"Pasta;c-1468202" wrote:
Peer there isn't a sport that just because you are weaker in terms of team value that you get a worst prize!!!
Leicester City won the championship 2015/16 and received the same prize as if it was Manchester united...if they're playing in the same league they should have put us in the same prize pool or then don't match us against teams from superior leagues....it's simple, we have added dificulty without reason, we shouldn't be competing with them.
We just want justice, have equal prizes or then put us in our supposed GP pool
Dont get me wrong. It is one thing to say that a weaker team should not get extra bonus for winning against a stronger team and this meant as joke anyways. But with regard to the general design of reward tiers I am with you - this is not optimal.
My 2 cents: if you win against a better guild you get what the better guild would have gotten for a victory and and they get what you would have gotten for a defeat. If you lose and they win each get their respective tier rewards.
This would be kind of fair because the "investment" of the better guild should not be rewarded if they are not able to win. And it really becomes silly if you compare their lose-box and your win-box: the content is almost identical and this is so stupxd I really cant believe anyone at CG even took a second look at this reward tier table. And since Kozispoon stated that active GP is not even relevant for matchmaking it is hard to explain why active GP should be relevant for rewards?
One general principle of the game is to avoid over-rewarding under any circumstances because this is not compatible with their commercial approach. So they decide to sacrifice fairness, balance and reliability to certain degree.
