@DNA3000 fair enough point, but i would go out on a limb and say that those people are in the vast minority. its better to make changes based off the majority not minority. Siding with the minority makes it seem like community feedback is cherry picked by kabam, only using what ideas better cater towards there goals not whats better for the community.
Even if they were in the majority, I would still think it was unfair to take away the one part of the game that catered to a sizeable minority of the playerbase. In fact, I might defend it even more, because then it would look like bullying.
I think the game should roughly reflect the proportions of the community (and the future prospective community). If the majority want head to head competition, the game should probably evolve to have most of the content include some head to head competition. If the majority don't want head to head competition, then head to head competition should be limited to only a few areas of the game.
My point is that it currently exists in only one part, so we should all strive to protect that one small part. Even if you believe you are in the majority and don't want it, you should try to protect the tiny part of the game that caters to that small minority just to ensure the game continues to attract a wider playerbase. It is the responsibility of the majority to see to it the minority isn't extinguished under their boot.
I get what your saying but making game breaking changes based off a small group of players is going to affect the player base in a more negative way then as you put it "extinguishing the minority under our boots" would because that majority player base is not going to like the changes and either stop playing or stop caring about the game. I mean i think the proof is on the forums, this is the most negative i have ever see it, as well as many players expressing there desire to quit after the changes.
I agree with you that yes the game should cater towards all types in the contest but doing that is next to impossible. The next best thing is to cater towards the biggest group of players you can, which would be the majority that do not like these changes in this case.
@DNA3000 fair enough point, but i would go out on a limb and say that those people are in the vast minority. its better to make changes based off the majority not minority. Siding with the minority makes it seem like community feedback is cherry picked by kabam, only using what ideas better cater towards there goals not whats better for the community.
Even if they were in the majority, I would still think it was unfair to take away the one part of the game that catered to a sizeable minority of the playerbase. In fact, I might defend it even more, because then it would look like bullying.
I think the game should roughly reflect the proportions of the community (and the future prospective community). If the majority want head to head competition, the game should probably evolve to have most of the content include some head to head competition. If the majority don't want head to head competition, then head to head competition should be limited to only a few areas of the game.
My point is that it currently exists in only one part, so we should all strive to protect that one small part. Even if you believe you are in the majority and don't want it, you should try to protect the tiny part of the game that caters to that small minority just to ensure the game continues to attract a wider playerbase. It is the responsibility of the majority to see to it the minority isn't extinguished under their boot.
I get what your saying but making game breaking changes based off a small group of players is going to affect the player base in a more negative way then as you put it "extinguishing the minority under our boots" would because that majority player base is not going to like the changes and either stop playing or stop caring about the game. I mean i think the proof is on the forums, this is the most negative i have ever see it, as well as many players expressing there desire to quit after the changes.
I agree with you that yes the game should cater towards all types in the contest but doing that is next to impossible. The next best thing is to cater towards the biggest group of players you can, which would be the majority that do not like these changes in this case.
I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying because in no way am I defending the devs changes to Alliance War. I'm saying that regardless of whether or not these changes were driven by the majority or the minority, it is usually never a good idea for one side to completely eliminate all of the parts of the game one segment enjoys. Since there is only one place that head to head strong competition exists, it doesn't matter if the majority like it or the minority like it. It is the last place it exists, so it should be protected from being wiped out.
To address what you are saying directly, who decides what is "game breaking" when looking at a change? It should be the players that actually want to play the part of the game that is being affected. If we assume that Alliance War is intended to be targeted at players that want head to head competition specifically (even if it is desirable for as many players to participate as possible) then it is their voices that should dominate any discussion of what is "game breaking." To put it bluntly if the players that want strong competition believe AW is broken and the players that don't want strong competition believe it is not broken, then AW is broken.
It isn't impossible to cater to a wide range of players. It is impossible to make every part of the game appeal to every possible player. But it is always possible to make some parts of the game appeal to some players and other parts of the game appeal to other players. The segment of players you will lose are the players that demand that every part of the game be specifically intended for them. In my opinion, you should jettison those players because they hurt all other segments of the player population with their (honestly selfish) demands.
