AW Season 13: the overlooked players

OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
in General Discussion
Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

These players joined a new alliance with enough time to complete 5 wars (which would have made them eligible for season rewards), but were left unable to participate in a single war due to the recurring enlistment bug.

As stated by Kabam, you are only able to claim the ‘early’ season rewards if you have taken part in at least one war with your current alliance. Consequently these players will be losing out on season rewards completely, despite only being victims of bugs and unlucky timing.

Are these players just going to get the short end of the stick without any acknowledgement at all from the Kabam team?

I understand that it would be impossible to differentiate between new alliance members who (in a bug-free world) would have gone on to complete 5 wars, and those who would not have. However, I do feel that such a wide-reaching problem with such an integral part of the game should warrant an equally wide-reaching solution, one that is as inclusive as possible, even if that means “overcompensating”.

I know some of you will disagree with this - that’s completely fine. I just wanted to express the views of a seemingly overlooked portion of the playerbase, and would appreciate a response or even just a simple acknowledgement from the Kabam team regarding these players and their current predicament. Thank you.
«1345

Comments

  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    It'd be great for the admins to recognise this exclusion of players and pass on the feedback to the team, even if they refuse to address it. Would be a good step moving forwards.
  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    grolsch420 said:

    I think these players should sent in a manual ticket for individual solving?

    That’s certainly one way to address it, although I anticipate that such players would be required to prove when they joined their current alliance. I imagine not many would have that kind of proof to hand, unless it’s something that can be checked on the system at Kabam’s end?
  • TgtalexTgtalex Posts: 44 ★
    Was going to post the exact same. We’ve got a guy who joined us with 6 wars left, presuming he had enough time to complete the required amount of wars to get his Plat4 rewards. After completing 3 wars he is not going to get anything!
    Needs sorting as it’s not his fault.
  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.
  • FreeToPlay_21FreeToPlay_21 Posts: 1,594 ★★★★
    Very well written. This is the only post I've seen which actually justifies the required "overcompensation". It's impossible for Kabam to actually cross check who has suffered and who hasn't.
  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    FreeToPlay_21 said:

    Very well written. This is the only post I've seen which actually justifies the required "overcompensation". It's impossible for Kabam to actually cross check who has suffered and who hasn't.

    Thank you, it’d be great to get a comment or any sort of response from the admins if they’ve read it.
  • PrathapPrathap Posts: 582 ★★★
    edited November 2019
    It's always best to join a new alliance before the season starts and better to stick with alliance for the entire season... After all this game is RNG and we don't know what's gonna happen anytime 😁.

    Even some of our group had to leave alliance mid of the war ..Then only we decided to do this thing from next time onwards
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,717 ★★★★★
    Tgtalex said:

    Was going to post the exact same. We’ve got a guy who joined us with 6 wars left, presuming he had enough time to complete the required amount of wars to get his Plat4 rewards. After completing 3 wars he is not going to get anything!
    Needs sorting as it’s not his fault.

    They changed it to just needing 1 war.
  • OctoberstackOctoberstack Posts: 872 ★★★★
    HC_Boss said:

    These players should be more loyal if that’s the case leave an ally mid season is bad in itself if you ask me they shouldn’t have rewards regardless wait till next season

    Loyalty to the alliance isn’t always the factor which determines whether or not you stay or leave.

    For example, some people change from a 6x5 AQ alliance to a more casual Map 3 one due to their work schedules getting busier - that way, they’re not compromising their former alliance’s chances of successfully completing AQ by giving them the chance to recruit a more active player.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
  • Run477Run477 Posts: 1,391 ★★★
    Octoberstack said:

    grolsch420 said:

    I think these players should sent in a manual ticket for individual solving?

    That’s certainly one way to address it, although I anticipate that such players would be required to prove when they joined their current alliance. I imagine not many would have that kind of proof to hand, unless it’s something that can be checked on the system at Kabam’s end?
    This is definitely something they can check. Give them the date and approximate time you joined.
  • Run477Run477 Posts: 1,391 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    And agreed. It’s actually even smaller. It also requires a person to have been dumped/left and the new person joined before day 1 of aq was over.
  • klobberintymeklobberintyme Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Wow, we're really worried about party crashers getting rewards off of the work done by members who didn't jump ship with the minimum wars left? If you didn't contribute to, say, the gold 2 level you're at now, just buy showing up you get the same rewards as the guys who blew through their stash the first 6 wars and aren't getting compensation back for those?

    Really?
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    Until the maintenance started in friday there were still about 2-3 hours left for players to join an open alliance and for said alliance to initiate matchmaking.

    That's what he's talking about. Those people would have been well inside the timeframe.

