Potential Delay to v44.1 Launch

We are currently working through some issues that may affect the release window of v44.1. This means that the update may not release on Monday as it usually does. We are working to resolve the issue holding us up as quickly as possible, but will keep you all updated, especially if the delay results in any changes to the content release schedule.
Options

Changing the rules

2»

Comments

  • Options
    Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,469 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    Like we all are saying. They said something and it was never announced that it will be implemented in the next fix. They said they were working on a fix but didn’t announce the actual changes. Some just now got announced today. People jumped the gun without thinking of the consequences. Besides, alliances would start wanting people with the rare champs like thanos, og dp, IIF. And that just not good for the game. I’m not surprised at all that diversity was kept inside of bgs
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Cobs wrote: »
    Ranking Champs is not a bad thing, regardless of the motivation to do it. That's how we advance. It was intended to be Ally-wide and they listened to the feedback of Players and made a change. Now people have more Champs Ranked. That's the whole point of the game. Who people Rank for whatever reason, is up to them.

    Yes and kabam mislead people (not on purpose im assuming) but stating multiple times it would be alliance wide and would be fixed as such. So people didnt chose to rank up champs because they wantsd to they chose to rank them up to be useful for diversity which is no longer true because kabam has changed there mind from what they said a week ago. And i havent seen anyone anywhere say they preferred it bg wide, where are people asking for this?

    Ummm, the main war discussion thread
  • Options
    CobsCobs Posts: 103
    R4GE wrote: »
    Draco2199 wrote: »
    Waldo wrote: »
    Ok, first, I'm not one to demand rank down tickets for every update. Now that that preface is out of the way:

    You guys put out there with fairly conclusive terms that defender diversity was going to be alliance wide. Even after the release of the new war content and scoring for diversity was done per group and not alliance wide, we were told this was a mistake and would be corrected.

    Today we get the news that diversity will remain per battle group and not be scored as an alliance whole. Fine, whatever you guys want, it's your game score it as you wish. The trouble with this is that a lot of people, myself included, have ranked up the most worthless trash champs in the game because you told us we were going to be scored as an alliance and not by groups. Translation: Rank this trash up or loose wars by the slimmest of margins.

    We need the option to rank these champs we just took up back down. It's hardly far to tell us get ready for a particular diversity scoring table then change the rules weeks after everyone has prepared for it. It's just not a fair model to follow, and I hope you guys do the right thing.

    I just ranked up Abom and Medusa for diversity throughout the whole alliance. I wouldn't have used these resources if Kabam wouldn't have said that it was supposed to be throughout the alliance. That was clearly told to us by the company and then they changed their minds but left us in the position where if we didn't we would lose wars.

    Kabam needs to give 3 rank down tickets minimum to everyone due to their communication to the community. You can't say it will be one thing and then change it a week later after everyone ranks up people based off of your communication to us!

    If your argument it you follow the forums and based choices off what Miike said than you should have seen other important comments he made and one that suggested that with new changes still coming our champs that we may think are useless now could easily be our favorites again.

    So its the OP’s fault for trusting what kabam says not at all on kabam for misleading them? Thats like telling a girl who got **** it was her fault for wearing a miniskirt.

  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Cobs wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    Draco2199 wrote: »
    Waldo wrote: »
    Ok, first, I'm not one to demand rank down tickets for every update. Now that that preface is out of the way:

    You guys put out there with fairly conclusive terms that defender diversity was going to be alliance wide. Even after the release of the new war content and scoring for diversity was done per group and not alliance wide, we were told this was a mistake and would be corrected.

    Today we get the news that diversity will remain per battle group and not be scored as an alliance whole. Fine, whatever you guys want, it's your game score it as you wish. The trouble with this is that a lot of people, myself included, have ranked up the most worthless trash champs in the game because you told us we were going to be scored as an alliance and not by groups. Translation: Rank this trash up or loose wars by the slimmest of margins.

    We need the option to rank these champs we just took up back down. It's hardly far to tell us get ready for a particular diversity scoring table then change the rules weeks after everyone has prepared for it. It's just not a fair model to follow, and I hope you guys do the right thing.

    I just ranked up Abom and Medusa for diversity throughout the whole alliance. I wouldn't have used these resources if Kabam wouldn't have said that it was supposed to be throughout the alliance. That was clearly told to us by the company and then they changed their minds but left us in the position where if we didn't we would lose wars.