But there is nothing impossible about saying "Alliance War is for players that want to compete head to head. Alliance Quest is for players that want to compete indirectly through rankings. Story quest is for players that want to play at their own pace without competition." And so forth. It is in that sense that I believe it is possible for a game to cater to a wide audience. And I believe that is the best thing to do in general when you are building an MMO, which by definition is trying to capture a large audience. If you want to cater to a very focused segment of the player population, you're better off making a single player game.
Dunno if it’s funny or sad that kabam doesnt understand how defender kills can impact war.
We understand how they can impact wars, but what I've gotten a lot of Private Messages about and have now seen posts of is that players are concerned that they will continue to 100% the map, and that Defender kills would fix this. This is what we're trying to avoid, a case where an Alliance is able to 100% Explore the map very easily, and even less so should it be possible for both Alliances to fully explore their opponent's maps.
We're working towards this, and will continue to make more iterations if we think that they are necessary.
We have usually been able to 100% our opponents maps in the old war system. Even with all the magiks, dorms, juggs, nightclub, etc. Most top 100 alliances have. How is this new design supposed to stop that?
That's a fair Question! The goal is to make the map more engaging and difficult so that where you place which Defenders is a conscious decision that you have to think about. If we find that you guys are all still 100%ing this Map, then it means that we need to make further revisions.
We're not through with this, and we plan on keeping a close eye on this next round. If there are more changes that need to be made, just like the last couple weeks, we'll make more.
At the risk of being repetitive, please explain how map changes are going to accomplish this. You say you want players to think about which defender to place on which node. But what the node does or where it is doesn't matter directly. What matters to the players is "if I place this defender here, what will the result be: good for me, or not good for me."
How do you expect a player to make that decision? Under 14.0, that question had an easy answer: place the defender that will get the most kills. Kills give points, and the more kills the defender gets the greater the chance the defender will also blockade the path. That's logical. That's how we made our decisions.
You say Kabam is adjusting the nodes to make them harder. No matter how easy they are or how hard they are, what should the players be thinking about which defender is better or worse? The only thing we can possibly think in 15.0 is "try to place a defender that can stop a player dead. If that can't happen, then it doesn't really matter what we place." But trying to stop an attacker from continuing to try to attack is your stated reason for removing defender kills. If we aren't allowed to compel an attacker to stop attacking, if we don't get points for defender kills, what's left to judge?
Kabam's position seems to be that if the nodes are harder, then it will matter which defenders get placed. But it only matters if being harder matters. And in 15.0, "harder" only matters if you stop the attacker cold. If you just kill him a couple times, that doesn't affect the war.
A defender isn't better because it hits harder or because he has a difficult to evade special attack or because he regenerates health. That's incidental. A defender is better if it helps us win a war. A defender has one and only one way to ultimately do that. Change the score. We don't get points when it kills an attacker. We only get points if the entire attacking alliance gives up on that path. Short of that, the only points we get is on placement. Nothing about the defender capabilities affects placement points.
Your question: How do you expect a player to make that decision?
The answer is that this still hasn't changed. Those defenders you're placing are still getting kills. Even if your defender doesn't stop a Summoner dead in their tracks, if you manage just one kill, you are still improving your defense in war.
That kill means that you are making them either use another champion to continue to compete, or use a revive/potion (of which there is a limited amount they can use every war). If they lose again, they have to make that choice again. So while that kill no longer grants you points, to say that there is no easy answer to your questions is not true. You still want to place your best defender for the situation/node that gets Kills, because Kills reduce your opponent's ability to move forward.
Just because there are no longer points awarded for a Defender Kill doesn't mean there is no value in defense. Reducing the Champions and offense that your Opponent has at their disposal is a victory. Every time you reduce your opponent's ability to output in the War, it's a victory.
Basically, just like before, you're trying to halt or negatively impact your Opponent's ability to progress, rather than have them award you points. The goal of defense hasn't changed: Exhaust your opponent's Champions and ability to proceed.
Again @Kabam Miike the how is important. For goodness sakes it's like you're creating a safe place for snowflakes here. If you lose a fight because you have low skill, got matched above your alliance level, or the other alliance is just better- the winner of that fight should get points. Put another way why does an attacker get points for winning and a defender does not?