    Add to those the players that even tried to not do this in the last possible instance, joining an alliance during aw 7 only for that alliance to be unenlisted on aw 8 and 9.

    This is a legitimate concern, even if the number of people affected in this way might be small. However, how exactly would you know that?

    The number of alliances that reported to have been unenlisted on both aw 8 and aw 9 was quite astonishing. And now consider how not every single alliance even reported this on the forum.

    How many percent of the player base actually frequently use the forum? There is genuinely no factual information for you to base a general judgement on regarding the amount of players affected in this way.
    Except a war was already going on during that time, so again the only people it would have affected are those who joined while the war was happening, meaning the alliance had to lose someone in the middle of the war, or were not enlisted in the war. Both of which is highly limited. You dont have to look at the people unenlisted to realize this is small, you just have to understand how alliance swaps happen. You can pretty much ignore anyone who was not fighting in war 7. That leaves people who joined while the alliance was still fighting, again this number is small, because alliances do not typically kick during a war and people dont typically leave during a war.
  • jdyke23jdyke23 Posts: 215 ★
    It says in the post that even if you joined before the bugs before the cut off you’ll still get the rewards even if you haven’t done the minimum of 5. You need to read the announcement again
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    jdyke23 said:

    It says in the post that even if you joined before the bugs before the cut off you’ll still get the rewards even if you haven’t done the minimum of 5. You need to read the announcement again

    you still have to do a min of 1 though.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    Until the maintenance started in friday there were still about 2-3 hours left for players to join an open alliance and for said alliance to initiate matchmaking.

    That's what he's talking about. Those people would have been well inside the timeframe.

    Add to those the players that even tried to not do this in the last possible instance, joining an alliance during aw 7 only for that alliance to be unenlisted on aw 8 and 9.

    This is a legitimate concern, even if the number of people affected in this way might be small. However, how exactly would you know that?

    The number of alliances that reported to have been unenlisted on both aw 8 and aw 9 was quite astonishing. And now consider how not every single alliance even reported this on the forum.

    How many percent of the player base actually frequently use the forum? There is genuinely no factual information for you to base a general judgement on regarding the amount of players affected in this way.
    Except a war was already going on during that time, so again the only people it would have affected are those who joined while the war was happening, meaning the alliance had to lose someone in the middle of the war, or were not enlisted in the war. Both of which is highly limited. You dont have to look at the people unenlisted to realize this is small, you just have to understand how alliance swaps happen. You can pretty much ignore anyone who was not fighting in war 7. That leaves people who joined while the alliance was still fighting, again this number is small, because alliances do not typically kick during a war and people dont typically leave during a war.
    Mate... Again, not every alliance runs 3 full bg's. Running 2 bg's on war 7 leaves up to 10 spots open to be filled before the enlistment period of war 8 ends.
    And you really think that makes the number of people affected by this huge? I mean if they only run 1 or 2 then you probably are not going to be on the war team when you first join, you will be a backup, which means no rewards in a normal season either.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    Until the maintenance started in friday there were still about 2-3 hours left for players to join an open alliance and for said alliance to initiate matchmaking.

    That's what he's talking about. Those people would have been well inside the timeframe.

    Add to those the players that even tried to not do this in the last possible instance, joining an alliance during aw 7 only for that alliance to be unenlisted on aw 8 and 9.

    This is a legitimate concern, even if the number of people affected in this way might be small. However, how exactly would you know that?

    The number of alliances that reported to have been unenlisted on both aw 8 and aw 9 was quite astonishing. And now consider how not every single alliance even reported this on the forum.

    How many percent of the player base actually frequently use the forum? There is genuinely no factual information for you to base a general judgement on regarding the amount of players affected in this way.
    Except a war was already going on during that time, so again the only people it would have affected are those who joined while the war was happening, meaning the alliance had to lose someone in the middle of the war, or were not enlisted in the war. Both of which is highly limited. You dont have to look at the people unenlisted to realize this is small, you just have to understand how alliance swaps happen. You can pretty much ignore anyone who was not fighting in war 7. That leaves people who joined while the alliance was still fighting, again this number is small, because alliances do not typically kick during a war and people dont typically leave during a war.
    Mate... Again, not every alliance runs 3 full bg's. Running 2 bg's on war 7 leaves up to 10 spots open to be filled before the enlistment period of war 8 ends.
    And you really think that makes the number of people affected by this huge? I mean if they only run 1 or 2 then you probably are not going to be on the war team when you first join, you will be a backup, which means no rewards in a normal season either.
    Considering how you approached your judgement of the amount of people affected by this, the number should definitely be higher than you figured in your first comment here.

    Please restrain from misrepresenting me, I don't say it's huge. I say it's impossible to know how many people were affected this way.

    And it is really naive to try and argue OP's point with such a restricted picture of how people could have ended up in this situation.

