I agree with y'all, this tactic wasnt much fun overall, and the team has received feedback highlighting this.
Appreciate you taking the time to respond on their behalf.
That said I’m not a fan of the last official response, being dismissive of the proactive attempts to get them to stop the car heading for the cliff, only to have a 3rd party follow up to tell us those concerns were valid after the car crash.
It’d be nice if the team remembered they could have tapped the breaks at some point. It’s a shame though as what’s done is done and there’s no fair way to compensate those who tired vs. those that took it easy.
What was their latest response?
I quite frankly don’t care if it’s been brought to their attention I care if they’re going to do something about it personally.
So Kabam eventually realized they made a mistake again, they will tune the node slightly although no fundamental change.
I’m also wonder why kabam hire guy like dna3000, this guy wrote extremely long comments and try to make everything in the game reasonable no matter it’s true or not, all he does on the forum is trying to convince other players that their concern is invalid. This will discourage other people to use forum as a channel of communicate with the game team, and poison the game.
So Kabam eventually realized they made a mistake again, they will tune the node slightly although no fundamental change.
I’m also wonder why kabam hire guy like dna3000, this guy wrote extremely long comments and try to make everything in the game reasonable no matter it’s true or not, all he does on the forum is trying to convince other players that their concern is invalid. This will discourage other people to use forum as a channel of communicate with the game team, and poison the game.
As far as I’m aware, Kabam hasn’t hired anyone like me yet.
I do try to make everything in the game reasonable, and I do try to discourage other people to use the forums to poison the game though, I’ll give you that. However, I wouldn’t say I was completely successful with either endeavor.
I think they honestly wanted to make war riskier on the top end. That response made sense to me.
I take issue with the heavy handed approach and absolutely tone deaf response to valid concerns. The usual players doing damage control for them blindly. And the community gets stuck with overturned and ruthless tactics with a lackluster potion economy as our true Xmas gift.
Cool they admitted they made a mistake, and cool they will make it better for the future. But little in the form of an apology or that they learned a lesson. And nothing about making it right to those players that burned resources so they could find out what many warned them about constructively prior to the season. It’s poor customer service at its finest.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
Unfortunately, this is what I saw each time I read a hot post, he always defend the game and make the issue look reasonable, you should know this isn’t correct.
I understand Kabam needs a voice to speak for the game team, but you have to admit top players are the best testers of the game, their concerns are proven to be correct again and again.
lol also let’s not forget… this is a tactic that was not even successful in getting players to engage with it. Instead many looked to subvert it using counters like OG Vision or Juggy or Quake.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
Unfortunately, this is what I saw each time I read a hot post, he always defend the game and make the issue look reasonable, you should know this isn’t correct.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
So Kabam eventually realized they made a mistake again, they will tune the node slightly although no fundamental change.
I’m also wonder why kabam hire guy like dna3000, this guy wrote extremely long comments and try to make everything in the game reasonable no matter it’s true or not, all he does on the forum is trying to convince other players that their concern is invalid. This will discourage other people to use forum as a channel of communicate with the game team, and poison the game.
Tbh im 50/50 with DNA. I agree and disagree with a lot of his points. Main thing is though he doesn’t skip details when he makes his points, which is why you can still have a mutual respect as you know he will keep it constructive and relevant to the thread and addressing its concerns. Ngl i thought he was a full blown kabam employee too at a point, until you see that he is consistently supporting whatever he says with evidence which is important in any argument. Some users speak based off blind opinions no matter what, but DNA will speak based off what is ethical/factual which is definitely more productive for an argument/view, and much appreciated feedback to see what gaps there are in your own points.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
I actually didn't express an opinion about this particular topic in this or really in any other thread. You mentioned me twice in this thread before I said anything, first to point out I hadn't actually offered any defense of the tactics, and then second to claim I defend every decision Kabam makes.
Which seems a bit contradictory, but perhaps that is another language issue.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
Serious question. Do you like the 40% revives in Alliance War that only cost 1 loyalty?
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
I actually didn't express an opinion about this particular topic in this or really in any other thread. You mentioned me twice in this thread before I said anything, first to point out I hadn't actually offered any defense of the tactics, and then second to claim I defend every decision Kabam makes.
Which seems a bit contradictory, but perhaps that is another language issue.
Well, I'm pretty sure you said a few things: - it's hard to change any numbers in the game. At the end, results show that it isn't so hard, Kabam came back from holiday and tune them in less than 2 weeks. - you said in another post, if players think it's expensive and don't want to push, then just don't push. This implies tactics are reasonable, it's not problem of the game.
These are just two examples from the topic I was involved in. I'm pretty sure there are way more examples show that how you are pushing feedbacks away, instead of spending a minute to think.
To be honest, you should learn to express yourself in short reply, go straight to the point, instead of throwing out thousands of words, most of the time, ppl don't have patient to read, you may think you win the argue, the reality is ppl didn't read.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
Serious question. Do you like the 40% revives in Alliance War that only cost 1 loyalty?
If you check my previous posts, you can see I said many times this is ridiculous and a big big mistake. They should fix BOTH potion price and the tacitics, it seems Kabam is trying to do both, which is good.
Calling probably the most helpful person on the forums a shill, a parrot, someone getting paid by the company to spread falsehoods, etc.
Now that's funny.
On the other hand, he did call my posts hot.
no, language issue, my English isn’t good enough, I wanted to say you step in those most concerned posts and try to make the problem not like a problem. This is no good to the game.
I actually didn't express an opinion about this particular topic in this or really in any other thread. You mentioned me twice in this thread before I said anything, first to point out I hadn't actually offered any defense of the tactics, and then second to claim I defend every decision Kabam makes.
Which seems a bit contradictory, but perhaps that is another language issue.
Well, I'm pretty sure you said a few things: - it's hard to change any numbers in the game. At the end, results show that it isn't so hard, Kabam came back from holiday and tune them in less than 2 weeks. - you said in another post, if players think it's expensive and don't want to push, then just don't push. This implies tactics are reasonable, it's not problem of the game.
These are just two examples from the topic I was involved in. I'm pretty sure there are way more examples show that how you are pushing feedbacks away, instead of spending a minute to think.
To be honest, you should learn to express yourself in short reply, go straight to the point, instead of throwing out thousands of words, most of the time, ppl don't have patient to read, you may think you win the argue, the reality is ppl didn't read.
