe you’ll learn the value of having a team around you even if they dare to outscore you.
What’s your problem man? I’m simply suggesting a different tier reward scale for titans. I’m not selfish or misunderstanding or whatever else you have a problem with. I’m just wondering why there can’t be a set damage number for each loot tier. Why can’t we have X damage for an A+, X damage for an A, and so on? Why can’t there be more than one A+ performance? Why can’t we have a consistent number that rewards a player based on what they do, not based on what the rest of the alliance does?
I think I mostly agree with the OP in some cases. You can only get an A score if you deal 3.3% damage AND are in the top 5. In my experience, there have been a lot of close calls between getting an A or a B amongst a fair amount of heavy hitters. So, adjusting the grading at this level could be beneficial. Keeping an A+ for the top scorer makes sense.
On the other hand, I think going straight to percentage based rewards entirely could promote titan snipers (unsolicited mercenaries), which could be problematic.
Hi guys! I’m new to the forum, but I’ve been playing for a long time. I have read all the comments and believe that this is the ideal topic to report the frustrations of my alliance.
Many people are discouraged by the rewards of the titans because they are unfair based on statistics. Because of this many members are no longer dedicated as before. Instead of doing 5/6 attacks are only doing 3 attacks, because the rewards are unfair and there is no motivation to continue the dedication. Every titan final we have discussed in the group what each won. Unfortunately we have noticed that many members who only make 1 bad attack without spending items can earn more ascension items than the first 5 that made 6 attacks and spent many items. Notice how unfair it really is! Why does a member who only make 1 attack and do not have the trouble to spend any items get better ascension items than members who are worried about causing more damage to the titans, make more attacks and waste time making items and spending materials? How can we say that this is fair? It is very discouraging!
It is very convenient to think that we must fight for the evolution of the alliance independent of reward because all injustice is harmful.
My suggestion is to solve this problem with formulas by merit. Example: The formula needs to take into account the limb’s power and the damage it caused to increase the chances of winning ascension items. Example: If a strong member causes 100K of damage and a weaker member causes only 50K it may be that the weaker member has been better because the formula would calculate the proportion of power. So, for the strong member to be better than the weakest member he would have caused 120K (it’s just an example). I think it would solve our problem, the problem of “Prich543” and the problem of mercenaries that the “elusive” commented. For mercenaries to earn good rewards in a weaker alliance, they would have to score MUCH more than the rest of the members. It would not pay to enter into a weaker alliance.
This formula automatically already takes into account the amount of attacks made and the items used, because to cause damage above the power ratio you have to make as many attacks as you can and use items.