Well that will keep me waiting on baited breath I guess I can just sit back and relax for the rewards to come in when they do. Take it easy just like the Eagles said.
Btw kabam also need to prepare for those guys and girls who will kick by Leader or officers before they will take there season rewards too. So they cant take the season rewards, And its will be again the big issues in community
The season should leave people in what bracket they ended up in. If someone was not granted a bye win for being unenlisted then that should be handled properly. As for compensation...I have no idea how you begin to make people happy after the game goes down for almost an entire work day of hours, but I can tell you that releasing “deals” and then still putting 6.3 into the contest seems like a move in bad faith with all that is still going on. I’m extremely unhappy with this games performance, bug issues, and ability to run smoothly(which it does not) I am a moderate spender, and this along with every other major issue dating back to last summers overheating fiasco has me ready to put this game down entirely and I’ve been here since almost the beginning. I’m not joking when I say that whatever you give the player base should be MASSIVE. You’ve done a great job reversing some bad decisions and really making an attempt to be more transparent. I want to see this trend of caring about your players continue when this is sorted. If you drop the ball in this I GUARANTEE the backlash will be catastrophic
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.
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.
So....you didn't quit. Cool.
Not what I said but if you want to look at it that way, be my guest. I haven't played in some time. Left my Ally because it wasn't fair to them to keep them held back. I'm logging on and checking the Forum now and then. I may play again someday, but for now, I'm retired from playing. Thanks for the concern, though. I appreciate you taking the time to miss me.
We Have still 2 days to start Alliamce Quest, Dont know why kabam not going for maintenance and fix leaderboard and The whole game ,
They have time for new A/Q announcement, They have time for releasing act 6.3 But when its about rewards , They Are silence and telling its not going to fix until next weekend which is kinda unfair for players who wanna go for retire and who wanna go for something different like map 7x5 ,
Until rewards out no one can leave , So Lock the kick button until Rewards out for everyone which is fair enough for everyone
We Have still 2 days to start Alliamce Quest, Dont know why kabam not going for maintenance and fix leaderboard and The whole game ,
They have time for new A/Q announcement, They have time for releasing act 6.3 But when its about rewards , They Are silence and telling its not going to fix until next weekend which is kinda unfair for players who wanna go for retire and who wanna go for something different like map 7x5 ,
Until rewards out no one can leave , So Lock the kick button until Rewards out for everyone which is fair enough for everyone
Please consider how a good amount of people changing alliance between aw 6 and aw 8 matchmaking actually did have a chance to participate in 1 war, if the alliance they joined didn't get unenlisted. So out of those people some simply lucked out and some got unlucky.
I'm sure someone somewhere got bit here, but the window of vulnerability is at least limited. The absolute latest you can jump and still expect to get rewards is just prior to the start of war 8. That would give you the opportunity to participate in five wars (8,9,10,11,12). Anyone who jumped after the start of 8 would have been jumping knowing they were basically forfeiting season rewards.
Anyone who jumped before the start of war 7 definitely had the chance to participate because the problems happened only at the very tail end of war 7. Depending on when your alliance matches, it probably happened some time between the last few hours and literally right as wars were ending. The higher your alliance, the earlier you match so for most alliances above a certain tier downtime was cutting off maybe the last hour or two at most, if that. I'd say anyone trying to get participation credit in the last few minutes of a war is playing with fire, but it is possible a very tiny number of players were bit here.
The real problematic window is anyone jumping or getting kicked after the start of war 7 but before the start of war 8. They would have had two shots to get participation credit, if their alliance was able to enlist for war 8 or war 9. A lot of alliances got locked out of war 8. Fewer I believe got locked out of 9. Any player jumping after war 7 into an alliance locked out of wars 8 and 9 would then be the largest potential group of players that should have had a chance to get participation credit but were unable to do so due to unavoidable game problems. I'd be curious to know how large that group of players are. If Kabam is reviewing data to look for "manual compensation fixes" I'd focus my attention there.
thanks kabam!!!! u successfully wasted my day by letting me check my inbox every now and then for rewards only to announce it 24 hours later that the rewards are going to take a few days. thanks!!
Btw kabam also need to prepare for those guys and girls who will kick by Leader or officers before they will take there season rewards too. So they cant take the season rewards, And its will be again the big issues in community
So issues after issues not good for sure ,
the they should have told us earlier. many of the players were waiting all day, refreshing their game expecting to see rewards. therefore the lack of communication in this issue has lead to more and more frustration for people who wasted and absolutely wasted their time checking their inbox for rewards that won't come on the same day. really disappointed in kabam is what I'd like to say. I'm not blaming anyone, just voicing my frustration in this issue.