1. I never said it was hard to change numbers. I even said it was easy to change numbers. What I said was that it isn't easy to change them correctly. Especially when it comes to balance or economy changes. As to your narrative that Kabam tuned some numbers in less than two weeks, first, which numbers. And second, how do you know how long it took for them to decide how to tune them?
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
3. It is cute you think you can educate me on communication skills. If I wanted to build an audience of short attention span people, I would spend more time on twitter. I do not write for the illiterate. If you can't sustain reading an amount of words that would not challenge a third grader, you're not the target audience for most of my posts.
When people either complain about, or actually try to make fun of the fact that I use more than a few words in my posts, I *literally* have the same reaction I would have if someone tried to make fun of the fact I have two eyes. I'm aware, on some level, that this was intended to be an insult, but for the life of me I cannot comprehend in what way.
I would not shorten any of those posts by a single word. I'm proud of them, and I'm proud of the fact that others take interest in them. Often, players from totally opposite sides of the playerbase. They get discussed, debated, covered by other content creators, and even acknowledged by the developers. Why would I trade that for adopting a writing style that would require smashing my forehead with a hammer until I started to fit into the average YouTube comment section.
3. It is cute you think you can educate me on communication skills. If I wanted to build an audience of short attention span people, I would spend more time on twitter. I do not write for the illiterate. If you can't sustain reading an amount of words that would not challenge a third grader, you're not the target audience for most of my posts.
When people either complain about, or actually try to make fun of the fact that I use more than a few words in my posts, I *literally* have the same reaction I would have if someone tried to make fun of the fact I have two eyes. I'm aware, on some level, that this was intended to be an insult, but for the life of me I cannot comprehend in what way.
The only comment for this part: "don't be childish" - Kabam Miike
So you basically are saying you never said the tactics are right or wrong, we should just let Kabam find out by themselves by checking data, then what's the point of having the forum? What you are doing now is exactly what I said, trying to push feedbacks away by throwing tons of words.
Is it so hard you for to admit you are wrong on something?
3. It is cute you think you can educate me on communication skills. If I wanted to build an audience of short attention span people, I would spend more time on twitter. I do not write for the illiterate. If you can't sustain reading an amount of words that would not challenge a third grader, you're not the target audience for most of my posts.
When people either complain about, or actually try to make fun of the fact that I use more than a few words in my posts, I *literally* have the same reaction I would have if someone tried to make fun of the fact I have two eyes. I'm aware, on some level, that this was intended to be an insult, but for the life of me I cannot comprehend in what way.
The only comment for this part: "don't be childish" - Kabam Miike
So you basically are saying you never said the tactics are right or wrong, we should just let Kabam find out by themselves by checking data, then what's the point of having the forum? What you are doing now is exactly what I said, trying to push feedbacks away by throwing tons of words.
Is it so hard you for to admit you are wrong on something?
You’re asking me to admit I was wrong about something I have not posted an opinion on.
So yes, that’s pretty hard.
However, I see no purpose in continuing to indulge you in whatever it is you think you’re doing. This thread was not about me until you tried to inject me into it, and perhaps I shouldn’t have taken the bait. I am most certainly not going to engage in a “I know you are but what am I” tussle. I would say that’s what I have nieces and nephews for, but they outgrew that by age six.
3. It is cute you think you can educate me on communication skills. If I wanted to build an audience of short attention span people, I would spend more time on twitter. I do not write for the illiterate. If you can't sustain reading an amount of words that would not challenge a third grader, you're not the target audience for most of my posts.
When people either complain about, or actually try to make fun of the fact that I use more than a few words in my posts, I *literally* have the same reaction I would have if someone tried to make fun of the fact I have two eyes. I'm aware, on some level, that this was intended to be an insult, but for the life of me I cannot comprehend in what way.
The only comment for this part: "don't be childish" - Kabam Miike
So you basically are saying you never said the tactics are right or wrong, we should just let Kabam find out by themselves by checking data, then what's the point of having the forum? What you are doing now is exactly what I said, trying to push feedbacks away by throwing tons of words.
Is it so hard you for to admit you are wrong on something?
You’re asking me to admit I was wrong about something I have not posted an opinion on.
So yes, that’s pretty hard.
However, I see no purpose in continuing to indulge you in whatever it is you think you’re doing. This thread was not about me until you tried to inject me into it, and perhaps I shouldn’t have taken the bait. I am most certainly not going to engage in a “I know you are but what am I” tussle. I would say that’s what I have nieces and nephews for, but they outgrew that by age six.
So you are saying you wrote an entire page comment in another thread to describe your "no opinion"? That's interesting.
I injected you because I want to remind people the results show that feedbacks from the community was right, Kabam and you were wrong. Well you will deny it again, but at least, you have admitted you always try to make everything in the game look reasonable, which is wrong for you position in the forum.
As a result, I'm generally happy with the tuning Kabam is making, although I think they can do better on the potion part. I post my feedbacks and suggestions on forum because I spent my money and time on the game, I want it be better.
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
That works on a personal level, but not at an alliance level. If you're in a top alliance, you're simply letting 29 other people down unless the alliance collectively decides they're not pushing.
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
That works on a personal level, but not at an alliance level. If you're in a top alliance, you're simply letting 29 other people down unless the alliance collectively decides they're not pushing.
That’s true: this is a decision that would have to be made at the alliance level, because it would be problematic to do it at an individual level. This is a power that the players have in general, but individual players cannot always exercise in isolation. However, I think at the tiers the problem most significantly affects, it is far more likely that war decisions are made at the alliance level, and not discoordinated like they tend to be at lower tiers. Not true for everyone, but true often enough for this to not be merely theoretical. If the problem is as widespread as suggested, and disproportionately affects the alliances most likely to be the most coordinated alliances when it comes to war, then this is an option that can be exercised in enough numbers to be noticeable.
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
That works on a personal level, but not at an alliance level. If you're in a top alliance, you're simply letting 29 other people down unless the alliance collectively decides they're not pushing.
That’s true: this is a decision that would have to be made at the alliance level, because it would be problematic to do it at an individual level. This is a power that the players have in general, but individual players cannot always exercise in isolation. However, I think at the tiers the problem most significantly affects, it is far more likely that war decisions are made at the alliance level, and not discoordinated like they tend to be at lower tiers. Not true for everyone, but true often enough for this to not be merely theoretical. If the problem is as widespread as suggested, and disproportionately affects the alliances most likely to be the most coordinated alliances when it comes to war, then this is an option that can be exercised in enough numbers to be noticeable.
Look you wrote a lot of essays here but the matter is that my original post was right on the money. It's my turn now to type a lot and you'll see how it feels.