Words like iterative process are used for poorly planned strategies. And while the forums are usually the most negative among us they do represent the avid player base that spends and keeps the lights on there. Use the iterative process to give us - those that spend the time to rank to rank a competitive roster - the recognition that our teams deserve. A kill is a kill. Shouldn't matter if it's offense or defense. It should get points. This isn't going away and the constant debating only serves the narrative that you don't listen to players.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
Without defender kills, defender rating is still going to be the deciding factor.
Shared this theory in another Thread. Rather than retype it, I'm just going to post a screenshot.
That's not a theory. That is an observation. If the alliances with higher rated defenders win more wars than they lose, the tier sorting algorithm will sort them into higher tiers, and by definition everyone else into lower tiers, with alliance defender rating acting indirectly by affecting the win/loss record. That's a given.
The problem is, there's no good justification for making that change. If the devs arbitrarily started giving additional points to alliances with defensive champions that were taller, you could say the exact same thing. The height of the champions was "balancing" the alliances into a new configuration, and eventually the taller alliances would be matched up with other taller alliances and their scoring would become more even. Growth would come from alliances growing their rosters, acquiring an increasingly large percentage of the tall champions.
The fact that we could make that observation doesn't make it a good thing to happen.
It's actually a good thing from my perspective. Advancing in War Tiers is a reflection in part, of advancing in the game. I don't want to argue too much about it. That's my opinion.
It's still a theory because we haven't seen enough results to call it an observation. That will be seen over time.
Couldn't disagree more. You will advance in the game over time whether or not you are actually good at it. I know people with incredible rosters who aren't actually good at the game. War, alliance vs. alliance, should not be about which alliance has had better luck with crystals or who has played longer, it should be about which alliance is better. No interest in the kind of war you seem to be advocating.
What you're describing is exactly that, luck on the Crystals. It's RNG. Roll the same Champs, Rank them, fill the BGs, and stack the kills. That has very little to do with skill. People advance in the game through effort. Not just rolls. They do Events, Arena, Rank, War, AQ, etc. Some also spend. That's all reflected in their Roster. Not just the Prestige. Their entire Rating and Roster.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
I agree with you completely but I do believe that between BG/seatin/Joel/Dave kabams going to lose a huge portion of their following unless these YouTube channels start feeling differently about the state of the game.... all of them have expressed their dislike for this current meta BG even went as far as cancelling his AW series entirely
Is anyone notice Grounded's comments keep appearing on this page? Old comments getting shuffled around.
Comments randomly pop up and then go away. No notifications to show he is actually commenting, but I can tell they are old comments
No idea. I haven't commented. Unless they're cleaning the Thread up or something.
I dunno wth it is. It showed a comment earlier of yours that is gone now, but replaced with another. Old comments moved to the front of newer comments from other users.
No idea. I haven't commented. Unless they're cleaning the Thread up or something.
I dunno wth it is. It showed a comment earlier of yours that is gone now, but replaced with another. Old comments moved to the front of newer comments from other users.
Very strange
Yeah I noticed too. I haven't reposted it. It's possible they cleaned the Thread. Could be a glitch.
No idea. I haven't commented. Unless they're cleaning the Thread up or something.
I dunno wth it is. It showed a comment earlier of yours that is gone now, but replaced with another. Old comments moved to the front of newer comments from other users.
Very strange
Yeah I noticed too. I haven't reposted it. It's possible they cleaned the Thread. Could be a glitch.
Miike stated he cleaned it earlier. Seems to have just caused a glitch. Odd its just your comments doing it
No idea. I haven't commented. Unless they're cleaning the Thread up or something.
I dunno wth it is. It showed a comment earlier of yours that is gone now, but replaced with another. Old comments moved to the front of newer comments from other users.
Very strange
Yeah I noticed too. I haven't reposted it. It's possible they cleaned the Thread. Could be a glitch.
Miike stated he cleaned it earlier. Seems to have just caused a glitch. Odd its just your comments doing it
Not sure. I haven't posted since the last comment.
