Event Medals: new system

Based on astute feedback and discussion in this thread (and many others), we’ve developed a new way to reward event medals.

When developing this formulation, we wanted to strike a healthy balance of skill (strategic ability + card upgrades) and grit (how hard a player plays).

The old system was too hard to understand, and felt bad at the end of the event when few medals could be won – we wanted to do away with those serious problems.

The new formula will reward more event medals to players who are rated higher (i.e., they win more matches against tougher opponents). Once a player hits their skill plateau, their medals earned will also plateau – so your medals won per match should be at an all-time high at the end of the event, not an all-time low (unless your skill was overrated and your skill estimate falls, i.e., due to a sustained losing streak … but this is exceedingly rare because players don’t tend to suddenly get worse at playing as the event goes on … it’s almost always the other way around!).

We’re working hard to try to get this in for the upcoming event. I’ll update this post once it’s release date is confirmed. EDIT: This is now live!

Thanks for all the feedback that led to this improvement. I’m sure we’ll need to continue to tweak the system, but hopefully this will be a big improvement for everyone.


Question: does my graph in the now-closed thread indicate I would have won north of 7000 tokens in the last event under the new methodology? Am I reading that right?

7,000 medals yes. However, other similarly skilled players would also have more medals too. The score in the new system is not calibrated to be the same as the old system – it’s intentionally different, so that we could meet the new goals.

Yeah, I just wanted to confirm before I jumped up and down with excitement for the new formula :joy::+1:


First of all, congratulations for considering players feedback. That’s really a positive attitude. Really nice. Event medals definitely needed some change.

Could you please explain better the new system? I am not sure if i got it totally from your explanation. Thank you.

Thanks Templar!

When a player wins an event battle, their skill rating will go up and they will earn medals proportional to their new, higher skill rating. When a player loses an event battle, their skill rating will go down and they’ll earn basically zero medals.

Basically, the more you win, the more medals you’ll earn. More highly skilled players (strategic skill + card upgrades --> win more battles vs harder opponents --> higher skill estimate) will thus have an easier time gaining medals. But less skilled players still have a chance to win by playing harder. It’s a balance between these two things.

I hope that helps better explain how it works. Specifically, medal gains = 1.02^(newSkillRating^0.7). We don’t show you your skill rating anywhere in the game, but if you really want to you can use this formula to compute your skill rating after winning a match (since we do show you the medals you gain, that leaves just one unknown, skill rating, in the equation which you can solve for if you like). Maybe later we’ll show skill rating in the UI too, if it turns out to be necessary. The exact formula for medal gains will almost certainly be tweaked in the near future based on learnings from this first event, so please don’t be too concerned when it does change!


Thank you for your quick answer. Now I understand it better. But I think i will understand completely when i play and do the math as you suggested.

But if i am not mistaking the medal gain is exponential considering the formula. If i win several matches in a row my medal gain will increase each time. I.e my last win in this example will give me much more medals than the first one. Is that right?

And thank u for making this game even better.

Thanks for considering all the feedback. I am anxious to see the new system in play and give more feedback which will hopefully be constructive.

1 Like

I may have missed this reading through your comments, so if I did I apologize.

Say you win a bunch of battles and you’re doing great, then you lose one. Does your medal count drop drastically then? Do you have to build it back up as your skill rating goes up?

Like the other two said, I think we will all understand this a bit better once we play. Thank you guys so much for accepting our feedback!


Me too! We’re looking forward to hearing how you all like it as the event plays out.

Medals will never decrease – same as before. However, if you lose a battle, your “strength” estimate will go down and your next win will probably net you slightly fewer additional medals. But it won’t fall off a cliff or anything from a single loss. There are some graphs at the bottom of the thread I linked to at the very top of this post that show how two different players would have fared under this new system. I think it’ll be more clear in a few hours when the event starts though :).


Ok, this new system is interesting the say the least. 9/10 wins leaves me at 1920 medals, and the people i’ve been fighting haven’t been massively over leveled like my level 11 Nash vs level 17 Val game.

So far it’s hard to tell how the system is since the event uses 4 specters, a new unit, and 4 medics a support unit and for me at least most of the other units are lower level. I only have one 17 when I used to having 3 or 4 at least.