I said In this thread before that I, as a tier 1 player from a tier 1 alliance, understand better than most that wars ending 0-1 or 0-0 are absurdly stressful. And they take a huge toll on me since I'm an officer an I plan the war map. I have not only the burden of my 5-6-7 fights (usually not more). I have the burden of 50 fights on my shoulders. If I send the wrong counter I send my teammate to die. And at tier 1 a single death can cost the war. That's always the case, no matter if the score is 0-1 or 10-11. A silngle attack bonus can cost the entire war and maybe the entire season.
That said, to reiterate, I agree that an increase on average death count is for the better. It gives people a bit of room to mess up. If you die once it's not all over, yet. I was relieved by this. We're humans, not cyborgs. Sometimes even if we have the right counter and are skilled enough to execute, we make a mistake and die. That happens even to the best so your average tier 1 player must experience this a few times per season. All of this is a point to support kabam's action to increase the difficulty of alliance war. I hope you are following me 'till here.
Now what I pointed out in my original post and again in a few comments well before season even started, just from our testing from off season wars, was that the defense global was not just hard to play. It was too punishing if you made a mistake (instant death) and it was too punishing even if you didn't make a mistake (losing a ton of health to block damage). On the other hand the attack global was more or less irrelevant (no real reward for making good use of it, other than not dying to a single unblockable rooted special to the face). It doesn't take a genius player to notice as much. It doesn't take a ccp highly skilled player who plays this game way more than most of us. All it takes is to take a couple fights in off season, on some random nodes. And you will see that. I remember this back from last off season: I took a power snack (node 39) void (defense global) with jabari panther (attack global, decent counter to void) and he always had a ton of power so I wasn't trying to rely on intercepts because the risk of being punished by a special to the face was pretty high. The fight went fine as long as I kept dodging all his unblockable rooted specials, then all of a sudden for some reason I missed the dex on his sp2 (way easier to dex than his sp1, tbh). Well he had 8 daunted and first hit dealt some 200k crit damage... so I was instantly blown away. It puzzles me how this kind of interaction could possibly escape unnoticed by the developers who created this tactic for us. That said, after experiencing this I decided invuln boost was more or less mandatory in every defense tactic fight, even when using attack tactic.
When I posted to this forum about my doubts on the tactics, many people joined in on the discussion and added their experience to further support my statement that the tactics were unbalanced and the defense tactic was too harsh for the players. Kabam replied with "devs are happy". Well that's the way to show they don't care about our opinion on the subject. And yet we are the ones supporting and playing the game. Without us players, there is no game. Without the game, there is no kabam. So basically I kinda felt disrespected by the lack of consideration for our opinions. But still, I kept playing. And you know why? Because like another guy pointed out before, aw is a content meant for alliances. Alliances are a group of 30 people (most often a group of friends) fighting for the same goal. This topic about the tactic brought a lot of division in my alliance. But after a lot of discussion, the leadershipe decided to push. So we played the season to the best of our capabilities. We had to resort to many many ways to play around the nodes. Most often we brute forced with corvus or herc or cgr or even nimrod (whoever wasn't banned). Sometimes we relied on power control champs like vision (thanks Swedeah for the heads up). Some other times we relied on quake (when she works, if the user is skilled enough, she bypasses everything the defense tactic does). And some other times we relied on champs like scorp who has a built in mechanic where he can apply taunt and then block unblockable specials (basically the attack tactic was giving scorp's ability to the entire attack tactic pool). We also used shuri a lot because if she's duped she can block unblockable specials (no need to intercept for the taunt and all that bs). And for the same reason we also used moleman quite a bit. You know what all these have in common? NONE of these are global attack tactic champs. We used a number of roundabout ways to counter the defense tactic, but most often it was not using global attack tactic. Of course we used some champs from the pool, like mantis or iron man (though he could be used regardless, at least vs mutants, because of his own kit), warlock, crossbones... but we heavily relied on champs not belonging to the attack tactic pool. And why is that? Because the attack tactic was not effective to counter the defense tactic. It takes high skill to always have the intercept ready to apply the taunt. It takes a bit of luck to hope the defender throws a special before the taunt expires (not like it's a 100% taunt which lasts forever). It takes a bit of nerves to resist the impulse to dodge the special, to force yourself to block it despite muscle memory tells you to dodge. And finally even after all that it takes a lot of potions to heal up the crazy amount of block damage (on some nodes more than others, with some defenders more than others). Furthermore, we discovered a few bugged interactions where the daunted which is supposed to only boost the damage from a special attack was boosting damage from every source for the duration of the special attack. So for example if void applied a debuff on you and he threw a special while you had 4 daunted effects, the damage from intimidating presence for the duration of the special would be increased by 120% (30% per daunted effect), if he had 6 daunted then it'd be 180% increase and so on... I believe the special attack damage increase was coded as attack increase. I remember we almost died with mole man to a void on path 4b where you get 2 debuffs on you if he throws a special because moleman was ticking for 5700 per tic for the duration of the special attack, so that was over 11k per second for 3-4 seconds and moleman basically went from 90% to 10% in a single (blocked) special attack. Nice healing back up to full for no particular reason. At least we didn't die that time!
The concern was justified but kabam decided not to take action on our concern.
"Devs are happy"
Well it seems to me like crunching the numbers after war season must have made some of them unhappy.
