I don’t know why this idea keeps persisting because it’s ridiculous, but not EVERYONE who moved up a bracket during war 7 did so only because of the bug. There were people who were one win away from a higher rank, who got matched with similarly ranked alliances. Who would have moved up a rank regardless of the bugs. So to everyone telling people “you only got that rank because of the bug” that’s not true for everyone, it’s entirely possible that those alliances would have achieved that rank and the compensation needs to acknowledge that possibility and removal of opportunity. To think that if there was no bugs that everyone who moved up rank wouldn’t have is just silly, of course there’s no way to assess who actually would’ve and who wouldn’t have, so the fair solution would to be to give the rewards one rank higher than were your ally lands after 6 wars. Making sure that people who got shafted get what they deserve is more important than making sure no gets something they might not deserve. With one tier up very few people lose out on anything.
War Season is not a competition they can adjust based on potential progress. In this particular case, they're judging it based on "last known good configuration", which is the most fair solution overall. In some cases, generalized Compensation Packages, they can calculate overall potential effects and lost earnings, which has been done in the past. In terms of Season Rewards, the best they can do is judge from start to finish. Which is essentially the point of the competition itself. It's a tally of Points earned between Point A and Point B. Unfortunately, it's not logical or feasible to factor in what progress an Alliance MIGHT have made. (I know I'm retired, but I popped on, and I had to point that out. Lol.)
But they should factor in the progress that alliances SHOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE. If everyone knew at the beginning it was a shorter season alliances would have been prepared differently, no one anticipated not being able to fight the number of wars they’re always able to fight. Compensation is about assessing what was lost, and something that was lost for a lot of alliances was the rewards they would’ve gained if we had a full season. Giving one tier up doesn’t break the game and doesn’t leave everyone who would’ve done better to be disappointed all the way until the end of next season.
What was lost is alliances potential progress, it was alliances OPPORTUNITY to progress , which should be accounted for and considered when giving compensation, giving one tier up to everyone covers anyone who would’ve have lost out, and do what if a few alliance get more than they would’ve? This makes sure that nobody gets less than might have had we had a proper function season. This makes sure that that bugs don’t rob people of rewards they should have been able to get had their been no bugs.
My allaince could of been Rank 3 in Masters for those Top 3 standings,
but u decided to make the wars end WAY TO EARLY for Master Allainces, where EVERY single war MATTERS
6 wars to determine top 3 Masters is to small.
By the looks of things on the 6th war we was 4th place, but the 3 wars u DIDNT count, we CLAWED and SCRATCHED our way to get back to top #3 in masters.
Seeing this message "now" just meaned we wasted time and effort just to be screwed out of the rewards.
Looks like as it stands we will be 4th in Alliance Wars because we didnt know u was only gona count the 6 wars,
6 wars is TOO short for End game alliances in Masters and ESPECIALLY Masters top 3.
You forget something. Its not all about the top alliances. It affected everyone.
this is why it's taking forever. They are trying to make sure the steaks in Master are happy. This isn't hard to do to go back on standings and release the rewards. Keeping the highest spenders in the game happy that is where the issues come from this.
I don’t know why this idea keeps persisting because it’s ridiculous, but not EVERYONE who moved up a bracket during war 7 did so only because of the bug. There were people who were one win away from a higher rank, who got matched with similarly ranked alliances. Who would have moved up a rank regardless of the bugs. So to everyone telling people “you only got that rank because of the bug” that’s not true for everyone, it’s entirely possible that those alliances would have achieved that rank and the compensation needs to acknowledge that possibility and removal of opportunity. To think that if there was no bugs that everyone who moved up rank wouldn’t have is just silly, of course there’s no way to assess who actually would’ve and who wouldn’t have, so the fair solution would to be to give the rewards one rank higher than were your ally lands after 6 wars. Making sure that people who got shafted get what they deserve is more important than making sure no gets something they might not deserve. With one tier up very few people lose out on anything.
"It's entirely possible" "possibility".
True, however it cannot be stated with 100% certainty that any alliance would actually have moved up, and that's the point. System failure ensured 1 thing: That any ranking after war 6 was "possibly" but not certainly the correct ranking.
Therefore the choice to cut it off after the last unbugged war is the right choice, since only those first 6 wars gave 100% reliable results and rankings.
Any statements such as "we would have been there anyway" or "we were just recovering from a bad start" is speculation about what would have happened if the season had finished normally without issues. Who can say for certain that they would not have lost a few wars after 1-6 that would have dropped them a tier lower? Nobody can, because the matches weren't played against all possible alliances.