    Kabam needs to give 3 rank down tickets minimum to everyone due to their communication to the community. You can't say it will be one thing and then change it a week later after everyone ranks up people based off of your communication to us!

    If your argument it you follow the forums and based choices off what Miike said than you should have seen other important comments he made and one that suggested that with new changes still coming our champs that we may think are useless now could easily be our favorites again.

    So its the OP’s fault for trusting what kabam says not at all on kabam for misleading them? Thats like telling a girl who got **** it was her fault for wearing a miniskirt.

    Thats a stupid analogy and not even a similar comparison. Multiple comments were made by mods, multiple threads were made by users, some just chose to read one comment and run with it while most waited for the final changes to be declared.
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.
  • Options
    Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,469 ★★★★
    It’s not like that at all. That’s a terrible analogy to use in any situation. It’s more like when buying a game system because a game will come out. Then before that game gets released you bought the system. The game never came out. So you want to go return the system. Except in this case the company said no refunds when bought the system so now you are stuck with it because you got the system too early and regret it
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,269 ★★★★★
    DaMunk wrote: »
    I'm aware that people are against rtds and I understand why but you have to admit OP stated a good case here.Right now your arguing just because you don't want them. Kabam clearly said one thing a few days ago and then changed the rules again. The argument you've made against rtds is basically that we shouldn't ever rank up champs for war defense...ever regardless of what kabam says. Whatever..ugh. I don't really care either way but I understand why the OP is pissed.

    That's not a case at all, actually. Personally, it has nothing to do with how I feel. It has to do with what they're for. I keep my feelings objective because they usually offend. Lol.
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    If you follow the forums, you don't have much to go off of. Should have known.

    Those who don't follow the forums and couldn't see all the threads or Mikes comments were left in the dark and could have made some bad choices since Kabam didn't make a point to consistently send in game messages. That could probably be a valid argument.
  • Options
    CobsCobs Posts: 103
    edited September 2017
    l
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    Why woulsnt you just say that initially then I would have agreed with you. Putting the blame soley on the OP doesnt make sense. Ive been waiting to rank anyone until the dust settles and the OP had to much faith in kabam. i see this as kabam misleading people more then people using poor judgement
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    Cobs wrote: »
    l
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    Why woulsnt you just say that initially then I would have agreed with you. Putting the blame soley on the OP doesnt make sense. Ive been waiting to rank anyone until the dust settles and the OP had to much faith in kabam. i see this as kabam misleading people more then people using poor judgement

    Its every OP that creates these threads. Not thinking so much of others and why they would need or want them but rather making arguments to cover their own foolish mistakes or selfish reasonings.

    Im obviously against them, but after Miikes comment today I instantly seen a major problem with it for those in game who don't see the threads. I don't understand how those in favor of RDT's couldn't spot that.
  • Options
    AmonthirAmonthir Posts: 754 ★★★
    R4GE wrote: »
    Cobs wrote: »
    l
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    Why woulsnt you just say that initially then I would have agreed with you. Putting the blame soley on the OP doesnt make sense. Ive been waiting to rank anyone until the dust settles and the OP had to much faith in kabam. i see this as kabam misleading people more then people using poor judgement

    Its every OP that creates these threads. Not thinking so much of others and why they would need or want them but rather making arguments to cover their own foolish mistakes or selfish reasonings.

    Im obviously against them, but after Miikes comment today I instantly seen a major problem with it for those in game who don't see the threads. I don't understand how those in favor of RDT's couldn't spot that.

    Because it would involve thinking of other people's problems rather than their desire to remake their roster whenever they want? I want RDTs for purely selfish reasons as well, but I know it won't help things in the long term of the actual game. Would trade RDTs for bug fixes to champs like Vision, female champs that drop hits, etc.
  • Options
    Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,469 ★★★★
    Love the post @Amonthir
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Amonthir wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    Cobs wrote: »
    l
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    Why woulsnt you just say that initially then I would have agreed with you. Putting the blame soley on the OP doesnt make sense. Ive been waiting to rank anyone until the dust settles and the OP had to much faith in kabam. i see this as kabam misleading people more then people using poor judgement

    Its every OP that creates these threads. Not thinking so much of others and why they would need or want them but rather making arguments to cover their own foolish mistakes or selfish reasonings.

    Im obviously against them, but after Miikes comment today I instantly seen a major problem with it for those in game who don't see the threads. I don't understand how those in favor of RDT's couldn't spot that.