I dont really understand why you think 6 wars is too short. Is there something you cant do in 6 wars you can do in 12? If you're really that good it shouldnt matter how many wars it is. Get it done or dont, and take your losses like a grownup.
Exactly. He’s just having a cry because it’s the only way his mediocre alliance would get top3. They are usually scrounging around 10-20 in master
Take it elsewhere guys. Forums ain’t the place for this. Completely off topic and with all due respect no one else cares. If this is how master level alliances behave then I’m glad I’m not in master. thanks
I never said we deserve 2nd lol, all i said is that 6 wars to determine master is to short.
If by that you mean that the results might have been different had the season gone longer, that's true. But that would also be true if the season went on for 18 wars, or 30 wars.
There's nothing magical about 12 wars. Seasons used to be 24 wars long. They were shortened because players were getting burned out on the long season. Reducing the length of the season reduces the number of wars you have to "decide" placement, and that increases the variability. But there's a trade off between how many match ups help determine placement, and how many people are willing to tolerate. The choice is mostly arbitrary, in that it depends on subjective factors and not quantitative ones.
We compromised from 24 to 12 not because 12 is a better number, but simply because players didn't want to fight 24. This season we're compromising from 12 to 6 because of a catastrophic corruption bug. It is less wars than we normally fight, but it isn't less fair, because there's nothing special about 12 that makes it "enough." If everyone was getting burned out on 12 war seasons, it could very well be 6 war seasons now, whether it was "enough" or not.
Also, 2^6 = 64. That's more than twice as large as the master's bracket (including the top three). Mathematically speaking, that's enough match ups to "resolve" the master's bracket, at least to a first order approximation. That's not the same thing as "deciding" the master's bracket with certainty, but it is enough to say it isn't completely off the wall.
I dont really understand why you think 6 wars is too short. Is there something you cant do in 6 wars you can do in 12? If you're really that good it shouldnt matter how many wars it is. Get it done or dont, and take your losses like a grownup.
Because there are like around 10 alliances that compete in Masters, and small amount of allainces in Tier 1 around less than 15, the match making pool is pretty small. If your just above Tier 1 u can match up with Tier 2 alliances.
meanwhile there are ALOT of platinum and gold allainces out there.
Not enough war, have to take consideration that they match easier allaince, but we matched up against Kenob and Ny, Both allainces are top 5 These guys didnt match Kenob,Ny like we did
All i said was that "6" wars is to short, to consider crowning top 3 in masters especially when #2 9322 witch is @Noone allaince
didn't face #1Kenob or #3 Ny718 or #4 ASR (allaince i am in )
I dont really understand why you think 6 wars is too short. Is there something you cant do in 6 wars you can do in 12? If you're really that good it shouldnt matter how many wars it is. Get it done or dont, and take your losses like a grownup.
Because in Tier 1 there are only like less than 15 alliances, the pool is very small.
When allaince is just above war rating for T1 cutoff there is a chance that they can match with T2 allainces Resulting in much easier matchups. Or avoiding tough wars
I said 6 wars is to small to judge top 3 in masters, especially when 9322 didnt face kenob or ny.
We have faced Kenob and Ny718 both allainces, resulting us in 4-2 for first 6 wars, and was rank #4,
but after the 7th war we was #2
#2 9322 @Noone did u or did u not have a war against these below alalinces for season 13?
I never said we deserve 2nd lol, all i said is that 6 wars to determine master is to short.
If by that you mean that the results might have been different had the season gone longer, that's true. But that would also be true if the season went on for 18 wars, or 30 wars.
There's nothing magical about 12 wars. Seasons used to be 24 wars long. They were shortened because players were getting burned out on the long season. Reducing the length of the season reduces the number of wars you have to "decide" placement, and that increases the variability. But there's a trade off between how many match ups help determine placement, and how many people are willing to tolerate. The choice is mostly arbitrary, in that it depends on subjective factors and not quantitative ones.
We compromised from 24 to 12 not because 12 is a better number, but simply because players didn't want to fight 24. This season we're compromising from 12 to 6 because of a catastrophic corruption bug. It is less wars than we normally fight, but it isn't less fair, because there's nothing special about 12 that makes it "enough." If everyone was getting burned out on 12 war seasons, it could very well be 6 war seasons now, whether it was "enough" or not.
