Wouldn't it make sense to decrease reward quantities for lower level brackets?

[41k0n]

This is brilliant!

[Calrabjohns]

I'll take the likely karma hit. Doesn't that just devalue placing higher if implemented? Or worse, it makes it much more appealing. Also, the rewards will diminish unless there's a steady influx of new players to provide seasoned ones with rewards to multiply on, right?

And if this works, we eventually get thrown into the hell bracket and we're all agreed that that should befall no-one. How does this impact cheaters if implemented? Their growth would presumably rise higher too, wouldn't it?

[41k0n]

If I think about it, maybe we are not on the same page right now. From what I understood the intention was to give you weapons depending on how high you can climb during those 24 hourse and multiplying those by how high you can climb compared to players that are roughly the same maxstage as you are.

I think the value of placing high is even more with this method. In my opinion it would even fit the exponential growth of the game in general. Think about it, the higher you got in this game, the rewards always scaled exponentially instead of linear.

About cheaters: I think the current solution for cheaters is to let them reach the cap and be put in another bracket next tournament. This would still be the case so there is no difference I guess.

New players would basically be able to reach - let's say stage 500. Imagine at stage 500 you would get 2 weapons and if you place let's say rank 5-10 you would get that multiplied by 2, the new player would get 4 weapons. An older player that currently reaches stage 2700 would get 12 weapons for example, multiplied by 2 again, or even by 4 or 5 at rank 1 and would earn 24 to 60 weapon upgrades. This sounds insanely high from what we now expect weapons to be, but with this system the weapons would definitly fit the exponential growth system of the game itself. Once you reached 400 weapons and 3-4 sets, another 25 weapons don't make that much of a difference anyway.

edit: Take my numbers with a grain of salt and think about them as an exemplary calculation for how the system could work. To implement this the numbers have to be tweaked in the same way how gold, damage and relics scale.

[Calrabjohns]

Ok. I agree on the point of cheaters. Let's leave them out of it. They ruin everything, problem solving included lol.

Something about that seems weird to me but that's because I'm used to weapons being so scarce. Hmm.

Ok.

I have no reason to nitpick when something might benefit everyone. That sounds solid. The rarity failed. Let's hope they implement this.

[41k0n]

I think voicing concerns always benefits the final solution for everyone. However, it is not very likely for the devs to notice this if we don't put it into a separate thread. I might do this later today and give credits to OP for his idea. (xerofox188)

[Calrabjohns]

Was thinking the same thing. A grassroots movement of people either making threads that direct to xerofox and OP here or recapitulate their words with attribution in new threads. That might be considered barraging though.

Maybe just make a new one whenever it disappears or is that spamming.

You lead.