RW payouts

Both of these wars were after the changes were made. I’m confused why we received less of a payout with a more competitive war. I’m happy to hear an explanation for it. Appreciate your time

Last weeks war
[image: cdn.discordapp.com]



This weeks war



[image: cdn.discordapp.com]

losers got $543k/score, winners got $354k/score

[background color=var(--bbc-body-bg-color)]Crows: 3.47mil per hit, Almanac: 5.01mil per hit

[/background]It seems that the losers are getting more compensation for their efforts than the winners.

Yeah you would think the war changes would promote more competitive warring, rather than punish the winner and benefit the loser.

We should ask the HoF factions how the payouts from their extremely competitive wars this week compare to that of previous weeks.

Extremely competitive HoF wars, Chuck has jokes tonight

What happens if a Bugs and Issues thread goes trending?

Competitive wars always pay less when expenses are taken into account. This might've been bad loot rng. With participation being such a huge part of the loot consideration it's suboptimal to score anything beyond it. There're many instances of the losing side earning more per hit than winning side now lol

Ched right now


We failed again screams at whoever the f**k he listened to

I was strictly looking at our earnings for the war. Disregard expenses and what the losing factions received. If you look at our wars, nothing about our faction changed and the war was harder fought. We put more respect in yet, the respect earned was less, points eanered less and caches payout less. I’m simply wondering why

you got a lower monetary value sure, but in my opinion you got the exact same payout as last time in terms of cache "points"

i believe heavy and armors have their own roll chance, with each heavy having the value of 2 armors, and meds smalls and melees sharing the same generation roll with equal values

in both wars you got 2 "points" on armors/heavies and 5 "points" on meds/smalls/melees

theres also nothing that ever indicated an higher enemy score improved your rewards

Imagine ched fixing termed wars? Then bam more reason to term than ever before lmao

I think the loser's score will not affect the winner's reward, and there is an upper limit on the reward the winner can get. This means that if the war is more competitive, the winner's reward will not fluctuate much and the loser's reward will change significantly (So considering that the winner attacks far more times than the loser, the winner is always unhappy)

Are cache points like Schrute Bucks?


[image: cdn.discordapp.com]

Exactly. The more the loser scores, the more the winner has to score to end the war quickly, but no increased reward, so once the white flag is waved, the best thing to do is decay and preserve your effort:reward ratio. In other words, the system isn't rewarding winners as generously as it's rewarding losers, and it's discouraging competitive participation every bit as much as the old system.

The only thing the new system addresses is Merc dominated wars, and 0 score wars.

Yes, terms war is still exist, and can find a balance point that allows both sides to make money. Without splitting, the winner can rise their rank without paying too many attacks, while the loser gets relatively larger rewards (more like loser selling their rank to get money haha)

The war against Wargasm had 34 members fighting in the war (you had 12 and wargasm had 21) / against the The Almanac there were 23 people taking part (The Almanac had 11 and you had 12).

It's super simple - there were more total people in the first war, not a bug.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the recent changes.

For those derailing the thread (while your tears are entertaining), this isn't GD, please take your cache farm tears over there.

So to clarify, because there was more overall people that happen to be in each faction for the war (mainly our opponent because our numbers did not change) we received a lower payout? And clarify “fighting”. I only ask because the amount of members that made war hits in this weeks war is greater than last weeks, and that is factoring in both factions

No literally the exact opposite.

In the wargasm war (more participants) you received a higher payout of respect / points.

In the war with The Almanac (less participants) you recieved less respect / points.

(caches are subject to RNG but as people have pointed out you seemingly received 'similar' cache rewards in both even if real value wasn't the same)

You could have checked your war history to see whether you've ever received the same respect / points in a war - and whether there is a general trend towards higher respect / points where you verse a faction with more members.

It's no secret that the amount of participants in a war has always increased rewards (don't confuse participants 'a total number of who is in war' with participation).

-------------------

To answer your second question and something that a few former members of yours have been complaining about. Yes you get a 3x participation bonus for winning and having the required amount of participation. You clearly got this in both wars.

You don't get a 4x bonus in the second war because they fought back (and honestly not even that hard).

It also would SUCK if the only way to get a 3x participation bonus would be if the enemy fought back.

Which is effectively what the people complaining on here are advocating for (if you want X amount of rewards where the enemy does nothing and X+1 rewards where the enemy fights back, expect Ched to move rewards for landslide victories down, not up).

It's no secret that the amount of participants in a war has always increased rewards.


I completely agree, so why less payout for this war. I have been highly monitoring RW payouts since the changes since we are a true warring faction. I was excited for the changes, but payouts are not adding up for the winners. Out of any faction, our wars are easy to evaluate and compare. We have 12 wins in a row with no war terms. Now, this war we did allow them to get to 1500 respect after they waved the white flag because Almanac was so wonderful to war against and I was honestly curious if the pay would be more.

Going thru our wars, we certainly didn’t have a bigger payout against Bees n Cheese and that was 38 members [image: cdn.discordapp.com]

I've included a link and extracts for you below. In short underdog bonuses (and loss streak if relevant) would impact on rewards previously. If you had a larger war without an underdog bonus, expect lower rewards despite more people in there.

Now it's divisions and participation in addition to the number of participants in a war (nothing changed in relation to participants with this update).

If you fight with 11-14 people expect to see more noticeable shifts depending on total numbers in the participants in a war as compared to factions with 60+ members on both sides.

https://www.torn.com/forums.php#/p=threads&f=1&t=16390024&b=0&a=0


Underdog and Loss Streak reward bonuses removed

Although these bonuses were fantastic incentives to keep participation high among newer factions, they inadvertently promoted collusion to maximize and split rewards. For this reason, Underdog and Loss Streak bonuses will be disabled.


Divisions factored into the rewards

Rewards will be influenced by divisions as well as rank tiers, ensuring each divisional promotion within a rank enhances the rewards. This adjustment incentivizes factions to achieve and maintain the highest possible position, discouraging deliberate losses and instead encouraging sustained competitive engagement.