**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.

Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.

Solution to AW Manipulation/Piloting

DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
v12afubr3nh7.jpg

I recently came across this image on this forum which shows line chat history of a top alliance. The line chat history is a schedule 16 very strong alliances in MCOC use to find AW matches so they can avoid going against each other. The 16 alliances have been inked out so that this post doesn't violate Kabam's Terms of Service.

Allowing this sort of AW matchmaking manipulation, as well as AW piloting, is detrimental to the integrity of MCOC and discouraging to alliances with aspirations of moving up AW tier ranks once Alliance Wars Season 1 begins. Imagine if the NFL made their schedule so that the Patriots never played the Seahawks, or the Steelers never played the Ravens, or the Chargers never played the Raiders, because doing so would allow certain teams to have "better" records. Same goes for the NBA - the Lakers never playing the Celtics, the Warriors never playing the Cavs, or the Raptors never playing the Thunder would be bad for business.

For forum members who prefer video games, extend the metaphor to EVO - Infiltration never fighting Fuudo, Justin Wong never fighting Tokido, and Daigo never fighting Snake Eyez would make EVO much more boring to watch. I'm not saying that the best should only fight the best, only that according to Alberto Braga (game designer in the recent video done by @Ad0ra_ and @Kabam Miike), the best intentionally avoiding fights with the best goes against the entire purpose of Alliance Wars Seasons.

While I don't have a suggestion for preventing AW manipulation as described above, does anyone else think alliances who utilize AW piloting being disqualified from Alliance Wars Seasons rank rewards could solve the ongoing AW piloting problem?
«1

Comments

  • While I don't have a suggestion for preventing AW manipulation as described above, does anyone else think alliances who utilize AW piloting being disqualified from Alliance Wars Seasons rank rewards could solve the ongoing AW piloting problem?

    AW "piloting" is account sharing and is already a bannable offense. I don't think explicitly changing the penalties for that conduct would do any more to reduce it. Anyone willing to risk a ban will also risk losing rewards.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    edited February 2018
    Deadbyrd9 wrote: »
    Aw matches are now determined by similar prestige’s not just by aw rating. The top alliances should be facing each other more often now. Usually the top 16 still faces alliances in the top 100 anyway. You can choose when you start a war. There’s nothing wrong with that

    I didn't know that, thanks for filling me in. And you're right, there's nothing wrong with searching for AW matchups at different times, especially when considering differences in time zones. Nevertheless, I hold my position that intentionally avoiding worthy opponents takes away from the integrity of competition. A wise man once said, "To be the man, you gotta beat the man!"
    AW "piloting" is account sharing and is already a bannable offense. I don't think explicitly changing the penalties for that conduct would do any more to reduce it. Anyone willing to risk a ban will also risk losing rewards.

    The number of members posting on the forum about AW piloting gave me the impression that many alliances have been piloting AWs for an extended amount of time without consequences. I personally haven't come across many instances where piloting seemed to be an issue in AW. With my alliance being 1 tier away from receiving 6* shards, the amount of accusations that piloting is common in top tier alliances motivated me to further comment on such behavior. Given Kabam's recent response to players using 3rd party software, I'm hopeful that AW piloting and AW piloting accusations won't be issues for much longer.
  • All you nooblets are so clueless ..

    And i love the response from Tier 3 AW experts.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    For_Spetz wrote: »
    All you nooblets are so clueless ..

    And i love the response from Tier 3 AW experts.

    lol I missed the part where someone claimed to be an expert
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    Veteran players have commented on other social media forums that AW Seasons will greatly decrease alliances trying to manipulate the matchmaking process. Seems like the first of my two points in this post is unfounded, which is awesome. Really hope Kabam continues to take actions that prevent players from attempting to gain advantages through dishonorable methods.
  • ImranAzharImranAzhar Posts: 34
    piloting has been there for ages. kabam should have just legalized it. No point of hiding it.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    ArmandStar wrote: »
    sounds like those "top" alliances don't deserve to be top alliances.
    even though they are strong, they're afraid of facing other strong players. that's an act of cowardice

    It’s not being scared. I was in a top 5 ally. And they do it so they don’t have to spend. 3 wars that would cost $200 and only earn you 700 more shards was not worth it. You could do two for free and not give kabam$. It was a pact by top allies to all spend less.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    ImranAzhar wrote: »
    piloting has been there for ages. kabam should have just legalized it. No point of hiding it.
    ImranAzhar wrote: »
    piloting has been there for ages. kabam should have just legalized it. No point of hiding it.

