Would you mind if the devs lowered the titan rewards?

My info about titans was from here:

I have never put down after playing and thought, “ ■■■■ I got to many mats today, I hope they nerf titan loot so the game becomes even more of s grind then it normally is.” Even though this is a totally ridiculous question to ask, at least it isn’t another post about unfair AW match up or how arrows suck, so OP gets credit for that fact anyway…:grinning::grinning::grinning::grinning::grinning:


That’s just…wrong. And this is our typical titan loot - not the exception.

I’m still convinced that loot from titans and chests has ALREADY been nerfed since late February when the raid arenas and alliance wars were introduced. Nowadays, if the chest isn’t rare…I just don’t care.

1 Like

Just going to throw something out here; this is a little bit of devil’s advocate as I’m pretty sure everyone who has seen me post knows I’m in favor of faster progression in this game rather than slower… my comment along the lines of “this is a phone game not a career, expecting advancement in a similar amount of time is ridiculous” is still floating around the forums every so often.

Many of you even in this thread have been asking for performance stratification on titans; over and over it’s come up “why should I try to get A+, C’s get better loot!”

Some of us have been trying to debunk this also over and over: “It’s the loot tier yo.”

Well, it may not be anymore. Every single screen shot that I’ve seen, and I’m the one soliciting them so I get them faster than most, where loot tier IX has been complained about, has been a C score.


I haven’t figured it out fully, there’s not enough data honestly and the tweaks may go well beyond this… I’m just going to say this though because it comes up often enough in threads regarding balance:

Be careful what you wish for. SG might have listened, and given the titan performance commenters exactly what they asked for.

ETA: SG has a budget when it comes to progression… I don’t agree with it but I know they have it from the staff comments on the forums over time. So yes, they have have changed it, and it might’ve been exactly with the 1.10 release of AW (sounds suspiciously similar in timing) and they may have tried to kill two birds with one stone while keeping their version of game integrity intact.

I don’t know, just something appears different and it’s not just a merc issue as had been theorized previously by some. For all I know they changed rare quests to be less frequent too, again limited data.


@revelate - to further fuel the fire - look at @Denys screen shot - loot tier IX, C ranking on a 9*, 2 ascension materials. I have two loot tier IX A rankings on a 7 * with THREE ascension materials I can send you. You may be onto something.


Are you saying that there’s a chance now, that loot is determined by separate rolls within specific tiers?

I mean it wouldn’t be hard to code the difference… But if loot tier ix - rank a and loot tier ix rank c are different; how long until enough data is collected to get a realistic breakdown of what rolls are obtainable?

1 Like

Perhaps I’m missing context, but introducing Titans above 10 doesnt affect 95%of the games population, so reducing loot on those lower tiers as some sort of a “balancing” makes absolutely no sense.


If the question is “Would you mind if the devs lowered the Titan rewards?” (which it is) then surely the answer always has to be “It depends”.

If the premise is that Titan rewards are lowered and other rewards are not changed (i.e. ceteris paribus) then the answer for almost everyone is going to be a resounding “Yes, I would mind a lot.” That seems to be how the question has been interpreted, based on the flood of indignant responses.

But that doesn’t seem to be what @Kahree was really asking:

So I think @Kahree’s premise is that Titan rewards are lowered, but other rewards are commensurately increased. It’s much easier to answer that question “No, I wouldn’t mind”, and in fact I’d answer “No, I wouldn’t mind - that’s a really great idea that I’d love, because Titan killing is the dullest part of the game and we rely on it far too much as a source of ascension materials. Let’s make other things more important.”

Of course, a third possible underlying premise could be that Titan rewards were reduced but other rewards vastly increased to totally overcompensate for the change. I don’t know if I would be for this or not - it would depend on the details - but I think many players probably would not mind such a change.

The point I am making is that the question was not at all trivial or simple and the answer is not at all obvious.

Further, @Revelate’s description of SG having a ‘progression budget’ is an intuitively appealing concept. It certainly seems likely that if other sources of ascension materials are introduced, Titan rewards will be throttled back.

So the second formulation of the premise - that Titan rewards are reduced but other rewards increased commensurately - seems likely to be relevant. And no, I wouldn’t mind this at all.

Honestly I’m spitballing a bit at this point.

