Alliance Satisfaction Poll RESULTS: What players think of the Championships

Jurassic World Alive General Discussion
#1

2 days ago, the forum was polled by me on its opinion of the alliance championships. These are the results:

Of 95 people polled, a sweeping 94% thought the top tier reward was NOT reasonably obtainable.

Of 90 people polled, there was a pretty even split between those that want more skill tournaments (50%) and those that think skill and advantage tournaments should be equal in number (48%).

Of 76 individuals polled, 65% found unfair matchmaking in advantage tournaments to be a problem. Just under that, 63% found issues with creature balancing. Shouldn’t be difficult to figure out which ones just from reading this forum. 34% had an issue with the way speed ties are handled, and 25% took issue with RNG dependence.

Ratings for the bugginess of the tournament were pretty varied, but 64% of those polled ranked it between a 3 and a 5 on the buggy scale. A considerably amount.

Satisfaction for rarity restrictions were mixed. 44% voted no, 21% voted yes, and the remaining 35 were mixed. Not many conclusions can be drawn from that worth noting.

91% of those polled thought that the use of alt accounts of continuously gain points should not be allowed. That is all I will say on that matter in this post.

73% of those polled felt the participation bonus was too infrequent, and the exact same amount of people did not like the method of only gaining points via high score increase.

Motivation rankings for continuing in the championship varied, but the majority was 43% voting 3, for a middle ground between being not motivated, and very motivated.

Worthless @Ludia_Developers tag, just in case.

9 Likes
#2

It’s always worth tagging the devs, but as you suggest probably a waste of time.

I would be very surprised if we don’t see some major changes for the next wave of tournaments.

It was very noticeable that the usual rush on the last day, particularly the last few hours, was non existent this time round.

Obviously those points that had a 90%+ would be obvious changes that need to be addressed ASAP.

The others maybe not so much, but if these aren’t looked at there seems little hope for the future of the Alliance tournament format.

Why on earth would any company want to design a format that actually encourages less participation time?

They’ve done exactly that with allowing alt accounts to switch in and to gain more points than continuous battling, and rewarding a win with 20 points and defecting 40 points for a loss.

1 Like
#3

I would disagree; the last few hours were very busy, no problem getting battles and a lot of position changes; the two alliances I have visibility of back up this observation. I didn’t battle on my alt (TeamInvincibles) as it was 200 down on its high score (so I agree the incentive isn’t there) but my main (TrykoCarnage) managed to get up from #600+ to #326 with an hour or so to go and finished on #369. Quite pleased with that given both my Procera and Rixis are mostly unboosted (one boost on Rixis to avoid I-Rex G2 mutual fury) and not max level.

It may have well been different at lower medal counts.

#4

@bobbymcfeen this was a great poll, thanks for taking the time to do this. :slight_smile:

2 Likes