LAUNCHING JULY 15: Peak Milestones and Alliance Quests Update Discussion Thread

179111213

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,044 ★★★★★
    vrto wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    You can paint it as you want, some changes were activated, other changes weren't, I don't understand why and I had my share of 6 months profiling and hacking Android kernel so my (most probably faulty) Nexus 5X wouldn't reach up to 70ºC running the game! Now imagine who doesn't know a thing about the matter, oh wait you are not DNA3000...

    I'm not painting anything. Just the opposite, actually. I'm using Turpentine.
  • every time this game is updated the lags become worst, I've been fighting GHOST and from start to finish the whole battle lags really bad, I need all my potions both health and revive back that I've lost because the game is glitching.
  • DrZolaDrZola Posts: 3,316 ★★★★★
    edited July 2018
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    The one time there was an update the players wanted.. you delay it over a minor issue effecting a minority of players..

    Business 101 failed

    If any business course in the country is currently advocating enabling new features in a widely deployed software system build that shows instability and functionality problems on the margins soon after deployment, I would recommend getting a refund on your tuition and using the funds to set the campus on fire.

    Absolutely made me laugh. Burn, baby, burn.

    How I wish a few of you software engineers could take an in depth look at the actual coding for the game. I suspect its architecture would make Rube Goldberg shudder.

    Dr. Zola
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 755 ★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.
  • DNA3000 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    The one time there was an update the players wanted.. you delay it over a minor issue effecting a minority of players..

    Business 101 failed

    If any business course in the country is currently advocating enabling new features in a widely deployed software system build that shows instability and functionality problems on the margins soon after deployment, I would recommend getting a refund on your tuition and using the funds to set the campus on fire.

    Come on, you are not GroundedWisdom! Calling these new features is a push, at most enhancements, specially the glory store update! Meanwhile the AW map update is on... I'm sure there is a good reason for such delays, yet I can't understand how these may interfere, a more detailed justification would be appreciated!

    There have been many times in the past when activating new features, even apparently innocuous ones on the surface, caused significant problems with both clients and servers (like, almost every time). Although Kabam has often moved forward with their scheduled updates regardless, that doesn't make it the safe or reasonable thing to do in general. And if someone is teaching otherwise in some MIS course somewhere, I am deadly serious that I'd like to know who and where, so I can try to talk them out of a career in academia. It just makes my profession look like it is filled with more idiots than it already is.

    You have missed the point... twice! Out of curiosity, why do you always brag about software engineering knowledge? You certainly know that many in the community are on same "field", and there is always someone who know more/better... Honestly, I enjoy many of your community interactions, yet being a very experienced software engineer (and architect) myself, working at a highly appraised core dev team, have to note your recurrent brag as something you should really nerf. Please take it as constructive criticism.

    The fact that you find statements about fundamental operational best practices to be a "brag" suggests to me the value of those appraisals are suspect. However, if you feel you have some superior knowledge of the subject you feel compelled to educate me on, I'm perfectly willing to have that discussion off-thread.

    You now failed to justify the activation of game engine related changes, while non game engine related changes were postponed THREE times. I recall that issue reports are wrt performance and overheating so please cut the BS, and recall you are the one calling other people idiots and questioning appraisals... It was just a constructive criticism yet please move on to the subject in discussion.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,044 ★★★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.

    They've maintained from the start of the changes that completing the Map should be rare. As for specific comments, it's been said over and over since the introduction of Diversity that people are constantly reaching 100%, and the Win is determined by a small number of Points. Now, whether the Search Function will find them or not, I can't go back that far in my memory. I'm sure other people have read the same. Regardless, that was the argument. Everyone hits 100%, and Wars are won by a few Points in Diversity. Until they reneged on the removal of it, Diversity was also set to go. I'm usually present, so I have a clear memory of the argument.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 755 ★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.

    They've maintained from the start of the changes that completing the Map should be rare. As for specific comments, it's been said over and over since the introduction of Diversity that people are constantly reaching 100%, and the Win is determined by a small number of Points. Now, whether the Search Function will find them or not, I can't go back that far in my memory. I'm sure other people have read the same. Regardless, that was the argument. Everyone hits 100%, and Wars are won by a few Points in Diversity. Until they reneged on the removal of it, Diversity was also set to go. I'm usually present, so I have a clear memory of the argument.

    Wow you can twist words some strange ways.

    So no one actually complained it was too easy but that diversity was a ridiculous medium for deciding a winner.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,044 ★★★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.