I see a lot of crying on the forums. Guys and gals. It’s a game. I know we spend money on it but you can’t always blame kabam on this. I work for a company where the system goes down and effects customers. They blame my company but it’s the servers and servers go down without having knowledge of it. It’s life, things like this happens. Does it suck? Definitely. Do we compensate people for it? Absolutely because in the end it does reflect on my company itself. Has kabam said they will compensate? Yes. Will they compensate us the way we think we need to be compensated? Probably not but in the end they will do what they can to make it right. All we can do is play the game and all they can do is listen to the community and TRY to remedy issue.
I see a lot of crying on the forums. Guys and gals. It’s a game. I know we spend money on it but you can’t always blame kabam on this. I work for a company where the system goes down and effects customers. They blame my company but it’s the servers and servers go down without having knowledge of it. It’s life, things like this happens. Does it suck? Definitely. Do we compensate people for it? Absolutely because in the end it does reflect on my company itself. Has kabam said they will compensate? Yes. Will they compensate us the way we think we need to be compensated? Probably not but in the end they will do what they can to make it right. All we can do is play the game and all they can do is listen to the community and TRY to remedy issue.
It's not just a game, real feelings are getting hurt here
Still no rewards any update please ? It's really annoying waiting for them I know its finished early but I was only ok with that because I thought we would get the rewards straight away lol
Still no rewards any update please ? It's really annoying waiting for them I know its finished early but I was only ok with that because I thought we would get the rewards straight away lol
They have to go back to war 6 and make sure everything is in order before sending them out. Let's also bare in mind they're still working on the known issues that have plagued the game since the initial loop bug occurred. I certainly want those rewards ASAP, but they'll come when they come. Just gotta be patient until then. I knew right from the word go it would be at MINIMUM 24 hours from when they ended the Season, if not 48+. If they don't show up by next week Wednesday AM, then I'd say there's a big problem here, lol. I sincerely doubt they'll take that long though. Anything before then is technically early as we wouldn't have seen them until then otherwise.
Kabam’s war resolution for this season is not perfect; but it is probably the most fair way to address the totality of the problems that arose. There is ZERO way to make it right for everyone so they compromised to the best possible solution.
Period.
The only thing I think was a negative was the time taken to come to this decision and now the time it will take for rewards. Those are small compared to the scope of the problems.
Imo Kabam made the best decision possible given the situation.
War Season is not a competition they can adjust based on potential progress. In this particular case, they're judging it based on "last known good configuration", which is the most fair solution overall. In some cases, generalized Compensation Packages, they can calculate overall potential effects and lost earnings, which has been done in the past. In terms of Season Rewards, the best they can do is judge from start to finish. Which is essentially the point of the competition itself. It's a tally of Points earned between Point A and Point B. Unfortunately, it's not logical or feasible to factor in what progress an Alliance MIGHT have made. (I know I'm retired, but I popped on, and I had to point that out. Lol.)
But they should factor in the progress that alliances SHOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE. If everyone knew at the beginning it was a shorter season alliances would have been prepared differently, no one anticipated not being able to fight the number of wars they’re always able to fight. Compensation is about assessing what was lost, and something that was lost for a lot of alliances was the rewards they would’ve gained if we had a full season. Giving one tier up doesn’t break the game and doesn’t leave everyone who would’ve done better to be disappointed all the way until the end of next season.
What was lost is alliances potential progress, it was alliances OPPORTUNITY to progress , which should be accounted for and considered when giving compensation, giving one tier up to everyone covers anyone who would’ve have lost out, and do what if a few alliance get more than they would’ve? This makes sure that nobody gets less than might have had we had a proper function season. This makes sure that that bugs don’t rob people of rewards they should have been able to get had their been no bugs.
If they would have known it was going to be a shorter Season, they would have told people. If people knew, they wouldn't have spent as many Resources. If people won, they would have advanced. There's a great many "Ifs". You can't give Season Rewards based on Ifs. It's based on actual performance. Placements are determined based on Points. The more you put up, the higher you place, and the more you earn. The Final Results have to be based on totals overall between one time period and the other. They can't give Points for Ifs. Compensation is a different story. They can include something for the trouble. They just can't determine shouda-coulda-wouldas.
War Season is not a competition they can adjust based on potential progress. In this particular case, they're judging it based on "last known good configuration", which is the most fair solution overall. In some cases, generalized Compensation Packages, they can calculate overall potential effects and lost earnings, which has been done in the past. In terms of Season Rewards, the best they can do is judge from start to finish. Which is essentially the point of the competition itself. It's a tally of Points earned between Point A and Point B. Unfortunately, it's not logical or feasible to factor in what progress an Alliance MIGHT have made. (I know I'm retired, but I popped on, and I had to point that out. Lol.)
But they should factor in the progress that alliances SHOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE. If everyone knew at the beginning it was a shorter season alliances would have been prepared differently, no one anticipated not being able to fight the number of wars they’re always able to fight. Compensation is about assessing what was lost, and something that was lost for a lot of alliances was the rewards they would’ve gained if we had a full season. Giving one tier up doesn’t break the game and doesn’t leave everyone who would’ve done better to be disappointed all the way until the end of next season.