I know for a fact some top tier alliances decided not to push this season. I know for a fact some lower tiers alliances also decided not to push this season. Many alliances who would regularly waste resources playing aw decided to not bother and just use 40% revives. This means less units spent in war. This means less money spent in war. I can tell all this from personal experience and from discussing the topic with some friends, as well as from reading forum posts. But if I had any doubts I'd get confirmation from the official announcement about season 47 and the plan they discussed for season 48 and forward. What kabam is stating is that basically only tier 1 alliances will bother pushing in aw if it takes so much effort and it wastes so many resources. That's why they plan on separating tier 1 from tier 2. They want to adjust the difficulty in a way that every tier will still try to push because the game mode will look playable enough. But they still wanna make it hard enough that people will have to waste a ton of resources (and possibly money) to be able to push. The slight tune down of the defense tactic and the very slight tune up of the attack tactic for season 47 prove that kabam is aware that they didn't do a good job with season 46. That said, the little effort they put in the tuning proves to be discouraging. Both for season 47 and the next ones. I'm particularly disappointed in the fact that despite all our feedback kabam devs failed to address the ridiculous block damage you take when playing by the nodes. We told them and we kept telling them that it doesn't make sense to be punished for playing the nodes. If you execute well and respect the nodes, you should be rewarded. But no, their answer is that they will let us spend loyalty on bigger potions, so well there you have it problem solved. Just as long as we keep spending, the problem is solved. The core issue of these tactics was addressed in this and other threads even before season 46 started. But even now, over a month later, after all the feedback and the data from last season, the main issue was neglected. So here we are ready to start season 47 with a little bit longer taunt and a little less damaging daunted effect, with sllightly bigger potions available to heal up our fully boosted rank 3 7s/ rank 5 ascended 6s... ready to waste a ton of units (and money) on boosts to push through. Or are we? I know my alliance decided not to push for season 47. The toll on us from season 46 was too much. I know some other tier 1 alliances are getting disbanded altogether. Is it really the best direction for the game mode? We shall see. Regardless of all this, forum guardians should be advocates for our concern. They shouldn't be the ones to dissuade us from voicing our concerns. I was really let down by what happened here. I wasted time and put a lot of effort to prove I wasn't just whining for no reason. To prove my point made sense. To prove that it was in everybody's best interest to do something to fix it... and nothing happened. I must read that we poison the community with negative thoughts and opinions... alright.
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
That works on a personal level, but not at an alliance level. If you're in a top alliance, you're simply letting 29 other people down unless the alliance collectively decides they're not pushing.
That’s true: this is a decision that would have to be made at the alliance level, because it would be problematic to do it at an individual level. This is a power that the players have in general, but individual players cannot always exercise in isolation. However, I think at the tiers the problem most significantly affects, it is far more likely that war decisions are made at the alliance level, and not discoordinated like they tend to be at lower tiers. Not true for everyone, but true often enough for this to not be merely theoretical. If the problem is as widespread as suggested, and disproportionately affects the alliances most likely to be the most coordinated alliances when it comes to war, then this is an option that can be exercised in enough numbers to be noticeable.
Look you wrote a lot of essays here but the matter is that my original post was right on the money. It's my turn now to type a lot and you'll see how it feels.
I said In this thread before that I, as a tier 1 player from a tier 1 alliance, understand better than most that wars ending 0-1 or 0-0 are absurdly stressful. And they take a huge toll on me since I'm an officer an I plan the war map. I have not only the burden of my 5-6-7 fights (usually not more). I have the burden of 50 fights on my shoulders. If I send the wrong counter I send my teammate to die. And at tier 1 a single death can cost the war. That's always the case, no matter if the score is 0-1 or 10-11. A silngle attack bonus can cost the entire war and maybe the entire season.
That said, to reiterate, I agree that an increase on average death count is for the better. It gives people a bit of room to mess up. If you die once it's not all over, yet. I was relieved by this. We're humans, not cyborgs. Sometimes even if we have the right counter and are skilled enough to execute, we make a mistake and die. That happens even to the best so your average tier 1 player must experience this a few times per season. All of this is a point to support kabam's action to increase the difficulty of alliance war. I hope you are following me 'till here.
Now what I pointed out in my original post and again in a few comments well before season even started, just from our testing from off season wars, was that the defense global was not just hard to play. It was too punishing if you made a mistake (instant death) and it was too punishing even if you didn't make a mistake (losing a ton of health to block damage). On the other hand the attack global was more or less irrelevant (no real reward for making good use of it, other than not dying to a single unblockable rooted special to the face). It doesn't take a genius player to notice as much. It doesn't take a ccp highly skilled player who plays this game way more than most of us. All it takes is to take a couple fights in off season, on some random nodes. And you will see that. I remember this back from last off season: I took a power snack (node 39) void (defense global) with jabari panther (attack global, decent counter to void) and he always had a ton of power so I wasn't trying to rely on intercepts because the risk of being punished by a special to the face was pretty high. The fight went fine as long as I kept dodging all his unblockable rooted specials, then all of a sudden for some reason I missed the dex on his sp2 (way easier to dex than his sp1, tbh). Well he had 8 daunted and first hit dealt some 200k crit damage... so I was instantly blown away. It puzzles me how this kind of interaction could possibly escape unnoticed by the developers who created this tactic for us. That said, after experiencing this I decided invuln boost was more or less mandatory in every defense tactic fight, even when using attack tactic.
When I posted to this forum about my doubts on the tactics, many people joined in on the discussion and added their experience to further support my statement that the tactics were unbalanced and the defense tactic was too harsh for the players. Kabam replied with "devs are happy". Well that's the way to show they don't care about our opinion on the subject. And yet we are the ones supporting and playing the game. Without us players, there is no game. Without the game, there is no kabam. So basically I kinda felt disrespected by the lack of consideration for our opinions. But still, I kept playing. And you know why? Because like another guy pointed out before, aw is a content meant for alliances. Alliances are a group of 30 people (most often a group of friends) fighting for the same goal. This topic about the tactic brought a lot of division in my alliance. But after a lot of discussion, the leadershipe decided to push. So we played the season to the best of our capabilities. We had to resort to many many ways to play around the nodes. Most often we brute forced with corvus or herc or cgr or even nimrod (whoever wasn't banned). Sometimes we relied on power control champs like vision (thanks Swedeah for the heads up). Some other times we relied on quake (when she works, if the user is skilled enough, she bypasses everything the defense tactic does). And some other times we relied on champs like scorp who has a built in mechanic where he can apply taunt and then block unblockable specials (basically the attack tactic was giving scorp's ability to the entire attack tactic pool). We also used shuri a lot because if she's duped she can block unblockable specials (no need to intercept for the taunt and all that bs). And for the same reason we also used moleman quite a bit. You know what all these have in common? NONE of these are global attack tactic champs. We used a number of roundabout ways to counter the defense tactic, but most often it was not using global attack tactic. Of course we used some champs from the pool, like mantis or iron man (though he could be used regardless, at least vs mutants, because of his own kit), warlock, crossbones... but we heavily relied on champs not belonging to the attack tactic pool. And why is that? Because the attack tactic was not effective to counter the defense tactic. It takes high skill to always have the intercept ready to apply the taunt. It takes a bit of luck to hope the defender throws a special before the taunt expires (not like it's a 100% taunt which lasts forever). It takes a bit of nerves to resist the impulse to dodge the special, to force yourself to block it despite muscle memory tells you to dodge. And finally even after all that it takes a lot of potions to heal up the crazy amount of block damage (on some nodes more than others, with some defenders more than others). Furthermore, we discovered a few bugged interactions where the daunted which is supposed to only boost the damage from a special attack was boosting damage from every source for the duration of the special attack. So for example if void applied a debuff on you and he threw a special while you had 4 daunted effects, the damage from intimidating presence for the duration of the special would be increased by 120% (30% per daunted effect), if he had 6 daunted then it'd be 180% increase and so on... I believe the special attack damage increase was coded as attack increase. I remember we almost died with mole man to a void on path 4b where you get 2 debuffs on you if he throws a special because moleman was ticking for 5700 per tic for the duration of the special attack, so that was over 11k per second for 3-4 seconds and moleman basically went from 90% to 10% in a single (blocked) special attack. Nice healing back up to full for no particular reason. At least we didn't die that time!