    They've maintained from the start of the changes that completing the Map should be rare. As for specific comments, it's been said over and over since the introduction of Diversity that people are constantly reaching 100%, and the Win is determined by a small number of Points. Now, whether the Search Function will find them or not, I can't go back that far in my memory. I'm sure other people have read the same. Regardless, that was the argument. Everyone hits 100%, and Wars are won by a few Points in Diversity. Until they reneged on the removal of it, Diversity was also set to go. I'm usually present, so I have a clear memory of the argument.

    Wow you can twist words some strange ways.

    So no one actually complained it was too easy but that diversity was a ridiculous medium for deciding a winner.

    People have complained the Map was easy. Yes. I don't have time to go on a Scavenger Hunt for comments to appease doubt.
    If people are hitting 100%, then it would be too easy as per their goal of making it rare.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,692 Guardian
    vrto wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    The one time there was an update the players wanted.. you delay it over a minor issue effecting a minority of players..

    Business 101 failed

    If any business course in the country is currently advocating enabling new features in a widely deployed software system build that shows instability and functionality problems on the margins soon after deployment, I would recommend getting a refund on your tuition and using the funds to set the campus on fire.

    Come on, you are not GroundedWisdom! Calling these new features is a push, at most enhancements, specially the glory store update! Meanwhile the AW map update is on... I'm sure there is a good reason for such delays, yet I can't understand how these may interfere, a more detailed justification would be appreciated!

    There have been many times in the past when activating new features, even apparently innocuous ones on the surface, caused significant problems with both clients and servers (like, almost every time). Although Kabam has often moved forward with their scheduled updates regardless, that doesn't make it the safe or reasonable thing to do in general. And if someone is teaching otherwise in some MIS course somewhere, I am deadly serious that I'd like to know who and where, so I can try to talk them out of a career in academia. It just makes my profession look like it is filled with more idiots than it already is.

    You have missed the point... twice! Out of curiosity, why do you always brag about software engineering knowledge? You certainly know that many in the community are on same "field", and there is always someone who know more/better... Honestly, I enjoy many of your community interactions, yet being a very experienced software engineer (and architect) myself, working at a highly appraised core dev team, have to note your recurrent brag as something you should really nerf. Please take it as constructive criticism.

    The fact that you find statements about fundamental operational best practices to be a "brag" suggests to me the value of those appraisals are suspect. However, if you feel you have some superior knowledge of the subject you feel compelled to educate me on, I'm perfectly willing to have that discussion off-thread.

    You now failed to justify the activation of game engine related changes, while non game engine related changes were postponed THREE times. I recall that issue reports are wrt performance and overheating so please cut the BS, and recall you are the one calling other people idiots and questioning appraisals... It was just a constructive criticism yet please move on to the subject in discussion.

    I did in the first post I made on the subject, which is probably how I "missed" your "point:"
    There have been many times in the past when activating new features, even apparently innocuous ones on the surface, caused significant problems with both clients and servers

    If you need more specifics, I'm actually one of the people that's been experiencing odd problems since the push of 19.0, and while I haven't been experiencing some of the severe overheating and related problems, I have been experiencing random bouts of the game client behaving as if its resource management is totally broken. The game client gives the appearance of graphics resources somehow being swapped out of memory, and it also experiences random instances of losing network connectivity even though I can confirm network connectivity itself isn't disrupted. All of these combined with the other reports of overheating and other performance problems lead me to believe the problem is something significant in how the game client functions. But that doesn't have to be a game client problem, or if it is it doesn't have to be caused by game client changes: game server problems can sometime appear to be game client problems when the game servers malfunction in a way that instructs the game clients to do weird or suboptimal things, and game server changes can sometimes trigger game client problems.

    For reference, in another MMO I played an update to the online store that appeared to be completely independent of the rest of the game caused major game client problems due to the fact that the in-game store used an embedded minibrowser that had a serious memory leak that was triggered by an expansion of the in-game store. The problem was triggered when the game servers were updated with larger sets of store contents, which were pushed live to the game clients, which would leak memory under certain store-browsing and sorting operations. In that way, a pure database update on the backend caused a memory leak in the game clients and crashed the game on client desktops under high activity situations. On the surface, the problem looked like a game client problem, which it technically was, but the game clients hadn't themselves been changed in any way around when the problem occurred. It was a game client problem that wasn't triggered by a game client change.