    On the contrary. It's against TOS, regardless of how long it's been going on and who has been doing it.

    It sure has. But with multiple people having multiple devices to play on. Or playing from Starbucks WiFi will change your IP. So if you can figure a PRACTICAL and here’s the bigger one. PROVABLE then I’m all ears.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    Side note. Matchmaking coordination also eliminated the need to pilot. And coming from a former piloter (i would play 3-5 accounts during hard wars) i MUCH preferred not having to do that.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    edited February 2018
    It sure has. But with multiple people having multiple devices to play on. Or playing from Starbucks WiFi will change your IP. So if you can figure a PRACTICAL and here’s the bigger one. PROVABLE then I’m all ears.

    @MattScott I spoke to a relative who has substantial experience in cyber forensics. According to him, unless someone takes steps to disguise their location with something such as a virtual private network (VPN), companies such as Facebook/YouTube have no problem determining the location from where their users access their websites. Kabam isn't Facebook or YouTube, but the analogy is still valid.

    Starbucks and other similar internet providers offer unprotected Wi-Fi , so unless someone is taking steps to disguise their location, using Wi-Fi in public locations wouldn't matter. It would be hilarious if multiple alliance members claimed to consistently play the game from the same Starbucks location, despite living 100s to 1,000s of miles from each other.

    Considering what I was told about companies being able to pinpoint their users' locations based on their Wi-Fi, it would seem Kabam could crack down on AW piloting if they chose to do so. Not being able to do this because of players using VPNs or other methods would raise a red flag when 99%+ of players are able to have their locations verified.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    It sure has. But with multiple people having multiple devices to play on. Or playing from Starbucks WiFi will change your IP. So if you can figure a PRACTICAL and here’s the bigger one. PROVABLE then I’m all ears.

    @MattScott I spoke to a relative who has substantial experience in cyber forensics. According to him, unless someone takes steps to disguise their location with something such as a virtual private network (VPN), companies such as Facebook/YouTube have no problem determining the location from where their users access their websites. Kabam isn't Facebook or YouTube, but the analogy is still valid.

    Starbucks and other similar internet providers offer unprotected Wi-Fi , so unless someone is taking steps to disguise their location, using Wi-Fi in public locations wouldn't matter. It would be hilarious if multiple alliance members claimed to consistently play the game from the same Starbucks location, despite living 100s to 1,000s of miles from each other.

    Considering what I was told about companies being able to pinpoint their users' locations based on their Wi-Fi, it would seem Kabam could crack down on AW piloting if they chose to do so. Not being able to do this because of players using VPNs or other methods would raise a red flag when 99%+ of players are able to have their locations verified.

    But it isn’t against TOS to use VPN. So, how could they PROVE it. Suspicious? Sure. Most likely piloting? Sure.

    But could they ban someone without PROOF that all those players don’t VPN into the same Starbucks?
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    Piloting happens. Matchmaking dodging happened. But with increased rewards that won’t be a problem any longer. However, also because of this piloting will be more prevalent than ever
  • HulksmasshhHulksmasshh Posts: 742 ★★★
    The top alliance coordinated matchmaking problem will be solved with seasons. They can still coordinate to find matches but if an alliance is only getting 2 wars a week because of that then it’s going to hurt them more than help.

    Piloting / account sharing has been rampant for the longest time already and Kabam has shown (so far) that they’re not taking serious action against it, other than the once-in-while mention that accounting sharing is against the TOS. As obvious as it may be at times, I’m guessing it’s something difficult to 100% prove without a doubt. I’m sure they consider things like account hacks and credit card fraud to be much more serious than account sharing at the moment. Until they start to enforce the TOS of account sharing, piloting/merc service will remain. It’s really only a problem in the top ~25 or so alliances.

    If you think about what piloting really is, it is no different than having 30 skilled players in an alliance (but that’s hard to do I know). If you have 30 skilled players who communicate well and can clear their AW lane without deaths, that alliance has no disadvantage to a piloting alliance.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    The top alliance coordinated matchmaking problem will be solved with seasons. They can still coordinate to find matches but if an alliance is only getting 2 wars a week because of that then it’s going to hurt them more than help.