The concern was justified but kabam decided not to take action on our concern.
"Devs are happy"
Well it seems to me like crunching the numbers after war season must have made some of them unhappy.
I know for a fact some top tier alliances decided not to push this season. I know for a fact some lower tiers alliances also decided not to push this season. Many alliances who would regularly waste resources playing aw decided to not bother and just use 40% revives. This means less units spent in war. This means less money spent in war. I can tell all this from personal experience and from discussing the topic with some friends, as well as from reading forum posts. But if I had any doubts I'd get confirmation from the official announcement about season 47 and the plan they discussed for season 48 and forward. What kabam is stating is that basically only tier 1 alliances will bother pushing in aw if it takes so much effort and it wastes so many resources. That's why they plan on separating tier 1 from tier 2. They want to adjust the difficulty in a way that every tier will still try to push because the game mode will look playable enough. But they still wanna make it hard enough that people will have to waste a ton of resources (and possibly money) to be able to push. The slight tune down of the defense tactic and the very slight tune up of the attack tactic for season 47 prove that kabam is aware that they didn't do a good job with season 46. That said, the little effort they put in the tuning proves to be discouraging. Both for season 47 and the next ones. I'm particularly disappointed in the fact that despite all our feedback kabam devs failed to address the ridiculous block damage you take when playing by the nodes. We told them and we kept telling them that it doesn't make sense to be punished for playing the nodes. If you execute well and respect the nodes, you should be rewarded. But no, their answer is that they will let us spend loyalty on bigger potions, so well there you have it problem solved. Just as long as we keep spending, the problem is solved. The core issue of these tactics was addressed in this and other threads even before season 46 started. But even now, over a month later, after all the feedback and the data from last season, the main issue was neglected. So here we are ready to start season 47 with a little bit longer taunt and a little less damaging daunted effect, with sllightly bigger potions available to heal up our fully boosted rank 3 7s/ rank 5 ascended 6s... ready to waste a ton of units (and money) on boosts to push through. Or are we? I know my alliance decided not to push for season 47. The toll on us from season 46 was too much. I know some other tier 1 alliances are getting disbanded altogether. Is it really the best direction for the game mode? We shall see. Regardless of all this, forum guardians should be advocates for our concern. They shouldn't be the ones to dissuade us from voicing our concerns. I was really let down by what happened here. I wasted time and put a lot of effort to prove I wasn't just whining for no reason. To prove my point made sense. To prove that it was in everybody's best interest to do something to fix it... and nothing happened. I must read that we poison the community with negative thoughts and opinions... alright.
Honestly I respect that. Tier 1 players have a lot on their plate already and seem to be getting milked with things like raids just releasing and seemingly impossible tactics occurring all in one shot after banquet event last month as well. War is always a game mode that should be rewarded for skill and experience rather than who has the most units for potions. You guys have it rough currently, kudos to your alliance for making the best call.
Look you wrote a lot of essays here but the matter is that my original post was right on the money. It's my turn now to type a lot and you'll see how it feels.
Feels like you had a lot to say. Which is perfectly fine.
And to be honest, I agree with a lot of it. As I said repeatedly, and perhaps you didn't read the entire thread and thus aren't aware of, I haven't posted any particular opinion about this seasons tactics. Mainly because I don't participate in tier 1 war, so I didn't feel my opinion was especially relevant. From what I've seen of it on paper and what I know from discussing it with players who do participate, it seems rather broken. But I don't think my saying it is broken is especially meaningful, so I left it to others to discuss their experiences with it.
It was another poster who tried to make the argument that I was stifling discussion about this, because of comments I've made elsewhere in completely different contexts which themselves have nothing to do with stifling discussion. When people express their opinions on a subject, for the most part I don't post just to contradict them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions when it comes to preferences. When people want things to be easier, harder, less rewarding, more rewarding, less expensive, those are preferences. Only they know what those are and everyone should feel free to express preferences.
But a lot of people can't just express their preferences. It isn't enough to say, for example, "I feel these potions should be cheaper." They have to try to make it seem like their preferences are universal, obvious, and everyone should agree with them. They don't just want potions to be cheaper, they say that the making them cheaper is the easiest thing in the world, and because the devs don't do what is obviously trivially easy to do, they must be stupid, greedy, or cruel. These are now statements of fact that are either true or false, and refutable. In those cases, sometimes I refute them. To some, this makes me the enemy. Because if (some of) the players want something, they can say anything they want to try to get it because they are on the Right Side, and anyone who disagrees with anything they say, even if it is 2+2=5, is the enemy because they are on the Wrong Side. I reject this attitude, and if that makes me their enemy, so be it.
Getting to the meat of your complaint. Personally, I have often stated that if I have a fundamental gripe with not just this dev team, but *most* game dev teams, it is the religious belief that incremental design means you can release anything and just tweak it later. That's a radical oversimplification, but there is a lot of truth to the statement that the way devs know they've made a mistake is when the fire reaches the second floor. If there is one thing I could wave a magic wand and change, everywhere across the games as a service industry, it would be that. And I know there is probably at least a few professional game developers reading this now thinking I'm just a little bit naive for saying it.
Until that magic wand appears, however, that's the world we live in. Players have to understand that complaints are factored in. They know complaints will happen, so complaining by itself will have limited impact unless it is accompanied by either extremely convincing arguments or changes in player behavior or both. I am not someone who claims that complaints don't matter. I'm someone that has gotten Kabam to acknowledge and even act on complaints. I know how difficult it is to cut through the noise and get noticed, and how hard it is to make suggestions the devs have any chance to act upon. When I see a discussion that might lead in productive ways, I try to advise on what I believe the best strategies for taking that discussion into productive directions might be.