    Because it would involve thinking of other people's problems rather than their desire to remake their roster whenever they want? I want RDTs for purely selfish reasons as well, but I know it won't help things in the long term of the actual game. Would trade RDTs for bug fixes to champs like Vision, female champs that drop hits, etc.

    Id trade RDT's for many things. Bug fixes or more interesting new content for starters
  • Options
    DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    Really I couldn't have created a more screwed up situation if I tried. I'm not that creative though. Let's think about this. Kabam said one thing...diversity is across all battlegroups and because we want to win people rank up champs. Dare you prove that wrong.
    The other side of that is waiting or using weaker champs both could result in a lose. People are making the argument that they should have waited...because kabam is still working on it although it was clearly stated how diversity was going to work.
    So basically do nothing and risk a lose or try to win and lose resources.
    Imagine an NFL game where everyone showed up ready to play and told you can't use 22 players...lawsuits would be everywhere.
    Kabam has created a no win situation here. Either use resources that might be wasted or be at a higher risk of losing.
    Like I said earlier I don't care if rtds are issued but just pointing out how ridiculous the situation is.
  • Options
    WaldoWaldo Posts: 38
    R4GE wrote: »
    If you follow the forums, you don't have much to go off of. Should have known.

    Those who don't follow the forums and couldn't see all the threads or Mikes comments were left in the dark and could have made some bad choices since Kabam didn't make a point to consistently send in game messages. That could probably be a valid argument.

    You are correct I don't follow every thread, but I do have time enough to read the updates posted by @Kabam Miike and just 10 days ago he said: "Many of you may have also noticed that Defender Diversity is not taking the entire Alliance’s placed Defenders into account, and is only counting each Battlegroup. This is not intentional, and will be fixed as soon as we can."

    I don't understand how anyone could defend an outright lie like this. This was not an in game message, this was a published update post by a senior moderator.

    https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/17902/15-0-alliance-wars-update-updated-september-22-9-35-pt#latest
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    Waldo wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    If you follow the forums, you don't have much to go off of. Should have known.

    Those who don't follow the forums and couldn't see all the threads or Mikes comments were left in the dark and could have made some bad choices since Kabam didn't make a point to consistently send in game messages. That could probably be a valid argument.

    You are correct I don't follow every thread, but I do have time enough to read the updates posted by @Kabam Miike and just 10 days ago he said: "Many of you may have also noticed that Defender Diversity is not taking the entire Alliance’s placed Defenders into account, and is only counting each Battlegroup. This is not intentional, and will be fixed as soon as we can."

    I don't understand how anyone could defend an outright lie like this. This was not an in game message, this was a published update post by a senior moderator.

    https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/17902/15-0-alliance-wars-update-updated-september-22-9-35-pt#latest

    EDIT: You're still quoting and debating after given an better argument in your favor vs the reasoning of your own mistakes
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Also, your thread isn't bumping up anymore.
  • Options
    Draco2199Draco2199 Posts: 803 ★★★
    Ranking Champs is not a bad thing, regardless of the motivation to do it. That's how we advance. It was intended to be Ally-wide and they listened to the feedback of Players and made a change. Now people have more Champs Ranked. That's the whole point of the game. Who people Rank for whatever reason, is up to them.

    People ranked based on an official response from a Kabam employee. Even if misleading us was unintentional it would still be their liability not the user.
  • Options
    WaldoWaldo Posts: 38
    Fair enough. I will agree rank down tickets may be over reaching. What I really want is the option to revert the specific champ(s) ranked up since @Kabam Miike posted his update 10 days ago, not a RDT that can be used on any and all champs.
  • Options
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    It is a valid argument for RDTs but not a new one. The argument in its strongest form would be this: players use rank up resources based on the current set of options available to them. If those options are not presented accurately or if they are changed in unpredictable ways, players should be allowed to change their choices which were made based on incomplete or incorrect information. This is something I usually call the "informed choice principle" in game design.

    But the problem with this argument is a problem I've stated before: it is a valid rationale for *wanting* RDTs and claiming it would be fair to have them, but it doesn't counter the reason why they aren't given out. People make up reasons why they think they aren't given out and attack those, but I don't think any of those reasons fully encapsulate the rationale for why Kabam doesn't want to give out RDTs. I believe it is the same reason most MMOs are either very stingy with similar kinds of things or almost never issue them at all. They want the act of spending resources to be permanent in a game that is always changing, irrespective of bugs or problems. Even in a perfect game the players are supposed to know that there will always be better choices in the future and when they spend resources now they are not going to spend the same resources on the better option in the future. There is always a choice, and it is always intended to be a painful choice: everything you spend now means you won't be able to spend later. Every choice to choose today is probably eliminating a future choice tomorrow.

