**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.

Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.

General Game Feedback [Merged Threads]

14849515354118

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★

    Upsetting the War system isn't going to be a solution to the issues brought up here.

    Any link to reading what are being proposed to combat tanking?
    That's being dealt with now.
    Dealt with. How?
    I read a mod acknowledged tanking is not good taste but the issue is not easily addressed.

    Not looking for the why.
    Trying to learn the how.

    One of the ways specifically has been freezing Rating for Tiers 1-5. That's been confirmed. The other suspected but not officially confirmed is Matchmaking. Which I don't want to get into too much here because I can't speak for them and it'll branch off into another conversation. There is always room for War improvements and it's always a work in progress.
  • winterthurwinterthur Posts: 7,655 ★★★★★
    QuikPik said:

    Or to see alliances that you can definitely beat get better rewards due to the match making system.

    I was thinking about this but no answer. Where should the strongest alliance with only 1BG be ranked against another alliance which has 2 BGs on the rewards scale?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    edited May 2020
    Flow is one issue. Alliances you CAN beat isn't a given that you should have the opportunity to beat them. You score based on the Matches you DO get and the Points you earn in those. Not on who you could massacre if you had the chance. There's a whole entitlement to that view. Let us pick whoever we want and take them out because we can.
    This is exactly why I didn't want to get into this debate here so I'm moving out of it.
  • BenQcSlayerBenQcSlayer Posts: 867 ★★★
    This thread is still going? I am happy to have an exterior life to MCOC.....
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    Oh, I'm not leaving. I'm just not rehashing a debate that has already gone on. It didn't come to an end then and it won't come to an end here. You don't earn Ranks because you beat everyone in your Bracket. You earn them based on the Points you put up. That's still missed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    Charnutz said:

    Oh, I'm not leaving. I'm just not rehashing a debate that has already gone on. It didn't come to an end then and it won't come to an end here. You don't earn Ranks because you beat everyone in your Bracket. You earn them based on the Points you put up. That's still missed.


    Wait, so you shouldn't win points if you are able to beat everyone in your bracket? I'm honestly at a loss. Do you read what you actually post? It's almost like you contradict yourself so you can argue about it later. If you can beat everyone in your bracket you should go to the next higher bracket! Why else have brackets??
    You don't win Points based on what you *could do. You win them based on what you *do.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    edited May 2020
    I'm not getting into this again. It's very simple. The Season is Ranked based on Points. There's entirely too much attention on everyone else's position. People earn their Rank based on the Points they earn in their own Wars. Not because of who they could take out IF they came up against them. If an Alliance is at a particular Rank or Bracket, that's because they've earned the Points to get them there. Regardless of who thinks they shouldn't be there. That's not a problem with the system. That's people trying to pick and choose who deserves what Rewards. That's honestly the last I'm saying on the matter. It's going to take up the entire Thread.
  • ChrisBosioChrisBosio Posts: 50
    @GroundedWisdom what is the jail bars across your profile picture indicate?
  • StevieManWonderStevieManWonder Posts: 5,017 ★★★★★
    DrZola said:

    Since the flag option no longer exists, I’m just going to drop this in here again for easy reference.



    Dr. Zola

    Thanks Doc, let’s get back to the topic at hand.
    We’re talking about AW and the issues with it, right? How do we go about fixing that?
    I play in a Gold II alliance and I’m happy with our ranking as I have no desire to deal with defensive tactics, so I don’t have the most insights on this one. Additionally, it’s no secret that I hate AW in general as I think it’s a waste of time of resources. Why do I think this? Mostly because season rewards blow.
    Like I said, I hate AW so I don’t have many suggestions to fix it because I don’t really care about it, but let’s focus on how we can fix it.
    Ideas?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    I've already shared an idea on how to fix it. At this point, between Tanking, Shells, and punishments, War Rating is no longer a trusted reflection of an Alliance's abilities. People are up and down the board out of Season and you need something to regulate Matches. Since people see it as an issue that some are earning the same with lower Alliances, you leave it as-is, and regulate the Points they can earn based on Prestige increments. This is in addition to the Multiplier they earn based on War Rating. Higher Prestige earns a higher Points threshold. 8k Prestige earns X plus Multiplier. 10k Prestige earns 2X plus Multiplier. A rough example, but the gist is there. AQ does this inherently by regulating the difficulty of the Map. Do the same for War, and Alliances will earn Rewards in somewhat of a rising scale that will increase as their Accounts increase. I still don't agree that it's broken. I think the "big boys" just don't like seeing "little guys" compete with them. Nevertheless, there's your fix.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    Then something is definitely different than the rest of the feedback I've seen. Most people complimented that Fight as one of the best ones in Act 6.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,189 ★★★★★
    H3t3r said:

    Then something is definitely different than the rest of the feedback I've seen. Most people complimented that Fight as one of the best ones in Act 6.

    Think he was just referring to act6 as a whole. But yeah the GM fight is one of if not the best fight in game.
    I guess. Honestly, this is why I never watch MCOC YouTube religiously. I'll look up some suggestions if I'm dealing with specific content, but I don't get involved with the drama. It's like the news. It's suggestive after a while.
  • gohard123gohard123 Posts: 995 ★★★

    Charnutz said:

    I see lots of people suggesting going back to 2-4*s with act 7. I for one absolutely do not want to see story content go down this road.

    I wasn't even one that had big issues with the 6.2 gates but basically the entire community disagreed. Gates can't be bad bc you didn't have the 5*s for 6.2 but then be good bc you have the 3*s for something else. I don't want to use worse versions of champions with less synergies bc you guys can't make up your minds about gates being good or bad. I certainly see far less people suggesting 1*s in all these posts too. Perhaps bc a lot of are missing those and that's why we still have people crying about the last variant.

    I'm fine with those types of quests being introduced in variants as that's the whole point of them. I don't want to see them anywhere near story content though.


    Shouldn't be a big deal unless you're one of those guy's that've sold all his 1,2 and 3 star champs to exploit the broken matchmaking system in war
    I assure you I haven't sold any of my champs. Have somewhere around 700 at the moment. Thats not the point though. I got crucified during the 6.2 threads bc I said I didn't mind the gates, they didn't really affect me as I had basically all the available 5*s at the time and an extensive 6* roster. I got told repeatedly that I'd feel differently if they affected me and that gates and restricting champion selection was inherently bad. Yet here we are and bc 2 and 3* gates wouldn't affect people they're good now? They're either inherently bad or they're only bad when they affect you and I was right all along. Regardless of which, I have no desire to use lower rarity champs bc the majority of you flip flopped on gates
    I really don’t understand the point you are trying to make. Seems like it is you that did not understand the issue behind the gates. The gates aren’t the problem it is the number and rarity attached to the gate that is. If 6.2 had 3* gate (and 3* were allowed in the content) there wouldn’t have been an issue. If 6.2 had 5* gates but only required a maximum of 2, there wouldn’t have been much of an issue.
Sign In or Register to comment.