I actually read your original post when you originally posted it and thought it was well written in general. I found it convincing. However, as I said, I didn't really feel I had anything material to add to it. If it was about something I actually had direct experience with, I would have tried to contribute to it. In any event, I don't know if you have some direct misunderstanding about how I view feedback posts or if you're just reacting to the opinions of others, but personally, I'm all for it. The forums could use people willing to spend more time expressing feedback thoughtfully and with detail, and especially without histrionics. I didn't see any cash grabs, any slaps to the face, any claims game design is easy or the devs are idiots. Just thoughts supported by facts. If I was a tier 1/2 player, it is the sort of post I might have forwarded to the devs.
Giving feedback is a marathon, not a sprint. The devs are not going to acknowledge everything you write. The devs are not going to act upon every suggestion you make. But they do read and they do listen. They remember who makes calm, logical arguments and who is just looking to go off the rails. If you make the kind of post you made at the start of this thread on a regular basis, you will make a difference. The hard part is doing it thanklessly. The forums won't always be on your side. The devs won't always visibly react to them. You have to have faith that that kind of post ultimately wins. Almost no one can sustain it for long.
Just know this. Even your dig at me above, I read in its entirety. Whether you believe it or not, I get it. Except for needing a few more paragraph boundaries, even that rant was more readable than a lot of the posts I see on the forums. The question you have to ask is: are you done? You see a problem, and you don't think the devs are doing what they need to do to solve it. What's next?
Another typical dna style of pushing feedbacks away, everyone else’s comment, I can see their point straightaway, no matter its long or short, but this guy, a big pile of texts of “no opinion “, then why bother to say it. It’s a horrible way of communicating with customers, and yeah, it’s also the first time I saw a hired guy call customers poison their product, brilliant!
i've played many seasons in t1 so i understand what it takes to survive. except for the very very top, t1 players aren't anymore special than the rest, they're just more disciplined, organized, and well prepared. a difficult map hurts them just as much and they also feel the pain of healing and using items.
by breaking up t1 and t2, kabam seems to be taking the approach of "tough s***. t1 players are supposed to be the best so we will do what we want, if they don't like it they can move down".
i know seasoned hardcore fans of war who hate it now after season 46 and keeping t1 as is will only hurt the mode and lead to disbanded alliances and retirement mode for players.
last season was demoralizing and bandaid solutions like slightly better potions or splitting the maps won't fix the problem, but i guess they've made up their mind.
Comments
This is why devs are happy
What was their latest response?
I quite frankly don’t care if it’s been brought to their attention I care if they’re going to do something about it personally.
I’m also wonder why kabam hire guy like dna3000, this guy wrote extremely long comments and try to make everything in the game reasonable no matter it’s true or not, all he does on the forum is trying to convince other players that their concern is invalid. This will discourage other people to use forum as a channel of communicate with the game team, and poison the game.
I do try to make everything in the game reasonable, and I do try to discourage other people to use the forums to poison the game though, I’ll give you that. However, I wouldn’t say I was completely successful with either endeavor.
I take issue with the heavy handed approach and absolutely tone deaf response to valid concerns. The usual players doing damage control for them blindly. And the community gets stuck with overturned and ruthless tactics with a lackluster potion economy as our true Xmas gift.
Cool they admitted they made a mistake, and cool they will make it better for the future. But little in the form of an apology or that they learned a lesson. And nothing about making it right to those players that burned resources so they could find out what many warned them about constructively prior to the season. It’s poor customer service at its finest.
Now that's funny.
I understand Kabam needs a voice to speak for the game team, but you have to admit top players are the best testers of the game, their concerns are proven to be correct again and again.
Which seems a bit contradictory, but perhaps that is another language issue.
- it's hard to change any numbers in the game. At the end, results show that it isn't so hard, Kabam came back from holiday and tune them in less than 2 weeks.
- you said in another post, if players think it's expensive and don't want to push, then just don't push. This implies tactics are reasonable, it's not problem of the game.
These are just two examples from the topic I was involved in. I'm pretty sure there are way more examples show that how you are pushing feedbacks away, instead of spending a minute to think.
To be honest, you should learn to express yourself in short reply, go straight to the point, instead of throwing out thousands of words, most of the time, ppl don't have patient to read, you may think you win the argue, the reality is ppl didn't read.
They should fix BOTH potion price and the tacitics, it seems Kabam is trying to do both, which is good.
2. I've said repeatedly that if players think something is too expensive, they should act upon that belief by not spending in a lot of contexts. I'm assuming here you mean in the context of war. This does not mean that the current set of tactics are reasonable. As a matter of fact, I very explicitly stated that *if* players think a tactic is unreasonable, a valid response to communicate that fact to the developers is to stop spending to work around it. *Spending* on a tactic you think is unfair communicates the impression you think it is fine, because you're willing to spend to work around it, so the costs are worth the rewards. Not spending sends the signal that the tactics aren't fair, because with those tactics it is not worth spending for those rewards anymore, because the costs have become too high.
The developers give every player a vote. But they count actions as worth a thousand times more votes than complaints.
3. It is cute you think you can educate me on communication skills. If I wanted to build an audience of short attention span people, I would spend more time on twitter. I do not write for the illiterate. If you can't sustain reading an amount of words that would not challenge a third grader, you're not the target audience for most of my posts.
When people either complain about, or actually try to make fun of the fact that I use more than a few words in my posts, I *literally* have the same reaction I would have if someone tried to make fun of the fact I have two eyes. I'm aware, on some level, that this was intended to be an insult, but for the life of me I cannot comprehend in what way.
I can aim for a huge number of followers eagerly awaiting my next twelve word drool. Or, I can aim higher. I can try to be entertaining. I can try to be informative. I can try to advocate for change. I can try to shed light on problems and suggest ways to fix them. I can be critical, and I can also explain why things that seem broken aren't, and even how players can sometimes learn to fix things themselves.
I would not shorten any of those posts by a single word. I'm proud of them, and I'm proud of the fact that others take interest in them. Often, players from totally opposite sides of the playerbase. They get discussed, debated, covered by other content creators, and even acknowledged by the developers. Why would I trade that for adopting a writing style that would require smashing my forehead with a hammer until I started to fit into the average YouTube comment section.
Nah, I'm good.
"don't be childish" - Kabam Miike
So you basically are saying you never said the tactics are right or wrong, we should just let Kabam find out by themselves by checking data, then what's the point of having the forum? What you are doing now is exactly what I said, trying to push feedbacks away by throwing tons of words.
Is it so hard you for to admit you are wrong on something?
So yes, that’s pretty hard.