    Regardless of why the future changes, whether it is because of new content or a bug fix or to implement a player-driven suggestion or to balance the game, players are supposed to factor that into their spending decisions. If not today, if not tomorrow, then eventually your choice today will be superceded by a better choice tomorrow. Or your reasons for choosing today will not be as valid tomorrow. That's intentional.

    Where you balance the preservation of the permanence of choice and the validity of the presentation of the options to choose from - in other words, what's the definition of a fair choice - is a subjective and somewhat arbitrary one. Neither argument "wins" over the other, because that's based on the values of the player and the values of the developers. You and I will never completely 100% agree on what the definition of "fair" is, and neither will the devs fully agree with any one particular player.
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    Whats funny is the OP is actually onto a valid argument for RDT's. The problem is so many want them for their own mistakes that they aren't considering a reason others should/would need them.

    It is a valid argument for RDTs but not a new one. The argument in its strongest form would be this: players use rank up resources based on the current set of options available to them. If those options are not presented accurately or if they are changed in unpredictable ways, players should be allowed to change their choices which were made based on incomplete or incorrect information. This is something I usually call the "informed choice principle" in game design.

    But the problem with this argument is a problem I've stated before: it is a valid rationale for *wanting* RDTs and claiming it would be fair to have them, but it doesn't counter the reason why they aren't given out. People make up reasons why they think they aren't given out and attack those, but I don't think any of those reasons fully encapsulate the rationale for why Kabam doesn't want to give out RDTs. I believe it is the same reason most MMOs are either very stingy with similar kinds of things or almost never issue them at all. They want the act of spending resources to be permanent in a game that is always changing, irrespective of bugs or problems. Even in a perfect game the players are supposed to know that there will always be better choices in the future and when they spend resources now they are not going to spend the same resources on the better option in the future. There is always a choice, and it is always intended to be a painful choice: everything you spend now means you won't be able to spend later. Every choice to choose today is probably eliminating a future choice tomorrow.

    Regardless of why the future changes, whether it is because of new content or a bug fix or to implement a player-driven suggestion or to balance the game, players are supposed to factor that into their spending decisions. If not today, if not tomorrow, then eventually your choice today will be superceded by a better choice tomorrow. Or your reasons for choosing today will not be as valid tomorrow. That's intentional.

    Where you balance the preservation of the permanence of choice and the validity of the presentation of the options to choose from - in other words, what's the definition of a fair choice - is a subjective and somewhat arbitrary one. Neither argument "wins" over the other, because that's based on the values of the player and the values of the developers. You and I will never completely 100% agree on what the definition of "fair" is, and neither will the devs fully agree with any one particular player.

    I agree with more than 90% of what your saying. This will probably be the first time we don't fully agree though on a topic we both commented on.

    Bad & false info was put out, Ill agree there. But the argument as that being the actual cause for premature rank ups seems very flawed to me.

    When the announcement of AW 2.0 arrived no one had a clue what to expect. A main discussion thread was started and everyone instantly flocked to it with concerns and pointed out everything wrong with the whole concept. At this point, I wouldn't assume any one decided to instantly start new rank ups. If they did, than theres no solid argument there for RDT's since rank ups were started before the new content even hit and no full understanding of it was even known.

    After AW 2.0 finally hit is when players had actual decisions to make, rank up or don't rank up. But at this point everyone seen the drastic errors in the system and jumped on the main discussion thread. After one war the flaws were pointed out at a rapid pace. This was enough knowledge alone for everyone to know not to rank up champs. Many were even going the route of zero defenders while it was fixed or chose to use lower ranked champs to meet diversity. Miike did at this point put an an announcement and did state diversity was glitched and would change to be for the alliance as a whole and not per bg. Was this enough cause for rank ups? Hardly not, as we all knew AW was bugged. And if you read Miikes announcement it would have been even smarter to jump over to the main discussion thread to see what users were suggesting and fighting against it to have it fixed. Any rank ups at this point still would arguably been of bad choice. This may not be a fair comparison but works for me: When a company puts out a new product or service do you believe them when they say it flawless or do you base a choice off customer reviews? This is one of those situations where the communities comments spoke volumes.