There is always a strategy. I don't need to assert my effectiveness. It's not about me. I can say I'm quite experiwnced at strategizing Wins in many scenarios and leave it at that because I'm not really here to brag. What I'm saying is regardless of the strategy used, it does not have to include Points for Defender Kills. The real argument is we can no longer place a Defense that KOs the opponent into a Loss. There are other forms of strategy involved. I've been running Wars since the new system has been implemented. Our last Win took some effort and planning. It's not as monotone as people are claiming. The Nodes were simplistic, yes. There is still strategy involved.
War is engagement in battle between two or more sides. When you eliminate the ability for one side to engage, it is no longer called War. It's called Defense. People mention strategy, but there's really very little strategy involved. "Okay, boys. Do we stop trying and take a Loss, or keep trying and take a Loss?". There is very little strategy for the winning side either. Just place the "Top Tier Champs" in drones and watch the enemy scramble and lose.
When talking about strategy in terms of Defender Kills, yes. The most popular Champs are placed because they garner the most Kills. Kills accumulate and force the opponent to try themselves to death. Two different references.
I'm not trying to be rude here, but many of the players commenting here play at high levels of AW. In AW 14.0, even the best champs that could be predicted in a certain spot on the map (outside of boss node) had become ineffective. We would plan our attack expecting to see Magik or Dorm or NC etc and if we were right, they would die quickly. Surprising the attackers (some call this strategy) with an unexpected defender in a strategic location created more issues and affected the war.
I'm sure there are wars and levels where players stop cold at a 5/50 duped dorm, but that's not the concern of the majority of players. Your perspective is your own and nobody will be able to change that, but you can at least understand that the majority of us have a different perspective and you don't really need to tell us all how that's wrong when you don't have the same experiences as we do. Perhaps this was a problem at low tiers of War, but it was not at high tiers. Personal experiences DO matter when discussing the meta of a video game.
Sorry, but I'm fully capable of discussing the meta of a game regardless of what Tier I'm in. I'm quite intelligent and I have the ability to understand entire systems, and not just the top, middle, or bottom.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
That's true. He has a much different view than many on the changes Kabam adds, which is why his views on AW are so telling.
ALL the youtubers are ripping on AW. It has to have a negative impact on Kabam when so many thousands of people keep seeing "AW's broken" videos every week.
Even worse is the new update didn't contain the changes to the nodes they announced. It really makes AW look like amatuer hour at the developers desk. Here we were actually excited about this latest iteration only to find out they screwed up yet again and we have no idea if they will flip flop again like they did on fixing the diversity per bg bug. I've pretty much lost all faith in anything they say. It appears they can't or won't commit to making the changes they announce. Extremely disappointed with another week of boring spreadsheet wars and mind numbing nodes.
Just drop wars until you get the bugs fixed and add some shards to the calendar while you do it. It really sucks when you're told one thing then have to listen to some BS excuse that voids the change promised. Especially with so much feedback being presented.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
That's true. He has a much different view than many on the changes Kabam adds, which is why his views on AW are so telling.
ALL the youtubers are ripping on AW. It has to have a negative impact on Kabam when so many thousands of people keep seeing "AW's broken" videos every week.
To be intellectually fair, it is more likely that a youtuber would dislike the new system than the average player, because youtubers are a self-selected group of people that are motivated to share their successes and failures to an audience. Those people are exactly the kinds of people that would tend to prefer a less routine and more dynamic game than the average player. For example, the impression I get is that Brian Grant doesn't so much hate the new version of AW as he is bored by it. He discontinued recording AW because he doesn't find the attack phase interesting. There's nothing interesting to comment about in terms of who is placing what where, or what he has to think about to defeat it. Having watched his last AW stream, it seemed to me it was as interesting to him as recording his alliance duel event commitment.
Nothing to talk about and not much to think about might actually be something some players want: a less difficult war. But of course that is likely to be exactly the opposite of what a streamer would want, even among a group of streamers that have different opinions in all other respects.
I have to specifically add that I'm not saying youtubers are only interested in what will help support their channel. I'm saying the kind of personality that would make a channel is the kind that would tend to want a less passive game all around. Even if they stopped streaming, I think they would still want a more dynamic AW.