S7Dave these events where a ton of the cards are already set are a bit frustrating to deal with. If your cards are poor you are out of luck.


So much this!

For the love of God, confine yourselves to just 3-4 event unit slots.

Well, at least since the card is newish, and it takes up 4 slots, that’s 4 slots with a good chance it’ll be the same level as mine (Though, my last match had someone with a level 11 specter…). Events that feature time warp cards, however, I’m always worried they’ll be over-leveled - mostly the rare ones like reaper.

I definitely didn’t like this event to start but with talking to my alliance and finding the best way to go at it, I’m enjoying it greatly. Waiting to see how the new system works out but haven’t had any absurd matches.

1 Like

S7Dave here is some initial feedback one day or so into the first event under the new rules system.

So far overall, the system seems ok in terms of no longer feeling like fights become worthless, of course it is still early in the event, usually that tended to happen on the last day. There definitely seems to be more of a pay to win in this rule set, I’ve bought 3 sets of tickets so far and have a pretty good win/loss ratio and I’m over 6000 medals but the guy in first place is over 12000 medals and I beat him once this event in the closest game ever.

It’s going to probably skew the rankings from where they were normally in events I am top 5 and almost always top 10, at least since I figured them out somewhere in Season 1. I’m in the top 10 now but the shifts in rank every time I step away for a few hours is impressive. At one time I dropped to 40th.


Now that the first event is over with the new system my thoughts are.

Overall match making was way better I did go against a few 15’s and a 17 after I had won 3-4 in a row.

I used about the same amount of tickets as I normally do. I fished 14th whereas I’m nearly always top ten. With the amount of tickets the top 5 in my bracket used I’d definitely never be able to afford to chase them. The only reason this doesn’t bother me is I was able to win 5 or so more games than average so I unlocked extra season credits with the additional wins.

I definitely liked whatever changed with match making and continuously being reward with 100+ points per win, as for the amount of tickets some other players used I’m not too sour. The game needs to make money and I got about the same seasonal rewards via my extra wins.

So at the end of the event I was 5th place, fairly similar placement to prior events and with no real chance to get higher unless I wanted to spend a ton of gems for tickets.

Overall it feels like we need something between the old system and the current system. Perhaps what we need is a cap on ticket purchases or a steeper curve after the first few purchases. Not sure that jives with what those of you running the game want.

A steeper cost curve might do the trick, but the side effect would inevitably be poorer matchmaking. I get that it’s an intractable problem, but in my bracket the disparities between #1 and #10 were laughably huge (around 30k medals, I think). Edit: sorry, the difference between 1 and 10 in my bracket was almost exactly 40,000 medals in the end.

Thanks for the myriad of passionate and well-reasoned responses to the first run of our new event scoring system (many responses here: Back to old ranking system, this is way worse!). I’d like to share some hard numbers about what we actually saw during the Strategic Thinking event, as well as compare it to what we saw in the last event with the old system (the Reforged event).

tl;dr – The new system appears to reward both strength (skill + cards) and grit (playing more than others) more than the old system, with strength being relatively more important than grit than before (but just slightly).


  • Strength rank (skill + cards, as measured by elo) is actually much better correlated with medals rank than in the previous system. This suggests that skill matters more now than it did before.
  • Grit rank (number of matches played compared to others) is also better correlated with medals rank than in the previous system. This suggests that grit also matters more now than it did before.
  • The fact that both of these increased suggests that the things we want to matter (strength and grit) now matter more. Hooray! This probably suggests that some other factor (e.g., luck, when you happened to play your matches) probably now matters less.
  • The total medals difference between first and last place (and indeed between any two ranks!) is now larger than before. This means players who play more (grit) and who player better (strength) will have a more significant impact on the outcome of wars than before. Previously, the best player was contributed only 1.4x a middle-of-the-pack player; now the difference is closer to 10x (though that’s a bit of an outlier because the top player really killed it; if we compare top 10 to middle-of-the-pack then the change was from 1.3x to about 4x).
  • The winning player played 20% fewer matches than in the previous system!

1 Like