    When this happens to you often enough, you stop trying to guess what changes will cause problems in which places, unless you are absolutely certain your knowledge of the entire system is absolutely complete. I doubt anyone has that knowledge about MCOC, and it would be best practice operationally not to guess.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 755 ★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.

    They've maintained from the start of the changes that completing the Map should be rare. As for specific comments, it's been said over and over since the introduction of Diversity that people are constantly reaching 100%, and the Win is determined by a small number of Points. Now, whether the Search Function will find them or not, I can't go back that far in my memory. I'm sure other people have read the same. Regardless, that was the argument. Everyone hits 100%, and Wars are won by a few Points in Diversity. Until they reneged on the removal of it, Diversity was also set to go. I'm usually present, so I have a clear memory of the argument.

    Wow you can twist words some strange ways.

    So no one actually complained it was too easy but that diversity was a ridiculous medium for deciding a winner.

    People have complained the Map was easy. Yes. I don't have time to go on a Scavenger Hunt for comments to appease doubt.
    If people are hitting 100%, then it would be too easy as per their goal of making it rare.

    1 post in 8 months and that's only if you twist his words to say it's too easy.

    This whole "100% is meant to rare" philosophy is only a week old.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,044 ★★★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    Show me the posts where people complained AW was too easy.

    Use the Search.

    I did, couldn't find any.

    Kabam clearly stated they made the changes to stop people 100%ing the map because exploration should be the tie breaker.

    They've maintained from the start of the changes that completing the Map should be rare. As for specific comments, it's been said over and over since the introduction of Diversity that people are constantly reaching 100%, and the Win is determined by a small number of Points. Now, whether the Search Function will find them or not, I can't go back that far in my memory. I'm sure other people have read the same. Regardless, that was the argument. Everyone hits 100%, and Wars are won by a few Points in Diversity. Until they reneged on the removal of it, Diversity was also set to go. I'm usually present, so I have a clear memory of the argument.

    Wow you can twist words some strange ways.

    So no one actually complained it was too easy but that diversity was a ridiculous medium for deciding a winner.

    People have complained the Map was easy. Yes. I don't have time to go on a Scavenger Hunt for comments to appease doubt.
    If people are hitting 100%, then it would be too easy as per their goal of making it rare.

    1 post in 8 months and that's only if you twist his words to say it's too easy.

    This whole "100% is meant to rare" philosophy is only a week old.

    A week old? No. You need to read the 2.0 Thread.
  • ctp1223ctp1223 Posts: 275
    Summoners,

    Due to some overheating and performance issues that we are investigating following our 19.0 release, we will be delaying the release of our new 1-Day and 3-Day Alliance Events, our new iteration of Alliance Quests and our update to the Glory Store.

    We do not currently have an ETA for these new Events and Alliance Quests, but will let you all know as soon as we have more information regarding their release, and the results of our investigation surrounding our 19.0 release.

    We apologize for this delay.

    Hey, I do like the fact that you are pushing the updates. APpreciate it. However I just saved glory from the past week of AQ for this coming week in expectations of this new update. So I just lost 3 alpha catalysts for the week. I had no other way to phrase this without it sounding like complaining lol. Sorry
  • Raymundo86Raymundo86 Posts: 559 ★★★
    Sigh
  • TensioTensio Posts: 106
    So more aq delayed and aw continue with the new schedule, why not to delay also aw? Easy answer kabam will gain lot of money with new changes. Perfect movement
  • PlantesanPlantesan Posts: 291 ★★
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    The one time there was an update the players wanted.. you delay it over a minor issue effecting a minority of players..