So... Wth happened to the supposed new changes??? AW Tier 1 (expert level), & all the nodes are still the same as they were. And an FYI, changing said nodes aren't going to make AW a "better experience". Getting rid of this failed idiotic defender diversity will!
Just drop wars until you get the bugs fixed and add some shards to the calendar while you do it. It really sucks when you're told one thing then have to listen to some BS excuse that voids the change promised. Especially with so much feedback being presented.
Without war, it's hard to pay loyalty for AQ maps. :-/
Didn't think about that. Just wish they could get their updates matched up with announcements. We placed based on what they said just to try something different and end up seeing all the same nodes, even had some good strategy planned for the new buffs.
We can debate endlessly, but it's not going to go anywhere. I'm for the removal of Defender Kills. It created an unfair situation, regardless of who agrees with it or not.
I disagree. This debate is going somewhere. You're incorrectly assuming my goal is to get you to change your mind. That is not my goal. I'm not here to force anyone to agree with me. My goal is to highlight the errors I perceive in your arguments and present counter-arguments that other readers will find convincing, and that goal extends to any devs that might be reading. You and I are one small set of proxies for the players that like the current system and the players that don't. I believe it is useful for the devs and other players to see how those two positions stand up under scrutiny.
The question you have to ask is do you believe you are representing the side of the players that like the system well, and do you believe it serves their interests to continue to create arguments in support of it. I'm only posting because I believe I'm representing my side reasonably well. If I thought I wasn't, I'd stop.
I'm glad I'm being represented by @DNA3000 I appreciate the time and effort put into your posts on this matter.
@Kabam Miike when are you going to address the fact that some of us placed champs to take advantage of new nodes and try a different strategy are now at a huge disadvantage ?
You misled us with the release notes and it's going to cost us. Do we just get a tough **** and deal with it response or is there something that shows a bit of integrity from the team ?
Just like always, anything that hurts players is of no concern to the team, but if it hurts kabam it gets fixed asap.
Since you guys misled us, then alter diversity scoring this round, even eliminate it. A guy can dream right, of course that will never happen and nothing will be done to fix the developers screw ups, but I'll be damned if the rewards were sending out double prizes it would be fixed instantly.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
That's true. He has a much different view than many on the changes Kabam adds, which is why his views on AW are so telling.
ALL the youtubers are ripping on AW. It has to have a negative impact on Kabam when so many thousands of people keep seeing "AW's broken" videos every week.
To be intellectually fair, it is more likely that a youtuber would dislike the new system than the average player, because youtubers are a self-selected group of people that are motivated to share their successes and failures to an audience. Those people are exactly the kinds of people that would tend to prefer a less routine and more dynamic game than the average player. For example, the impression I get is that Brian Grant doesn't so much hate the new version of AW as he is bored by it. He discontinued recording AW because he doesn't find the attack phase interesting. There's nothing interesting to comment about in terms of who is placing what where, or what he has to think about to defeat it. Having watched his last AW stream, it seemed to me it was as interesting to him as recording his alliance duel event commitment.
Nothing to talk about and not much to think about might actually be something some players want: a less difficult war. But of course that is likely to be exactly the opposite of what a streamer would want, even among a group of streamers that have different opinions in all other respects.
I have to specifically add that I'm not saying youtubers are only interested in what will help support their channel. I'm saying the kind of personality that would make a channel is the kind that would tend to want a less passive game all around. Even if they stopped streaming, I think they would still want a more dynamic AW.
Spreading the word that one of the game's biggest features is boring has to have a negative impact on the game. The other night Joel was talking about with all defenders being equal, no champs outside of the god tier attackers are desirable. That leads to less desire to grind arenas for champs and shards. Today is a great example. Mephesto is the next god-tier defender but defenders don't matter anymore so many probably won't grind for him.
This game is doesn't have much interesting content. AQ, you run the same lane for months fighting the same chames. Arena is a slog and just a means to get resources. The monthly events are fun for the week it takes to clear heroic and master. Act fine is fun until you clear it then it's over for ever.
AW was the last true exciting part of the game. You had a good idea of who you might face, but you never really knew until the fight started. With the new watered down AW with no penalty for deaths and the ability to see the class of who you're fighting AW is quite boring. That doesn't even take into account the stupid map that forces you to wait 3 hours between fights.