What was lost is alliances potential progress, it was alliances OPPORTUNITY to progress , which should be accounted for and considered when giving compensation, giving one tier up to everyone covers anyone who would’ve have lost out, and do what if a few alliance get more than they would’ve? This makes sure that nobody gets less than might have had we had a proper function season. This makes sure that that bugs don’t rob people of rewards they should have been able to get had their been no bugs.
If they would have known it was going to be a shorter Season, they would have told people. If people knew, they wouldn't have spent as many Resources. If people won, they would have advanced. There's a great many "Ifs". You can't give Season Rewards based on Ifs. It's based on actual performance. Placements are determined based on Points. The more you put up, the higher you place, and the more you earn. The Final Results have to be based on totals overall between one time period and the other. They can't give Points for Ifs. Compensation is a different story. They can include something for the trouble. They just can't determine shouda-coulda-wouldas.
War Season is not a competition they can adjust based on potential progress. In this particular case, they're judging it based on "last known good configuration", which is the most fair solution overall. In some cases, generalized Compensation Packages, they can calculate overall potential effects and lost earnings, which has been done in the past. In terms of Season Rewards, the best they can do is judge from start to finish. Which is essentially the point of the competition itself. It's a tally of Points earned between Point A and Point B. Unfortunately, it's not logical or feasible to factor in what progress an Alliance MIGHT have made. (I know I'm retired, but I popped on, and I had to point that out. Lol.)
But they should factor in the progress that alliances SHOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE. If everyone knew at the beginning it was a shorter season alliances would have been prepared differently, no one anticipated not being able to fight the number of wars they’re always able to fight. Compensation is about assessing what was lost, and something that was lost for a lot of alliances was the rewards they would’ve gained if we had a full season. Giving one tier up doesn’t break the game and doesn’t leave everyone who would’ve done better to be disappointed all the way until the end of next season.
What was lost is alliances potential progress, it was alliances OPPORTUNITY to progress , which should be accounted for and considered when giving compensation, giving one tier up to everyone covers anyone who would’ve have lost out, and do what if a few alliance get more than they would’ve? This makes sure that nobody gets less than might have had we had a proper function season. This makes sure that that bugs don’t rob people of rewards they should have been able to get had their been no bugs.
If they would have known it was going to be a shorter Season, they would have told people. If people knew, they wouldn't have spent as many Resources. If people won, they would have advanced. There's a great many "Ifs". You can't give Season Rewards based on Ifs. It's based on actual performance. Placements are determined based on Points. The more you put up, the higher you place, and the more you earn. The Final Results have to be based on totals overall between one time period and the other. They can't give Points for Ifs. Compensation is a different story. They can include something for the trouble. They just can't determine shouda-coulda-wouldas.
I thought you quit. Why are you still here?
I'm still logging on everyday, still coming to the Forum now and then. I never really close any door. If the day comes I decide to start playing again, I'd like to know what's going on. Besides, you do something everyday for 4 years, and it becomes a part of you.
Comments
But they should factor in the progress that alliances SHOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE. If everyone knew at the beginning it was a shorter season alliances would have been prepared differently, no one anticipated not being able to fight the number of wars they’re always able to fight. Compensation is about assessing what was lost, and something that was lost for a lot of alliances was the rewards they would’ve gained if we had a full season. Giving one tier up doesn’t break the game and doesn’t leave everyone who would’ve done better to be disappointed all the way until the end of next season.
What was lost is alliances potential progress, it was alliances OPPORTUNITY to progress , which should be accounted for and considered when giving compensation, giving one tier up to everyone covers anyone who would’ve have lost out, and do what if a few alliance get more than they would’ve? This makes sure that nobody gets less than might have had we had a proper function season. This makes sure that that bugs don’t rob people of rewards they should have been able to get had their been no bugs.
True, however it cannot be stated with 100% certainty that any alliance would actually have moved up, and that's the point. System failure ensured 1 thing: That any ranking after war 6 was "possibly" but not certainly the correct ranking.
Therefore the choice to cut it off after the last unbugged war is the right choice, since only those first 6 wars gave 100% reliable results and rankings.
Any statements such as "we would have been there anyway" or "we were just recovering from a bad start" is speculation about what would have happened if the season had finished normally without issues. Who can say for certain that they would not have lost a few wars after 1-6 that would have dropped them a tier lower? Nobody can, because the matches weren't played against all possible alliances.
Period.
The only thing I think was a negative was the time taken to come to this decision and now the time it will take for rewards. Those are small compared to the scope of the problems.
Imo Kabam made the best decision possible given the situation.
Any update when Season rewards will given to all ?