However, I see no purpose in continuing to indulge you in whatever it is you think you’re doing. This thread was not about me until you tried to inject me into it, and perhaps I shouldn’t have taken the bait. I am most certainly not going to engage in a “I know you are but what am I” tussle. I would say that’s what I have nieces and nephews for, but they outgrew that by age six.
I injected you because I want to remind people the results show that feedbacks from the community was right, Kabam and you were wrong. Well you will deny it again, but at least, you have admitted you always try to make everything in the game look reasonable, which is wrong for you position in the forum.
As a result, I'm generally happy with the tuning Kabam is making, although I think they can do better on the potion part. I post my feedbacks and suggestions on forum because I spent my money and time on the game, I want it be better.
I said In this thread before that I, as a tier 1 player from a tier 1 alliance, understand better than most that wars ending 0-1 or 0-0 are absurdly stressful. And they take a huge toll on me since I'm an officer an I plan the war map. I have not only the burden of my 5-6-7 fights (usually not more). I have the burden of 50 fights on my shoulders. If I send the wrong counter I send my teammate to die. And at tier 1 a single death can cost the war. That's always the case, no matter if the score is 0-1 or 10-11. A silngle attack bonus can cost the entire war and maybe the entire season.
That said, to reiterate, I agree that an increase on average death count is for the better. It gives people a bit of room to mess up. If you die once it's not all over, yet. I was relieved by this. We're humans, not cyborgs. Sometimes even if we have the right counter and are skilled enough to execute, we make a mistake and die. That happens even to the best so your average tier 1 player must experience this a few times per season.
All of this is a point to support kabam's action to increase the difficulty of alliance war. I hope you are following me 'till here.
Now what I pointed out in my original post and again in a few comments well before season even started, just from our testing from off season wars, was that the defense global was not just hard to play. It was too punishing if you made a mistake (instant death) and it was too punishing even if you didn't make a mistake (losing a ton of health to block damage). On the other hand the attack global was more or less irrelevant (no real reward for making good use of it, other than not dying to a single unblockable rooted special to the face). It doesn't take a genius player to notice as much. It doesn't take a ccp highly skilled player who plays this game way more than most of us. All it takes is to take a couple fights in off season, on some random nodes. And you will see that. I remember this back from last off season: I took a power snack (node 39) void (defense global) with jabari panther (attack global, decent counter to void) and he always had a ton of power so I wasn't trying to rely on intercepts because the risk of being punished by a special to the face was pretty high. The fight went fine as long as I kept dodging all his unblockable rooted specials, then all of a sudden for some reason I missed the dex on his sp2 (way easier to dex than his sp1, tbh). Well he had 8 daunted and first hit dealt some 200k crit damage... so I was instantly blown away. It puzzles me how this kind of interaction could possibly escape unnoticed by the developers who created this tactic for us. That said, after experiencing this I decided invuln boost was more or less mandatory in every defense tactic fight, even when using attack tactic.
When I posted to this forum about my doubts on the tactics, many people joined in on the discussion and added their experience to further support my statement that the tactics were unbalanced and the defense tactic was too harsh for the players. Kabam replied with "devs are happy". Well that's the way to show they don't care about our opinion on the subject. And yet we are the ones supporting and playing the game. Without us players, there is no game. Without the game, there is no kabam. So basically I kinda felt disrespected by the lack of consideration for our opinions. But still, I kept playing. And you know why? Because like another guy pointed out before, aw is a content meant for alliances. Alliances are a group of 30 people (most often a group of friends) fighting for the same goal. This topic about the tactic brought a lot of division in my alliance. But after a lot of discussion, the leadershipe decided to push. So we played the season to the best of our capabilities. We had to resort to many many ways to play around the nodes. Most often we brute forced with corvus or herc or cgr or even nimrod (whoever wasn't banned). Sometimes we relied on power control champs like vision (thanks Swedeah for the heads up). Some other times we relied on quake (when she works, if the user is skilled enough, she bypasses everything the defense tactic does). And some other times we relied on champs like scorp who has a built in mechanic where he can apply taunt and then block unblockable specials (basically the attack tactic was giving scorp's ability to the entire attack tactic pool). We also used shuri a lot because if she's duped she can block unblockable specials (no need to intercept for the taunt and all that bs). And for the same reason we also used moleman quite a bit. You know what all these have in common? NONE of these are global attack tactic champs. We used a number of roundabout ways to counter the defense tactic, but most often it was not using global attack tactic. Of course we used some champs from the pool, like mantis or iron man (though he could be used regardless, at least vs mutants, because of his own kit), warlock, crossbones... but we heavily relied on champs not belonging to the attack tactic pool. And why is that? Because the attack tactic was not effective to counter the defense tactic. It takes high skill to always have the intercept ready to apply the taunt. It takes a bit of luck to hope the defender throws a special before the taunt expires (not like it's a 100% taunt which lasts forever). It takes a bit of nerves to resist the impulse to dodge the special, to force yourself to block it despite muscle memory tells you to dodge. And finally even after all that it takes a lot of potions to heal up the crazy amount of block damage (on some nodes more than others, with some defenders more than others). Furthermore, we discovered a few bugged interactions where the daunted which is supposed to only boost the damage from a special attack was boosting damage from every source for the duration of the special attack. So for example if void applied a debuff on you and he threw a special while you had 4 daunted effects, the damage from intimidating presence for the duration of the special would be increased by 120% (30% per daunted effect), if he had 6 daunted then it'd be 180% increase and so on... I believe the special attack damage increase was coded as attack increase. I remember we almost died with mole man to a void on path 4b where you get 2 debuffs on you if he throws a special because moleman was ticking for 5700 per tic for the duration of the special attack, so that was over 11k per second for 3-4 seconds and moleman basically went from 90% to 10% in a single (blocked) special attack. Nice healing back up to full for no particular reason. At least we didn't die that time!
The concern was justified but kabam decided not to take action on our concern.
"Devs are happy"
Well it seems to me like crunching the numbers after war season must have made some of them unhappy.