Kabam is truly way off the mark with AW right now and it doesn't look like they're going to figure it out any time soon.
Brian Grant hitting the nail on the head yet again
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
@Kabam Miike i hope u watched that video cause all u guys would have to do is what brian grant was saying to make war fun and engaging again and stop this backlash from everyone in the community
Comments
I get what your saying but making game breaking changes based off a small group of players is going to affect the player base in a more negative way then as you put it "extinguishing the minority under our boots" would because that majority player base is not going to like the changes and either stop playing or stop caring about the game. I mean i think the proof is on the forums, this is the most negative i have ever see it, as well as many players expressing there desire to quit after the changes.
I agree with you that yes the game should cater towards all types in the contest but doing that is next to impossible. The next best thing is to cater towards the biggest group of players you can, which would be the majority that do not like these changes in this case.
I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying because in no way am I defending the devs changes to Alliance War. I'm saying that regardless of whether or not these changes were driven by the majority or the minority, it is usually never a good idea for one side to completely eliminate all of the parts of the game one segment enjoys. Since there is only one place that head to head strong competition exists, it doesn't matter if the majority like it or the minority like it. It is the last place it exists, so it should be protected from being wiped out.
To address what you are saying directly, who decides what is "game breaking" when looking at a change? It should be the players that actually want to play the part of the game that is being affected. If we assume that Alliance War is intended to be targeted at players that want head to head competition specifically (even if it is desirable for as many players to participate as possible) then it is their voices that should dominate any discussion of what is "game breaking." To put it bluntly if the players that want strong competition believe AW is broken and the players that don't want strong competition believe it is not broken, then AW is broken.
It isn't impossible to cater to a wide range of players. It is impossible to make every part of the game appeal to every possible player. But it is always possible to make some parts of the game appeal to some players and other parts of the game appeal to other players. The segment of players you will lose are the players that demand that every part of the game be specifically intended for them. In my opinion, you should jettison those players because they hurt all other segments of the player population with their (honestly selfish) demands.
But there is nothing impossible about saying "Alliance War is for players that want to compete head to head. Alliance Quest is for players that want to compete indirectly through rankings. Story quest is for players that want to play at their own pace without competition." And so forth. It is in that sense that I believe it is possible for a game to cater to a wide audience. And I believe that is the best thing to do in general when you are building an MMO, which by definition is trying to capture a large audience. If you want to cater to a very focused segment of the player population, you're better off making a single player game.
Unless you are CCP, I guess.
Not a question of if they have been implemented yet or not ... neither the before nor the after match the excel table.
am I missing something?
Again @Kabam Miike the how is important. For goodness sakes it's like you're creating a safe place for snowflakes here. If you lose a fight because you have low skill, got matched above your alliance level, or the other alliance is just better- the winner of that fight should get points. Put another way why does an attacker get points for winning and a defender does not?
Words like iterative process are used for poorly planned strategies. And while the forums are usually the most negative among us they do represent the avid player base that spends and keeps the lights on there. Use the iterative process to give us - those that spend the time to rank to rank a competitive roster - the recognition that our teams deserve. A kill is a kill. Shouldn't matter if it's offense or defense. It should get points. This isn't going away and the constant debating only serves the narrative that you don't listen to players.
When the biggest Kabam supporter of the youtubers is ripping AW you know something is wrong.
Brian Grant is not so much a big Kabam supporter as he is more of a live and let live player that likes challenges. He doesn't tend to hate what other players hate so he doesn't complain as much about the same things other players complain about. He actually doesn't complain a lot in general, but not because he thinks everything is great.
What you're describing is exactly that, luck on the Crystals. It's RNG. Roll the same Champs, Rank them, fill the BGs, and stack the kills. That has very little to do with skill. People advance in the game through effort. Not just rolls. They do Events, Arena, Rank, War, AQ, etc. Some also spend. That's all reflected in their Roster. Not just the Prestige. Their entire Rating and Roster.
