**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.
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.
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.
Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Arenas award players based on how many points they put up relative to other players, Not your record or anything else. They do not award weaker players by giving them more points for using lesser rated teams than they do for stronger players using stronger teams.
There is no point in arguing with this guy when his unyielding belief is that players should be rewarded based on record rather than ability (something people routinely mislabel as skill).
Also hi kettle! 🙂
I'm stating that when placed in an even playing field winners should benefit more and losers should benefit less... you keep saying I'm comparing my skill to yours... and i haven't once done that... I'm saying that my alliance beating an enemy alliance of the same strength should reward us the same as your alliance beating an equal strength alliance...
You guys keep disagreeing with my posts because it means if you can't beat an alliance on your level you feel I'm saying you should get smaller rewards than my alliance if we beat an alliance on our level...
At no point have I said that at all...
I'm saying winners in lower rated alliances should receive rewards that are a fraction of the same level of a higher tier bracket...
Not that strong alliances losers should receive ridiculously low rewards... they should still surpass the lower tier rewards... as in all of those high tier alliances should receive 6 star shards... and stuff..
But so should the strongest of the weaker alliances... not as many... but some...
I really wish you guys could understand what I'm saying... i feel like my 4 year old son would understand the simplicity of what I'm saying better than the majority of you have...
Rolled because for 9 seasons they Literally displaced me for their rewards while never having to face my alliance because they were protected By their low prestige. A very strange factor to reward
Also, many people have raised that they were stuck in g2 or g2 while alliances lower than them were placed in p4 and p3. If you look at the excel shared, most of the discrepancy seems to be in gold tier and very little are in the plat and master tiers. That is why I think the shakeup could be focused on the bottom tiers than the top ones. I could be wrong and I look forward for @QuikPik to analyse and tell me hopefully.
P.S This system works wonders for me so it is not for me that I am speaking. We crushed our opponents as they could not clear the map
Kabam listened to the complaints of people. Everyone kept saying they wanted Matchmaking fixed. The issue wasn't the Matchmaking, it was the Rewards structure. It had part to do with the Rewards, but the real argument was that bigger Alliances didn't get a chance to overpower the smaller ones. "They would never win against us!"
An argument somewhat validated by the fact those smaller alliances were displacing them
For rewards. Whilst never having to face them. It’s not rocket science, it’s simple
Boring tournament style competition on an even playing field we have ended up with. A tiered system might work but it seems to open up more exploits than it fixes, as apart from this shambles of a season, as you’ve Already agreed, this system won’t be as exploitable in the long term