I know for a fact some top tier alliances decided not to push this season. I know for a fact some lower tiers alliances also decided not to push this season. Many alliances who would regularly waste resources playing aw decided to not bother and just use 40% revives. This means less units spent in war. This means less money spent in war. I can tell all this from personal experience and from discussing the topic with some friends, as well as from reading forum posts. But if I had any doubts I'd get confirmation from the official announcement about season 47 and the plan they discussed for season 48 and forward. What kabam is stating is that basically only tier 1 alliances will bother pushing in aw if it takes so much effort and it wastes so many resources. That's why they plan on separating tier 1 from tier 2. They want to adjust the difficulty in a way that every tier will still try to push because the game mode will look playable enough. But they still wanna make it hard enough that people will have to waste a ton of resources (and possibly money) to be able to push. The slight tune down of the defense tactic and the very slight tune up of the attack tactic for season 47 prove that kabam is aware that they didn't do a good job with season 46. That said, the little effort they put in the tuning proves to be discouraging. Both for season 47 and the next ones. I'm particularly disappointed in the fact that despite all our feedback kabam devs failed to address the ridiculous block damage you take when playing by the nodes. We told them and we kept telling them that it doesn't make sense to be punished for playing the nodes. If you execute well and respect the nodes, you should be rewarded. But no, their answer is that they will let us spend loyalty on bigger potions, so well there you have it problem solved. Just as long as we keep spending, the problem is solved. The core issue of these tactics was addressed in this and other threads even before season 46 started. But even now, over a month later, after all the feedback and the data from last season, the main issue was neglected. So here we are ready to start season 47 with a little bit longer taunt and a little less damaging daunted effect, with sllightly bigger potions available to heal up our fully boosted rank 3 7s/ rank 5 ascended 6s... ready to waste a ton of units (and money) on boosts to push through. Or are we? I know my alliance decided not to push for season 47. The toll on us from season 46 was too much. I know some other tier 1 alliances are getting disbanded altogether. Is it really the best direction for the game mode? We shall see. Regardless of all this, forum guardians should be advocates for our concern. They shouldn't be the ones to dissuade us from voicing our concerns. I was really let down by what happened here. I wasted time and put a lot of effort to prove I wasn't just whining for no reason. To prove my point made sense. To prove that it was in everybody's best interest to do something to fix it... and nothing happened. I must read that we poison the community with negative thoughts and opinions... alright.
And to be honest, I agree with a lot of it. As I said repeatedly, and perhaps you didn't read the entire thread and thus aren't aware of, I haven't posted any particular opinion about this seasons tactics. Mainly because I don't participate in tier 1 war, so I didn't feel my opinion was especially relevant. From what I've seen of it on paper and what I know from discussing it with players who do participate, it seems rather broken. But I don't think my saying it is broken is especially meaningful, so I left it to others to discuss their experiences with it.
It was another poster who tried to make the argument that I was stifling discussion about this, because of comments I've made elsewhere in completely different contexts which themselves have nothing to do with stifling discussion. When people express their opinions on a subject, for the most part I don't post just to contradict them. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions when it comes to preferences. When people want things to be easier, harder, less rewarding, more rewarding, less expensive, those are preferences. Only they know what those are and everyone should feel free to express preferences.
But a lot of people can't just express their preferences. It isn't enough to say, for example, "I feel these potions should be cheaper." They have to try to make it seem like their preferences are universal, obvious, and everyone should agree with them. They don't just want potions to be cheaper, they say that the making them cheaper is the easiest thing in the world, and because the devs don't do what is obviously trivially easy to do, they must be stupid, greedy, or cruel. These are now statements of fact that are either true or false, and refutable. In those cases, sometimes I refute them. To some, this makes me the enemy. Because if (some of) the players want something, they can say anything they want to try to get it because they are on the Right Side, and anyone who disagrees with anything they say, even if it is 2+2=5, is the enemy because they are on the Wrong Side. I reject this attitude, and if that makes me their enemy, so be it.
Getting to the meat of your complaint. Personally, I have often stated that if I have a fundamental gripe with not just this dev team, but *most* game dev teams, it is the religious belief that incremental design means you can release anything and just tweak it later. That's a radical oversimplification, but there is a lot of truth to the statement that the way devs know they've made a mistake is when the fire reaches the second floor. If there is one thing I could wave a magic wand and change, everywhere across the games as a service industry, it would be that. And I know there is probably at least a few professional game developers reading this now thinking I'm just a little bit naive for saying it.
Until that magic wand appears, however, that's the world we live in. Players have to understand that complaints are factored in. They know complaints will happen, so complaining by itself will have limited impact unless it is accompanied by either extremely convincing arguments or changes in player behavior or both. I am not someone who claims that complaints don't matter. I'm someone that has gotten Kabam to acknowledge and even act on complaints. I know how difficult it is to cut through the noise and get noticed, and how hard it is to make suggestions the devs have any chance to act upon. When I see a discussion that might lead in productive ways, I try to advise on what I believe the best strategies for taking that discussion into productive directions might be.
I actually read your original post when you originally posted it and thought it was well written in general. I found it convincing. However, as I said, I didn't really feel I had anything material to add to it. If it was about something I actually had direct experience with, I would have tried to contribute to it. In any event, I don't know if you have some direct misunderstanding about how I view feedback posts or if you're just reacting to the opinions of others, but personally, I'm all for it. The forums could use people willing to spend more time expressing feedback thoughtfully and with detail, and especially without histrionics. I didn't see any cash grabs, any slaps to the face, any claims game design is easy or the devs are idiots. Just thoughts supported by facts. If I was a tier 1/2 player, it is the sort of post I might have forwarded to the devs.
Giving feedback is a marathon, not a sprint. The devs are not going to acknowledge everything you write. The devs are not going to act upon every suggestion you make. But they do read and they do listen. They remember who makes calm, logical arguments and who is just looking to go off the rails. If you make the kind of post you made at the start of this thread on a regular basis, you will make a difference. The hard part is doing it thanklessly. The forums won't always be on your side. The devs won't always visibly react to them. You have to have faith that that kind of post ultimately wins. Almost no one can sustain it for long.
Just know this. Even your dig at me above, I read in its entirety. Whether you believe it or not, I get it. Except for needing a few more paragraph boundaries, even that rant was more readable than a lot of the posts I see on the forums. The question you have to ask is: are you done? You see a problem, and you don't think the devs are doing what they need to do to solve it. What's next?
It’s a horrible way of communicating with customers, and yeah, it’s also the first time I saw a hired guy call customers poison their product, brilliant!
by breaking up t1 and t2, kabam seems to be taking the approach of "tough s***. t1 players are supposed to be the best so we will do what we want, if they don't like it they can move down".
i know seasoned hardcore fans of war who hate it now after season 46 and keeping t1 as is will only hurt the mode and lead to disbanded alliances and retirement mode for players.
last season was demoralizing and bandaid solutions like slightly better potions or splitting the maps won't fix the problem, but i guess they've made up their mind.