    Business 101 failed

    We get it, you have to be the designated dink. Those affected don’t want to screw over our alliances because kabam’s update is causing issues with our phones, which affects our ally contribution...
  • Darkness82Darkness82 Posts: 275
    @Kabam Miike Any update on when next aq will begin with peak milestones and new alliance events too thanks from Darkness82
  • Darkness82Darkness82 Posts: 275
    @Kabam Miike i don’t mind waiting for the peak milestones it’s fine take your time with it your a good company love your game it’s fun I’m open to new ideas thanks once again from darkness82
    I’m excited for the peak milestones and new Alliance events
  • Carmel1Carmel1 Posts: 379 ★★
    So I guess during the delay of the new events (that doesn’t even have ETA), uthe old events are still turn off?
  • TyEdgeTyEdge Posts: 435 ★★★
    edited July 2018
    @ctp1223 the glory store resets at the start of AQ Day 1. You lost nothing. Buy things in the next 23 hours.
  • BrainimpacterBrainimpacter Posts: 578 ★★★
    edited July 2018
    What is the point in delaying the changes because overheating causing phones to shutdown and then still going ahead and scheduling a week of the old AQ format?
    If you are expecting people to play old AQ with overheating phones then there was no point delaying the new format because heat problems, the AQ version we play is not going to change the fact phones are overheating
  • H_B0MBH_B0MB Posts: 41
    They should at least keep the 30min timers for AQ until they resolve this 19.0 fiasco. Shorter amount of time playing having to play AQ might also limit the ridiculous overheating problem. Kabam will need to roll out a steady flow of good content in the coming weeks/months to make up for this nonsense. But we all know this will probably get worse before it gets better. Sad but true.
  • Zuko_ILCZuko_ILC Posts: 1,177 ★★★★
    Why isn't AW on hold? I can't even play this game without burning my hand now. Makes no sense why they suspend only a few events and all the new ones with increased rewards. So confused and am tired of putting my phone in the freez
    vrto wrote: »
    vrto wrote: »
    What changes were introduced today that affect mass profit?
    There's not much to detail. It's been said that they need a stable Build, and it's just common sense to wait with everything going on that they're trying to resolve.

    I'm disappointed that you are not aware of today's changes.

    My mistake. You meant the changes to War, that you view to be for profit, when in actuality are the direct result of people complaining the Map was too easy. Perhaps I didn't think of it because I'm not of the opinion it's all just to milk the Players.

    Those changes have been scheduled for some time now, and were already set in motion. The aforementioned changes have a tentative date, pending the issues being resolved. That much has been stated from the onset of announcing them. Considering they have more control over holding off with it, that's the wisest choice.

    You can paint it as you want, some changes were activated, other changes weren't, I don't understand why and I had my share of 6 months profiling and hacking Android kernel so my (most probably faulty) Nexus 5X wouldn't reach up to 70ºC running the game! Now imagine who doesn't know a thing about the matter, oh wait you are not DNA3000...

    I'm not painting anything. Just the opposite, actually. I'm using Turpentine.

    Actually you are just trolling at this point and your posts aren't constructive and only creating a hostile environment which isn't healthy for the forums.
  • HigherPoweredHigherPowered Posts: 118
    More broken promises. Inadequate planning and testing yields unexpected outcomes without proper roll back process to keep game stable for the community while they fix the issues created with 19.0, and delayed and insufficient compensation after taking a week to come up with it... but, we keep playing, because we love the alliances and people we play with... feels bad... been playing clash of clans for 4 years, they don’t have any issues like these, and have ability to watch others war attacks, and replays from wars...
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    I am a bit confused. Phones are over heating, so AQ goes on with old rewards. But adding new rewards would make the situation worse? I would think just login in to play AQ in general while your phone over heats is the problem, not the type of rewards you collect.

    I really am ignorant to this, anyone have an explanation I could understand?
  • zeezee57zeezee57 Posts: 2,335 ★★★★★
    So i made a post here when the delay announcement was made asking what the correlation between the AQ update and overheating phones was, why was that deleted? There's been plenty of posts since then discussing the same thing. Admittedly I'm no expert in game coding or anything but it just seems weird that releasing the new AW maps was still pushed out but the AQ stuff delayed.

    So could a mod explain why one was released and the other delayed? And moreso with the importance of AW if players devices are overheating to the point they cant play the game why isn't AW suspended altogether until the issue is resolved. Doesn't that automatically put any alliance dealing with this issue at a disadvantage? Sorry I'm just trying to understand how exactly these things all relate and why some changes are fine while others aren't, and also why certain things aren't just put on hold altogher until there's a fix allowing all new content to start together.
  • BrainimpacterBrainimpacter Posts: 578 ★★★
    edited July 2018
    Phones are over heating and will do so no matter what AQ format we have to play, whether its new or old.
    The only reason why they decided to risk peoples phones and not totally suspend everything is just because they dont want to compensate players even further and would rather let people ruin their devices than have to do so.
  • VoluntarisVoluntaris Posts: 1,133 ★★★
    welp, looks like AQ is all messed up ... they have us in "Normal" bracket when we ranked 26 overall last week.

    also, AQ requiring 3 to join each BG before opening next BG, whereas it was 1 before.
Sign In or Register to comment.