    An alliance with 20 members on aw 7 gets 10 new members before aw 7 ends, all of them eager to qualify for season rewards, all of them eager to participate.
    Now it's supposed to be unlikely that that alliance is going to run 3 bg's for aw 8?

    You try to paint this as something absurd, while there really are a lot of possible scenarios, again, hinting at a way bigger number than what you seem to still think.
    please restrain from misrepresenting me, I didnt say you claimed it would be huge, I questioned your meaning, hence the ? at the end. Also I already covered the "join alliance while war is going scenario", how large do you really, honestly think that number is, I would wager less than a couple hundred people affected, probably less than 100.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Look, my alliance casually runs 1 bg in aw, because our member strength is all over the place.

    How can you possibly think it is absurd to switch out members during the season in this case? I could have very well lost my 20 weakest members during aw 7 and have 20 strong armed freeloaders join before enlistment ends for aw 8 allowing us to run 3 bg's.

    Are you trying to tell me alliances that only casually play aw for whatever reason are like a rare thing? And even then it's a rare occasion for them to switch players well inside the given timeframe for season reward qualification?

    Get real.

    Where did I say it was absurd to switch out remembers, you just accused me of misrepresenting you when I did not, now you are doubling/tripling down on the misrepresentation. I never claimed only causal alliances do something, I said it is a rare event, and that is true.

    Get real yourself, stop making up strawmen to try and justify your arguments. We all lost something in this situation, every single one of us. not everyone will be happy.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    Until the maintenance started in friday there were still about 2-3 hours left for players to join an open alliance and for said alliance to initiate matchmaking.

    That's what he's talking about. Those people would have been well inside the timeframe.

    Add to those the players that even tried to not do this in the last possible instance, joining an alliance during aw 7 only for that alliance to be unenlisted on aw 8 and 9.

    This is a legitimate concern, even if the number of people affected in this way might be small. However, how exactly would you know that?

    The number of alliances that reported to have been unenlisted on both aw 8 and aw 9 was quite astonishing. And now consider how not every single alliance even reported this on the forum.

    How many percent of the player base actually frequently use the forum? There is genuinely no factual information for you to base a general judgement on regarding the amount of players affected in this way.
    Except a war was already going on during that time, so again the only people it would have affected are those who joined while the war was happening, meaning the alliance had to lose someone in the middle of the war, or were not enlisted in the war. Both of which is highly limited. You dont have to look at the people unenlisted to realize this is small, you just have to understand how alliance swaps happen. You can pretty much ignore anyone who was not fighting in war 7. That leaves people who joined while the alliance was still fighting, again this number is small, because alliances do not typically kick during a war and people dont typically leave during a war.
    Mate... Again, not every alliance runs 3 full bg's. Running 2 bg's on war 7 leaves up to 10 spots open to be filled before the enlistment period of war 8 ends.
    And you really think that makes the number of people affected by this huge? I mean if they only run 1 or 2 then you probably are not going to be on the war team when you first join, you will be a backup, which means no rewards in a normal season either.
    Considering how you approached your judgement of the amount of people affected by this, the number should definitely be higher than you figured in your first comment here.

    Please restrain from misrepresenting me, I don't say it's huge. I say it's impossible to know how many people were affected this way.

    And it is really naive to try and argue OP's point with such a restricted picture of how people could have ended up in this situation.

    An alliance with 20 members on aw 7 gets 10 new members before aw 7 ends, all of them eager to qualify for season rewards, all of them eager to participate.
    Now it's supposed to be unlikely that that alliance is going to run 3 bg's for aw 8?

    You try to paint this as something absurd, while there really are a lot of possible scenarios, again, hinting at a way bigger number than what you seem to still think.
    please restrain from misrepresenting me, I didnt say you claimed it would be huge, I questioned your meaning, hence the ? at the end. Also I already covered the "join alliance while war is going scenario", how large do you really, honestly think that number is, I would wager less than a couple hundred people affected, probably less than 100.
    At the end of the day, neither of us know with ang certainty the number nor the relative proportion of players affected in this manner.

    What we do know is that such players do exist, and I am simply expressing their perspective in the hope that it gets recognised by the admins and passed on as feedback, regardless of whether or not it enacts any immediate change. @Lormif This was the point of my post, which you seem to have somewhat missed.
    I dont argue against the number being greater than 0, I argue it is not as large as people make it out to be. I assume that the general compensation will cover this, we will see. After all not everyone can be 100% happy.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    Lormif said:

    Octoberstack said:

    However there are far too many players who thought the same, joined a new alliance, and were unable to participate in any wars at all due to getting unlucky with the enlistment bug.