I agree with you completely but I do believe that between BG/seatin/Joel/Dave kabams going to lose a huge portion of their following unless these YouTube channels start feeling differently about the state of the game.... all of them have expressed their dislike for this current meta BG even went as far as cancelling his AW series entirely
Comments randomly pop up and then go away. No notifications to show he is actually commenting, but I can tell they are old comments
I dunno wth it is. It showed a comment earlier of yours that is gone now, but replaced with another. Old comments moved to the front of newer comments from other users.
Very strange
Yeah I noticed too. I haven't reposted it. It's possible they cleaned the Thread. Could be a glitch.
Miike stated he cleaned it earlier. Seems to have just caused a glitch. Odd its just your comments doing it
Not sure. I haven't posted since the last comment.
That's true. He has a much different view than many on the changes Kabam adds, which is why his views on AW are so telling.
ALL the youtubers are ripping on AW. It has to have a negative impact on Kabam when so many thousands of people keep seeing "AW's broken" videos every week.
Just drop wars until you get the bugs fixed and add some shards to the calendar while you do it. It really sucks when you're told one thing then have to listen to some BS excuse that voids the change promised. Especially with so much feedback being presented.
To be intellectually fair, it is more likely that a youtuber would dislike the new system than the average player, because youtubers are a self-selected group of people that are motivated to share their successes and failures to an audience. Those people are exactly the kinds of people that would tend to prefer a less routine and more dynamic game than the average player. For example, the impression I get is that Brian Grant doesn't so much hate the new version of AW as he is bored by it. He discontinued recording AW because he doesn't find the attack phase interesting. There's nothing interesting to comment about in terms of who is placing what where, or what he has to think about to defeat it. Having watched his last AW stream, it seemed to me it was as interesting to him as recording his alliance duel event commitment.
Nothing to talk about and not much to think about might actually be something some players want: a less difficult war. But of course that is likely to be exactly the opposite of what a streamer would want, even among a group of streamers that have different opinions in all other respects.
I have to specifically add that I'm not saying youtubers are only interested in what will help support their channel. I'm saying the kind of personality that would make a channel is the kind that would tend to want a less passive game all around. Even if they stopped streaming, I think they would still want a more dynamic AW.
Didn't think about that. Just wish they could get their updates matched up with announcements. We placed based on what they said just to try something different and end up seeing all the same nodes, even had some good strategy planned for the new buffs.
Again all kabam is doing is making war winners based on defender rating.
Defender rating is the only thing breaking ANY TIES .... we all max out the points in every other catagory.
Stop pretending like your not reading and understanding this.
I'm glad I'm being represented by @DNA3000 I appreciate the time and effort put into your posts on this matter.
You misled us with the release notes and it's going to cost us. Do we just get a tough **** and deal with it response or is there something that shows a bit of integrity from the team ?
Just like always, anything that hurts players is of no concern to the team, but if it hurts kabam it gets fixed asap.
Since you guys misled us, then alter diversity scoring this round, even eliminate it. A guy can dream right, of course that will never happen and nothing will be done to fix the developers screw ups, but I'll be damned if the rewards were sending out double prizes it would be fixed instantly.
Spreading the word that one of the game's biggest features is boring has to have a negative impact on the game. The other night Joel was talking about with all defenders being equal, no champs outside of the god tier attackers are desirable. That leads to less desire to grind arenas for champs and shards. Today is a great example. Mephesto is the next god-tier defender but defenders don't matter anymore so many probably won't grind for him.
This game is doesn't have much interesting content. AQ, you run the same lane for months fighting the same chames. Arena is a slog and just a means to get resources. The monthly events are fun for the week it takes to clear heroic and master. Act fine is fun until you clear it then it's over for ever.
AW was the last true exciting part of the game. You had a good idea of who you might face, but you never really knew until the fight started. With the new watered down AW with no penalty for deaths and the ability to see the class of who you're fighting AW is quite boring. That doesn't even take into account the stupid map that forces you to wait 3 hours between fights.
Kabam is truly way off the mark with AW right now and it doesn't look like they're going to figure it out any time soon.
@Kabam Miike i hope u watched that video cause all u guys would have to do is what brian grant was saying to make war fun and engaging again and stop this backlash from everyone in the community