Also, 2^6 = 64. That's more than twice as large as the master's bracket (including the top three). Mathematically speaking, that's enough match ups to "resolve" the master's bracket, at least to a first order approximation. That's not the same thing as "deciding" the master's bracket with certainty, but it is enough to say it isn't completely off the wall.
noone said it was magical.
12 wars is the standard now for many seasons.
i was there when it was 24 wars, Made masters Season 2,
but thats not the case, nor is it the subject.
i Simply posted that 6 wars is to short to crown masters allaince especially when Rank #1 and #2 never faced each other this season
All you guys in master tier are just gonna whip out the wallets and replenish your resources anyway, what does it even matter? You get better rewards than the vast majority of other alliances anyway so I don’t want to hear it anymore, move that measuring contest elsewhere. Anyways, back on topic, has it been confirmed yet that the issues in aq and aw have been fixed? Things should be on hold if not.
All you guys in master tier are just gonna whip out the wallets and replenish your resources anyway, what does it even matter? You get better rewards than the vast majority of other alliances anyway so I don’t want to hear it anymore, move that measuring contest elsewhere. Anyways, back on topic, has it been confirmed yet that the issues in aq and aw have been fixed? Things should be on hold if not.
lol seriously? so just cause ur not playing up here, give u the right to brush off "my concern" and give an answer like that.
So just cause we get better rewards cause we choose to be up here, gives u the right to judge?
Those rewards arent handed for free, alot of alliances push hard and play for the win.
I have afew buddies who missed 1 and even 2 in platinum wars because of matchmaking, and that completely threw off there season,
Some even started bad start in the season and got wins in wars 7th,8th,9th war to climb up and had a rough start. then all of a sudden kabam says, thanks for fighting war and clmbing but thats not gona count to the season! All kabam said is that they just get items back they used?
How does kabam fix that?
How does kabam fix Aq when rewards already was released?
We are top 10 in aq, we was rank 8th the week prior and because of this week on the first day of aq the emergency maintanance screwed us over and ended up 30+ aq rank?
Are we gona get our top 10 aq rank rewards as compensation? but that doesnt concearn u cause, we are "just gona whip out our wallet"
Kabam have already come to the conclusion of giving end of season rewards based on first 6 wars. So I don’t understand the prolonging war season rewards to later on this week/early next week. People want to move to different alliances based on what they want to do for AQ either go up, go down, retire etc. It’s not fair on either people or alliances that they have to go through another whole set of AQ due to the delay on war season rewards keeping everyone locked in, which is also affecting recruiting etc.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why is 6 wars not enough? Every season schedule will be different. If the top 2 didnt face each other over 12 fights instead of 6 would it make a difference? It's a totally real possibility. And dont dismiss folks who play at lower levels than you, especially when you dont want people dismissing your own opinion.
i didnt dismiss him, he dismiss it first.
again its only 6 wars because of what happened, same way that happened to aq, both was cut short, both had consequences in the top.
we havent yet to have that happened, As you win more, there are higher chances of war rating climbing up. and being paired with higher war rating allaince.
The pool for T1 allaince is very small, less than 15 are in tier 1.
again ur speculating a possibility that hasnt happen, but this possibility happened, and it was 6 wars, thats why i am addressing it, thats why 6 wars to determine top 3 in master is something that needs to be address and known.
especially this season when #1 and #2 did not face each this season. Let alone #3 and #4 havent faced each other. and #2 didnt face any of the top5 aliance war
again there are also allainces who address this kind of concearn
Brian Grant also addressed how his allaince kept on running to kenob
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why is 6 wars not enough? Every season schedule will be different. If the top 2 didnt face each other over 12 fights instead of 6 would it make a difference? It's a totally real possibility. And dont dismiss folks who play at lower levels than you, especially when you dont want people dismissing your own opinion.
i didnt dismiss him, he dismiss it first.
again its only 6 wars because of what happened, same way that happened to aq, both was cut short, both had consequences in the top.
we havent yet to have that happened, As you win more, there are higher chances of war rating climbing up. and being paired with higher war rating allaince.