I have 3 data points from C’s on 9*'s that show Loot Tier IX has changed. Incidently I have zero that had 3 rolls, neither of which is enough to be conclusive but it’s odd.

I also have full screenshots from 7*'s in Emerging and @sleeperZ96BT has some too that IX is still dropping 3 ascension items… and, those were from A’s.

I’m still getting 3 ascension items on 10*'s when I get a C, I haven’t noticed a difference there yet and I will fully admit the titan performance not really mattering is probably one of the reasons I got lazy in this game when it came to titans (I can beat the metrics we set in the alliance but I’m no longer one of the regular top performers in Departed for all that sometimes I get lucky and still pull an A+ over players everyone has heard of).

The problem is our data in the past has been so bad… and nobody, including myself, has been interested in trying to collect it. Statistics just aren’t in our favor, but now meh.

1.5 - 1.9 I’m pretty confident in saying a loot tier was a loot tier was a loot tier. Now it may not be. This is a recent change, not enough data to draw a conclusion, blah blah blah but something changed. Now just need to figure out what.

This is still early, I only started asking for screenshots yesterday and there’s only so many people contributing… also this is really a narrow band to evaluate as it looks like C on 10’s is still 3 ascension rolls, and A on VIII is still 2, so it’s something in the margins and we’re going to have to try to extend it to others.

1 Like

@revelate send me your line ID and I will send you my snaps for your records.

Yesterday I got a C, Tier X. Three ascension items (battle manual, dagger, wooden shield), three crafting items (fine steel, feathers, firestone), three battle items and some gems.

It’s Revelate on Line as well, can fish me out of the merc or heroes advice channels if you have access to there.

And thank you bud.

Yeah, I didn’t notice any changes because my own accounts (except for the stupid alt) are all killing 10’s and there’s no easy observable changes there.

So now, data, and sadly this is a more complicated project than I wanted; I really just thought this was going to be shoring up the crafting / consumable rolls, and then “hey that looks weird…” oh well, thanks SG!

1 Like

To give a short answer to number one yes I would mind overall. The fact is that a lot of alliances are not killing 10* titans so the cumulative effect on loot at lower tiers will be that much worse. This being said I do have a potential idea toward mitigation of the issue. The mitigation would need to come in the form of more common rare quests Farholme Pass and similar named quests such as that.

As for point 2 I wouldn’t mind much, if the rewards for wars are kept proportionally the same. For sake of argument if Titan loot is nerfed by one Ascension roll per tier war loot should be increased by a similar amount. In fact I personally think war loot should be greater than Titan loot, particularly considering that wars tend to cost more in terms of time than Titan attacks. This is just my opinion and I can accept a slight Titan reduction if, and only if, war loot is adjusted to compensate.

There is an idea floating around about the addition of a war chest. If that were added I would be far more amicable to a reduction in titan loot. Just my two cents worth and I really hope this topic continues to be considered by many minds.

Ooooooooo. :face_with_monocle:

To be fair, the only thing we can do is address the question as asked. If there’s a reason or an implication or some addendum that is a factor in why it is being asked, then it should be revealed in the post.

I really did see the original post as a bit of a non-sequitur myself (as it was originally phrased).

May as well post… “would you mind if I kicked you in the shins”?
(Disclaimer… not aimed at you etc etc. Oh no! it’s politcal correctness gone mad! :slightly_smiling_face:)


I kinda see what you mean: sometimes people post stupid things that don’t deserve a considered response.

But the source matters. I certainly do not always agree with @kahree, but they are smart, so I don’t think it’s fair to assume the worst of their question - that it posits no change in non-Titan rewards, and is thus just silly.

This aside, I think there is a real issue to be discussed. Assuming SG wants to keep the flow of ascension items at its current level, would it be a good thing for them to reduce the payoff from Titans while increasing the payoff from other areas? I think that would be a good thing, but I might be alone.

I just added you and sent you a message - it’s under my game handle which you may recognize from Beta.

1 Like

I can’t imagine under what circumstance I would welcome the lowering of ascension items in particular or Titan loot in general.

Bring on the loot!


Instead of downgrading this ridiculous rewards why not to improve them? That’s definitively an option I will recommend to devs.


Jacques de la Palice, it’s you?

1 Like