    As the issue went on we were lead to believe diversity would be changing. We were also informed more changes were going to continue to happen. Even at this point the info pointed out (later today to be changed), never suggested it to be a good time to settle with whats in front of you and start rank ups. The info alone that "more changes would follow" was accurate enough info, in my opinion, to say don't do anything until you see this system in its final stage. And many, if not most, chose to hold for those reasons. Also, had anyone been following the main discussion thread they would have seen that Miike also pointed out that changes were being planned to counter the thoughts that our top defenders were now useless and could become our favorites again.

    So to sum it up, if the argument is "I based my choices off the announcements on the forums" than you made mistakes not making the effort to follow the rest put in front of us. I feel a bigger injustice for those not on the forums who received little to no info and are in the dark still and could very easily had done many rank ups.

    I can see how its an argument for "wanting" RDT's. From my perspective its just a very 1/2 ass argument.
  • Options
    DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    Some people don't want rtds so they'll argue against people asking for them. Not by saying it changes to much in the prestige race but by saying people screwed up and want a redo. While that's possible in part, the problem is the war and it's roll out. Kabam also has a tendency to not be the most forthcoming which doesn't help the decision making process. I've written numerous PMs to the mods ask simple questions and never had a single reply. I think people disagree with others asking for rtds because if they agree kabam made a mistake they would have a hard time defending the argument for not issuing them. There's no right answer here. What bugs me is an individual states his opinion and people are lining up to be jerks just because they disagree. That sort of makes me actually want the damn rtds when I had no actually desire to have some in the first place.
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    DaMunk wrote: »
    Some people don't want rtds so they'll argue against people asking for them. Not by saying it changes to much in the prestige race but by saying people screwed up and want a redo. While that's possible in part, the problem is the war and it's roll out. Kabam also has a tendency to not be the most forthcoming which doesn't help the decision making process. I've written numerous PMs to the mods ask simple questions and never had a single reply. I think people disagree with others asking for rtds because if they agree kabam made a mistake they would have a hard time defending the argument for not issuing them. There's no right answer here. What bugs me is an individual states his opinion and people are lining up to be jerks just because they disagree. That sort of makes me actually want the damn rtds when I had no actually desire to have some in the first place.

    Saying people are being jerks for strongly disagreeing is no different than me saying everyone else is jerks for disagreeing with me. I do strongly believe the OP and others jumped the gun knowing so much was not cast in stone, regardless of the single comment in question from Miike. I am open minded and am willing to have the debate and am open to having my mind changed, which does happen. Something that should never be expected when creating a thread is for every member to agree with whats said or expect those who disagree to have to sit in silence while other who agree comment freely. People are gonna disagree, doesn't make them "jerks."

    Many of us are just in a strong agreement that RDT's should only be dished out for the purpose they were created for. And that is only when champs are changed. Can argue all day champs were affected by changes in the game. But they weren't changed and still perform the exact same.

    All the arguments against them may make you "sort of" want them. But all argument for them "sort of" makes me wish they were never introduced. Now people demand them every time they are unhappy, make a bad choice, or look for any other reason they can because they got a new champ they don't have resources for. RDT's were never introduced for any of those reasons and has been stated they will hold there original purpose.
  • Options
    DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    Not you in particular but others are damn sure being jerks. If you want to disagree...fine.. actually seen someone say paraphrasing "it's your fault for listening to kabam so you don't deserve them" that's not helpful at all. If you believe that's cool then your part of the problem
  • Options
    R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    DaMunk wrote: »
    Not you in particular but others are damn sure being jerks. If you want to disagree...fine.. actually seen someone say paraphrasing "it's your fault for listening to kabam so you don't deserve them" that's not helpful at all. If you believe that's cool then your part of the problem

    Part of what problem?
  • Options
    DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    I'll rephrase this. I didn't say people were being jerks because they disagreed but being jerks while disagreeing. If your fine with people making those type of comments...thats where I have a problem. Disagree all you want I don't care. I'm all for discussion but there's been a lot of rude ass comments because people are tired of hearing about rtds. Just because your tired of it doesn't make it cool to be a jerk. I totally agree with DNA on this one btw. He writes much better than I do. But think it fine if people want to get on here and start a thread about it too. We might want to start an unpopular thread someday.
  • Options
    I_am_GrootI_am_Groot Posts: 646 ★★
    Here's a solution that's NOT RDT's....are you ready?

    Rank UP tickets! heck yeah. Then we don't even have to rank down the others :smiley:
    You're a genius. Everyone should support it.
Sign In or Register to comment.