The pool for T1 allaince is very small, less than 15 are in tier 1.
again ur speculating a possibility that hasnt happen, but this possibility happened, and it was 6 wars, thats why i am addressing it, thats why 6 wars to determine top 3 in master is something that needs to be address and known.
especially this season when #1 and #2 did not face each this season. Let alone #3 and #4 havent faced each other. and #2 didnt face any of the top5 aliance war
again there are also allainces who address this kind of concearn
Brian Grant also addressed how his allaince kept on running to kenob
9322 played your same game, the same as every other players play. We do not face empty maps. we just fight what the matchmaking systems give us. we are not even saying to be better than anyone, not even the alliances we have beaten. Afther 6 wars we were 2nd, same afther 9 wars. we will have been 2nd at the end? I do not know, neither you can tell if we have been or not been. If you want to affirm something different you are not objective. If you are not objective you're just pointing the finger at 9322 because, in your opinion, are responsible for taking something away from you.
It seems to me that you are simply crying about rewards: you want the of second place rewards and you are accusing us of having taken them away. what a great thesis you have!
If you have problems with this system, go here: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/categories/suggestion and explain your reasons. I bet not all player like the system as it is now, I even bet that more players that you can suspect will trade a 12 wars system for a 6 wars system. Btw go there and help the game with your suggestions instead of crying and ranting at 9322.
Guys come on. Open up your own thread if you want to have a tit for tat spat. Otherwise keep it to constructive posts only. Can’t believe many notifications I’ve received from you guys going back and forth and it doesn’t add anything meaningful to the issue at hand.
So even though the season was supposed to end, it still went though with matchmaking after a lot of 600k+ members (5-6) had left. As I'm currently sitting at 290k, should this war be taken seriously?? Or is this for the off season?? Or???
Comments
Btw kabam also need to prepare for those guys and girls who will kick by Leader or officers before they will take there season rewards too.
So they cant take the season rewards,
And its will be again the big issues in community
So issues after issues not good for sure ,
Dont know why kabam not going for maintenance and fix leaderboard and The whole game ,
They have time for new A/Q announcement,
They have time for releasing act 6.3
But when its about rewards , They Are silence and telling its not going to fix until next weekend which is kinda unfair for players who wanna go for retire and who wanna go for something different like map 7x5 ,
Until rewards out no one can leave ,
So Lock the kick button until Rewards out for everyone which is fair enough for everyone
Anyone who jumped before the start of war 7 definitely had the chance to participate because the problems happened only at the very tail end of war 7. Depending on when your alliance matches, it probably happened some time between the last few hours and literally right as wars were ending. The higher your alliance, the earlier you match so for most alliances above a certain tier downtime was cutting off maybe the last hour or two at most, if that. I'd say anyone trying to get participation credit in the last few minutes of a war is playing with fire, but it is possible a very tiny number of players were bit here.
The real problematic window is anyone jumping or getting kicked after the start of war 7 but before the start of war 8. They would have had two shots to get participation credit, if their alliance was able to enlist for war 8 or war 9. A lot of alliances got locked out of war 8. Fewer I believe got locked out of 9. Any player jumping after war 7 into an alliance locked out of wars 8 and 9 would then be the largest potential group of players that should have had a chance to get participation credit but were unable to do so due to unavoidable game problems. I'd be curious to know how large that group of players are. If Kabam is reviewing data to look for "manual compensation fixes" I'd focus my attention there.
u successfully wasted my day by letting me check my inbox every now and then for rewards only to announce it 24 hours later that the rewards are going to take a few days.
thanks!!
There's nothing magical about 12 wars. Seasons used to be 24 wars long. They were shortened because players were getting burned out on the long season. Reducing the length of the season reduces the number of wars you have to "decide" placement, and that increases the variability. But there's a trade off between how many match ups help determine placement, and how many people are willing to tolerate. The choice is mostly arbitrary, in that it depends on subjective factors and not quantitative ones.
We compromised from 24 to 12 not because 12 is a better number, but simply because players didn't want to fight 24. This season we're compromising from 12 to 6 because of a catastrophic corruption bug. It is less wars than we normally fight, but it isn't less fair, because there's nothing special about 12 that makes it "enough." If everyone was getting burned out on 12 war seasons, it could very well be 6 war seasons now, whether it was "enough" or not.
Also, 2^6 = 64. That's more than twice as large as the master's bracket (including the top three). Mathematically speaking, that's enough match ups to "resolve" the master's bracket, at least to a first order approximation. That's not the same thing as "deciding" the master's bracket with certainty, but it is enough to say it isn't completely off the wall.