    Piloting / account sharing has been rampant for the longest time already and Kabam has shown (so far) that they’re not taking serious action against it, other than the once-in-while mention that accounting sharing is against the TOS. As obvious as it may be at times, I’m guessing it’s something difficult to 100% prove without a doubt. I’m sure they consider things like account hacks and credit card fraud to be much more serious than account sharing at the moment. Until they start to enforce the TOS of account sharing, piloting/merc service will remain. It’s really only a problem in the top ~25 or so alliances.

    If you think about what piloting really is, it is no different than having 30 skilled players in an alliance (but that’s hard to do I know). If you have 30 skilled players who communicate well and can clear their AW lane without deaths, that alliance has no disadvantage to a piloting alliance.

    The problem is to successful large ally, you need a combo of spenders, grinders, and killers. Everyone benefits from each other. The skilled (possibly less spending player) gets all the SA rewards, and the whales (possibly less skilled) let others run their account to get the better war rewards.

  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    I responded to two comments yesterday. It hasn't reappeared after edited for typos, so I'll comment again.
    But it isn’t against TOS to use VPN. So, how could they PROVE it. Suspicious? Sure. Most likely piloting? Sure.

    But could they ban someone without PROOF that all those players don’t VPN into the same Starbucks?

    @DNA3000 addressed this perfectly. Most people's understanding of disguising internet activity is inaccurate. Anyone who knows how to effectively do so is likely partaking in actions well beyond the category of piloting their teammates' accounts in a video game.

    So all this talk based on a screenshot of a line chat that is more than 6 months old and based on allegations of piloting that cannot be proven. This thread needs to just be closed.

    Providing additional details would violate Kabam's TOS. Multiple veteran players (2+ years of playing/LOL Exploration/members of a top 10 alliance at some point) have confirmed the AW matchmaking manipulation strategy detailed in this thread has been going on for 2+ years, one veteran player gave details that it started with 10 alliances and expanded from there.

    If you think about what piloting really is, it is no different than having 30 skilled players in an alliance (but that’s hard to do I know). If you have 30 skilled players who communicate well and can clear their AW lane without deaths, that alliance has no disadvantage to a piloting alliance.

    @Hulksmasshh I was agreeing with you 100% until this part of your post. Not because you're wrong, but because supporting the view that skilled alliances will win no matter the opponent allows piloting alliances to continue cheating to win the other 9 out of 10 of their AW matchups.

    The problem is to successful large ally, you need a combo of spenders, grinders, and killers. Everyone benefits from each other. The skilled (possibly less spending player) gets all the SA rewards, and the whales (possibly less skilled) let others run their account to get the better war rewards.

    @MattScott Difficulties with developing a successful large alliance does not justify piloting accounts to gain an advantage with rewards. Like the new AW points system, AW Seasons is a big step in the right direction to make AW reward skillful play above all else. Violating Kabam's TOS shouldn't increase rewards by going unpunished and is (dishonorable) skillful manipulation, not skillful playing.

    Again: everyone I've ever caught believed their actions were impossible to catch. That's what made them catchable. They *think* they know what is and is not detectable or determinable. And they only have to make a mistake once.

    @DNA3000 You nailed it. I wouldn't be surprised if you've collaborated with or heard of the relative I was alluding to in my last post.
  • MattScottMattScott Posts: 587 ★★
    I think you’re missing my point.

    I think piloting should end too.

    I’m saying why it happens, and how it’s hard to prove. But i do not want it happening at all. Regardless of the reason.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    MattScott wrote: »
    I think you’re missing my point.

    I think piloting should end too.

    I’m saying why it happens, and how it’s hard to prove. But i do not want it happening at all. Regardless of the reason.

    Yes, I missed that point. Thanks for clarifying, and I apologize for not asking for more details.
  • Primmer79Primmer79 Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    Toukolou wrote: »
    People need to read the TOS more carefully.

    I don't think reading is the issue. I think one issue is you resurrecting a dead thread. The other issues contain:

    1. VPN is not against TOS.
    2. Piloting is against the TOS.

    How does Kabam balance the two to crack down on #2 but allow #1. And they cant make VPN against TOS because it would effectively remove people from the game.