    You would have had to have faced the enlistment bug twice for that to have happened, and that number of people is really small
    I’ve acknowledged this here:
    Octoberstack said:

    Although they exist in the minority, there are still many players who are being excluded from AW season rewards through no fault of their own.

    That number may be small in a relative sense, but from what I’ve gathered in the merged threads it’s a more common predicament than one might think. Maybe I’m biased as there are two such players in my current alliance. Regardless, I believe it to be an issue that warrants some recognition.
    Not jsut small in a relative sense, it is small in a general sense, and the more I think about it the smaller it gets.

    1) They had to join before war 8 started, as joining between war 8 and 9 would not have granted you 5 total wars.
    2) You could not join between war 7 and 8 because of the downtime, once the servers came back up enslistment started, and the issues of down time started at the end of war 7.
    3) this means the people who could legit claim this are people who joined during an active war, so the alliance had to have not been in that war or lost members during the war, both of which is very small.
    Until the maintenance started in friday there were still about 2-3 hours left for players to join an open alliance and for said alliance to initiate matchmaking.

    That's what he's talking about. Those people would have been well inside the timeframe.

    Add to those the players that even tried to not do this in the last possible instance, joining an alliance during aw 7 only for that alliance to be unenlisted on aw 8 and 9.

    This is a legitimate concern, even if the number of people affected in this way might be small. However, how exactly would you know that?

    The number of alliances that reported to have been unenlisted on both aw 8 and aw 9 was quite astonishing. And now consider how not every single alliance even reported this on the forum.

    How many percent of the player base actually frequently use the forum? There is genuinely no factual information for you to base a general judgement on regarding the amount of players affected in this way.
    Except a war was already going on during that time, so again the only people it would have affected are those who joined while the war was happening, meaning the alliance had to lose someone in the middle of the war, or were not enlisted in the war. Both of which is highly limited. You dont have to look at the people unenlisted to realize this is small, you just have to understand how alliance swaps happen. You can pretty much ignore anyone who was not fighting in war 7. That leaves people who joined while the alliance was still fighting, again this number is small, because alliances do not typically kick during a war and people dont typically leave during a war.
    Mate... Again, not every alliance runs 3 full bg's. Running 2 bg's on war 7 leaves up to 10 spots open to be filled before the enlistment period of war 8 ends.
    And you really think that makes the number of people affected by this huge? I mean if they only run 1 or 2 then you probably are not going to be on the war team when you first join, you will be a backup, which means no rewards in a normal season either.
    Considering how you approached your judgement of the amount of people affected by this, the number should definitely be higher than you figured in your first comment here.

    Please restrain from misrepresenting me, I don't say it's huge. I say it's impossible to know how many people were affected this way.

    And it is really naive to try and argue OP's point with such a restricted picture of how people could have ended up in this situation.

    An alliance with 20 members on aw 7 gets 10 new members before aw 7 ends, all of them eager to qualify for season rewards, all of them eager to participate.
    Now it's supposed to be unlikely that that alliance is going to run 3 bg's for aw 8?

    You try to paint this as something absurd, while there really are a lot of possible scenarios, again, hinting at a way bigger number than what you seem to still think.
    please restrain from misrepresenting me, I didnt say you claimed it would be huge, I questioned your meaning, hence the ? at the end. Also I already covered the "join alliance while war is going scenario", how large do you really, honestly think that number is, I would wager less than a couple hundred people affected, probably less than 100.
    At the end of the day, neither of us know with ang certainty the number nor the relative proportion of players affected in this manner.

    What we do know is that such players do exist, and I am simply expressing their perspective in the hope that it gets recognised by the admins and passed on as feedback, regardless of whether or not it enacts any immediate change. @Lormif This was the point of my post, which you seem to have somewhat missed.
    I dont argue against the number being greater than 0, I argue it is not as large as people make it out to be. I assume that the general compensation will cover this, we will see. After all not everyone can be 100% happy.
    Once again, this is not the point I am making. It is also difficult to “argue that it is not as large as people make it out to be” without access to an accurate insight of who was and wasn’t affected in this way, something which we both lack. Your best estimates are, unfortunately, just estimates.

    I’ll say it once more. I am simply pointing out that such players exist - nothing more, nothing less - and I am brining it up on the forums in the hopes that it is taken into consideration by the Kabam team if similar incidences were to occur in future.
    It is also not that hard to argue it using deductive reasoning, using the reasons already pointed out. You had to have joined during war 7 because of how it went down. If you joined before war 7 it is hard to argue you were planning to do 5 wars but decided to skip some. It is possible but also not possible to verify.

    So it comes down to people who joined an alliance during a war already running, and how many people you think that is likely to be given how alliances are typically run

    This is a niche case, and they cannot cover all niches.
This discussion has been closed.