LOL I win my Grand Arena battles because I am more addicted to the game.

Yeah they need to reduce the awards to near zero for people that do nothing. Or greatly increase the awards to encourage people to try. Half of the people not setting D or not trying to attack is lame.

For instance, if they awarded 15 Mark V stun guns per round victory, participation would drastically increase.

"VonZant;c-1761767" wrote:
Yeah they need to reduce the awards to near zero for people that do nothing. Or greatly increase the awards to encourage people to try. Half of the people not setting D or not trying to attack is lame.

For instance, if they awarded 15 Mark V stun guns per round victory, participation would drastically increase.

LOLz. You and I both know they won't be giving those out. That's the bottleneck for gearing.

It’s pretty common, I suspect. To date, every GA I’ve been in has had at least two inactive or minimally active players in the group.

"VonZant;c-1761767" wrote:
Yeah they need to reduce the awards to near zero for people that do nothing. Or greatly increase the awards to encourage people to try. Half of the people not setting D or not trying to attack is lame.

For instance, if they awarded 15 Mark V stun guns per round victory, participation would drastically increase.

Be interesting if they picked a piece of high value gear, mk3 caribanti, stun guns, or gold eye balls, then give them out based on points earned. 3-5 per match for roughly the amount of points if you attack 80% of the teams. Pretty sure that would stop the inactive joiners real quick.

Scale it from 1-2 for placing all defensive teams, up to the max for the 80% mentioned.

@DarjeloSalas
My GP of 1.35million might have an oddity to how it matches me because I took 2 years off. There might be a factor in the matching calculation that pairs me with less competitive people.

"Kyno;c-1761827" wrote:

"VonZant;c-1761767" wrote:
Yeah they need to reduce the awards to near zero for people that do nothing. Or greatly increase the awards to encourage people to try. Half of the people not setting D or not trying to attack is lame.

For instance, if they awarded 15 Mark V stun guns per round victory, participation would drastically increase.

Be interesting if they picked a piece of high value gear, mk3 caribanti, stun guns, or gold eye balls, then give them out based on points earned. 3-5 per match for roughly the amount of points if you attack 80% of the teams. Pretty sure that would stop the inactive joiners real quick.

Scale it from 1-2 for placing all defensive teams, up to the max for the 80% mentioned.

I think an even simpler approach of credits for each defence set would probably be better.

The kind of people who would only be encouraged to attack for gear probably aren't particularly competitive and are probably the kind of people to not set defence. Your idea incentivises attacking over defending, so these people would probably set no defence and then make some attacks, further annoying their opponents. If setting a defence is incentivised, then these non-competitive people can do that and not worry about attacking, while their opponent who wants to actually play the game gets to take out their defences.

"Kyno;c-1761827" wrote:

"VonZant;c-1761767" wrote:
Yeah they need to reduce the awards to near zero for people that do nothing. Or greatly increase the awards to encourage people to try. Half of the people not setting D or not trying to attack is lame.

For instance, if they awarded 15 Mark V stun guns per round victory, participation would drastically increase.

Be interesting if they picked a piece of high value gear, mk3 caribanti, stun guns, or gold eye balls, then give them out based on points earned. 3-5 per match for roughly the amount of points if you attack 80% of the teams. Pretty sure that would stop the inactive joiners real quick.

Scale it from 1-2 for placing all defensive teams, up to the max for the 80% mentioned.

Would honestly prefer that over a daily waiting game.