Because there are like around 10 alliances that compete in Masters, and small amount of allainces in Tier 1 around less than 15, the match making pool is pretty small. If your just above Tier 1 u can match up with Tier 2 alliances.
meanwhile there are ALOT of platinum and gold allainces out there.
Not enough war, have to take consideration that they match easier allaince, but we matched up against Kenob and Ny,
Both allainces are top 5 These guys didnt match Kenob,Ny like we did
All i said was that "6" wars is to short, to consider crowning top 3 in masters especially when
#2 9322 witch is @Noone allaince
didn't face #1Kenob or #3 Ny718 or #4 ASR (allaince i am in )
When allaince is just above war rating for T1 cutoff there is a chance that they can match with T2 allainces Resulting in much easier matchups. Or avoiding tough wars
I said 6 wars is to small to judge top 3 in masters, especially when 9322 didnt face kenob or ny.
We have faced Kenob and Ny718 both allainces, resulting us in 4-2 for first 6 wars, and was rank #4,
but after the 7th war we was #2
#2 9322 @Noone did u or did u not have a war against these below alalinces for season 13?
#1 Kenob
#3 Xilem
#4 Asr (me)
#5 Ny718
i was there when it was 24 wars,
Made masters Season 2,
but thats not the case, nor is it the subject. noone said it was magical.
12 wars is the standard now for many seasons.
i was there when it was 24 wars,
Made masters Season 2,
but thats not the case, nor is it the subject.
i Simply posted that 6 wars is to short to crown masters allaince especially when
Rank #1 and #2 never faced each other this season
so just cause ur not playing up here, give u the right to brush off "my concern" and give an answer like that.
So just cause we get better rewards cause we choose to be up here, gives u the right to judge?
Those rewards arent handed for free, alot of alliances push hard and play for the win.
I have afew buddies who missed 1 and even 2 in platinum wars because of matchmaking, and that completely threw off there season,
Some even started bad start in the season and got wins in wars 7th,8th,9th war to climb up and had a rough start.
then all of a sudden kabam says, thanks for fighting war and clmbing but thats not gona count to the season!
All kabam said is that they just get items back they used?
How does kabam fix that?
How does kabam fix Aq when rewards already was released?
We are top 10 in aq, we was rank 8th the week prior and because of this week on the first day of aq the emergency maintanance screwed us over and ended up 30+ aq rank?
Are we gona get our top 10 aq rank rewards as compensation?
but that doesnt concearn u cause, we are "just gona whip out our wallet"
So I don’t understand the prolonging war season rewards to later on this week/early next week. People want to move to different alliances based on what they want to do for AQ either go up, go down, retire etc.
It’s not fair on either people or alliances that they have to go through another whole set of AQ due to the delay on war season rewards keeping everyone locked in, which is also affecting recruiting etc.
again its only 6 wars because of what happened, same way that happened to aq, both was cut short, both had consequences in the top.
we havent yet to have that happened, As you win more, there are higher chances of war rating climbing up. and being paired with higher war rating allaince.
The pool for T1 allaince is very small, less than 15 are in tier 1.
again ur speculating a possibility that hasnt happen, but this possibility happened, and it was 6 wars,
thats why i am addressing it, thats why 6 wars to determine top 3 in master is something that needs to be address and known.
especially this season when #1 and #2 did not face each this season. Let alone #3 and #4 havent faced each other.
and #2 didnt face any of the top5 aliance war
again there are also allainces who address this kind of concearn
Brian Grant also addressed how his allaince kept on running to kenob
#2 spot... 9322 below
Afther 6 wars we were 2nd, same afther 9 wars. we will have been 2nd at the end? I do not know, neither you can tell if we have been or not been. If you want to affirm something different you are not objective. If you are not objective you're just pointing the finger at 9322 because, in your opinion, are responsible for taking something away from you.
It seems to me that you are simply crying about rewards: you want the of second place rewards and you are accusing us of having taken them away. what a great thesis you have!
If you have problems with this system, go here:
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/categories/suggestion
and explain your reasons. I bet not all player like the system as it is now, I even bet that more players that you can suspect will trade a 12 wars system for a 6 wars system. Btw go there and help the game with your suggestions instead of crying and ranting at 9322.
Other wise, If you really think 9322 are responsable of any action that damaged your ally go there:
http://kabam.force.com/PKB/KbContactUsForm
and open a ticket.