    P.S. All this in a way that players accept
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    68qb3md1ndoo.jpg

    Wasn't expecting this thread to come back. But since it did, the above image is evidence of a matchmaking technique used for years that caused war ratings to be so high.
  • Primmer79Primmer79 Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    68qb3md1ndoo.jpg

    Wasn't expecting this thread to come back. But since it did, the above image is evidence of a matchmaking technique used for years that caused war ratings to be so high.

    I don't see the relevance of this anymore. Piloting should be our complaint, and I saw this SS over a year ago. Its nothing new and is allowable even now within the rules. (Even if I hate it). With the new seasons, some top alliances are almost encouraged to face other top alliances to prevent them from gaining a win bonus. Not to mention the matchmaking problems.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    Riegel wrote: »
    With the new AW seasons coming up will there be an update to the AW matchmaking system?

    Being placed against opponents where a victory will award 0 points and slow matchmaking all hinder the ability to hit the top spots.

    @Kabam Miike hate to tag you in this, but very concerned as the stakes are so high. Please if you have any info.

    Will it be easier to match with other in our tier now or will it still go by our AW rating and prestige which will cause long delays in finding a match?

    Thanks for any response in advance.

    A forum member asked these questions on February 2nd, before AW Seasons started. The forum member was ignored.
    Ad0ra_ wrote: »
    Hey Summoners! As some of you may or may not recall, at the start of Alliance Wars Seasons an Alliance at the top end experienced some undesired matchmaking issues. While it’s feasible that an Alliance may miss out on a match in Wars if they enter the matchmaking process late in the window (or delay in searching for their next match), this Alliance entered matchmaking the second it opened and were still unable to find a match. In fact this Alliance took so long to find a match that they were actually prevented from participating in two matches.

    To be specific, the main issue was this Alliance’s incredibly high War Rating. Our matchmaker will attempt to match two Alliances as closely as possible but if it can’t find a close War Rating it will look wider to find a match. The War Rating of this Alliance was so high that it took hours to even get close to nearby War Rating Alliances, all of which already matched, so it took hours more to find an Alliance to match with. This issue affects Alliances at the very top and bottom where there are more outliers and a smaller quantity of nearby matches (like a bell curve). We’re focusing on this particular situation because the stakes involve the top upgrade materials in the game, and we want to do our best to ensure a fair competition.

    Our team worked to make some improvements to the matchmaking system to alleviate this, and have spent the past few weeks monitoring the situation to ensure this has significantly improved the issue. As you may know, Kabam’s general policy is to resolve a situation, observe and ensure the resolution ‘sticks’, prior to discussing how to rectify the issue from a compensation perspective.

    Now that we are confident in the improvements to matchmaking our changes made, we wanted to explain what we would be doing to address how this impacted one Alliance twice. In this instance, the heart of the matter is where it has placed this Alliance in the competitive play landscape, and how this will impact their ability to earn Season end rewards that match the merit of their Alliance’s skill and dedication to The Contest.

    This issue impacted only one Alliance and we are only making adjustments for this alliance, yet we wanted to be transparent with the rest of the community regarding how we were resolving this. It’s important to note that this issue was and is different than matchmaking taking a few hours to complete - given the international audience of The Contest, it is realistically possible that some matchmaking timelines will be several hours long.

    While still ensuring fair consideration to ALL Summoners within The Contest, our solution is this:

    At the end of the first Alliance Wars Season, Kabam will be manually adjusting the rewards this Alliance receives for their performance and play. Our team will be looking at the average points this Alliance earned in the first half of Season 1 for each War they participated in, excluding ‘win bonus’ points. We will then be reviewing this Alliance’s positions in the leaderboards, and counting this bonus point amount for the Alliance Wars that were impacted by this issue. If upon manually calculating these points, this Alliance is supposed to fall somewhere else on the leaderboards, they will be granted whatever the discrepancy in rewards is. Note that we cannot manually alter points on the leaderboard to impact their earned in-game title or leaderboard position, but our team wants to ensure that they will receive the top upgrade materials at the end of the Season that they should have. This also means that no other Alliances will have the rewards they receive or their position on the leaderboards changed - Kabam is simply paying ‘extra’ rewards for whatever position these Alliances would have placed on the leaderboards.

    We feel that this is the most fair option for us to proceed with.

    - The Contest of Champions Team

    This announcement was made on March 13th, over a month after players had said they were concerned this could happen.

    Why be responsible when it's easy to be lazy and still gave whales what they want?
Sign In or Register to comment.