**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.
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.
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.
Comments
And because it was not intended that they could get so high up and by passing stronger alliances.
Multiplying points based on prestige is literally the same thing as AQ.
We need to keep prestige out of this.
There are no guaranteed losses. There will be for a while until the ratings balance themselves out. After that, not anymore.
And, the matches fought between alliances of different tier but right in the border would be amazingly unfair. You could win but would get less points than they would.
And not because of your skill (war rating) but because of your rank ups.
The move to multiple hidden nodes spread out in the map is not a good idea. You moved past it before please move past it now.
It just spreads the burden to have scouter lens masteries to (at least) 3 guys instead of one.
This new intercept nodes are NOT good. Aegis intercept was difficult, but you only needed to do the required thing a set amount of times. Not indefinetly. And with the unpredictability of the AI we don’t need to be FORCED to keep intercepting through the whole fight.
The move to have everybody tackle both the “bridge” minis is a good one. That
I’ll wait until the defense tactics changes are announced but please consider eliminating them. They don’t work.
Let's take an exaggerated and simplified case. Let's say my alliance decided to dump rating, back when Kabam was apparently using alliance rating as a match criteria. When we had a 2000 war rating we should have been matching against other 2000 alliances, all of which should have had roughly the same strength. But instead, I ordered my players to sell everything except defenders and attackers, so my alliance rating was a ridiculously low number like say 6,000,000. Instead of matching against the average 2000 rating alliance, who might have had an average alliance rating of 20 million, the game was artificially limiting our matches to alliances closer to 6 million. If all the 6 million alliances preferentially match against each other, *someone* has to get to 2000, because someone has to win and someone has to lose. If we happen to be one of the best 6 million alliances we're just going to keep winning and winning, and our rating is going to go higher than higher, and no one is ever going to beat us because the alliances strong enough to beat us aren't inside our little bubble. Eventually our rating could be 2800, having never faced anything but 6 million alliances.
That rating was "earned" by winning, but we got it through facing an artificially small pool of opponents, and we just happened to be the best out of that pool. When Kabam removes that extra match criteria and we now have to fight *all* 2800 alliances, things will be different. *If* we earned that rating fighting alliances that were at least average strength compared to all 2800 alliances, our rating won't suffer, because out average competition won't change. The pool will get bigger, but not stronger. But if our little pocket of competition was weaker than the average 2800 alliance our competition will, on average, get stronger. We will now have to face stronger 2800 alliances. And our rating will go down.
But this isn't an artificial reduction in rating. This is the same mechanism that causes alliances to move up and down all the time as they get stronger and weaker, relative to the competition, every normal season. Every season there are alliances that change in some way: people leave, people join, people suddenly pull Doom. When that happens, their rating is "wrong" relative to their strength now. And wins and losses in season will "correct" that over time, to reflect your true position relative to the competition. Kabam altering the match system is basically doing the same thing on a larger scale: alliances used to compare themselves to a smaller pool of opponents, that pool is getting bigger, and some alliances will see that bigger pool as stronger than the smaller pool, and some alliances will see that bigger pool as weaker than the smaller pool, and their rating will change to reflect that new pecking order. The rewards alliances might lose because they descend in rating are roughly counterbalanced by the rewards they must have won when they originally ascended in rating, which were higher than they would have gotten in the current match system.
I didn't benefit from it at all. I'm talking about fairness for the people who are on the other end of being forced to lose because the concept of a fair fight is too foreign for the people who think they're entitled to watch them fail. Revenge is exactly what it's about. If they can't get it by beating them through Matches, they'll threaten to start dummy Allies and beat them that way. I know exactly what I'm talking about and it's anything but a benefit for anyone. It's sacrificing peoples' Seasons just to keep the top happy.
I'm done going on about it. Just watch the result when the Season starts. If anyone can call it justified or fair, they need to do some serious rethinking on those definitions.
I was looking at who ends up below me on the leaderboard.
Rating 30,439,379
War Rating 777
Bronze 2
Why are they even here in this tier?
AW looks to be more of the same and it’s a game mode I won’t bother with.
In summary, you seem to be saying that, yes, people may lose rewards because of horrible matchups. But they have been getting exaggerated rewards all these seasons and they deserve to get less rewards this time. It was not their fault. It was set up that way by Kabam. So, how exactly is punishing them for playing the game the way kabam wanted them to play fair?. next, you will be saying shell alliances are also fair, since it is not against TOS.
but the overall result will be a much fairer system then we have now.
so just have to deal with it for a small time and then it will sort itself out.
and yes you are clearly out of touch., just look at your disagrees. people do not like what you are saying. it means you are out of touch with the majority of the people.
It is NOT the only way, and I do not consider the efforst of that many honest Players doing their best for a month as something that is trivial. These people put in their best just like anyone else, top or bottom, and that's just as valuable as the Players in the Top Alliance. Their time and effort is worth something. They work their asses off the best they can to get Rewards at the end of the Season, and forcing them into Matches they'll never win for some distorted view of a better system for everyone is just plain ignorant. Ignorant to their efforts, ignorant to their value as Players, and ingorant to the number of people this is going to happen to. Take a look at the Matches. The entire system is going to be affected. It's easy to say, "We're in a huge Ally so we'll be fine. It needs to happen.", but what about the people on the other end of that? Do they matter? The answer is absolutely.
There is another way. I don't consider a month's worth of honest effort as something that is disposable for the "greater good".
Cause with the new map, some node combinations with the current ones could be hard roadblocks...
hope it hurries up and gets approved...
It isn't a small amount of headache. There are other ways to address the Rewards. Which is, after all, the heart of the problem presented. Having a smaller Account with the knowledge and skill of a much more developed Player is absolutely not a gauge into fairness based on ability. Nor is an experienced Player starting a new Account an accurate gauge for how easy it is to progress.
It is not what has to happen, and no amount of dispute is going to convince me that people being forced to lose automatically and forfeit their efforts to grow is a necessary solution for a long-term good. What happens when you devalue a majority to appease a minority? I think we know the answer to that one.
Who wants to play Wars that are decided before they even start? Place your Champs, wait 20 some hours, and start Attack knowing there's no way in hell you'll ever win. Try a whole Season of that. Multiply that by the number of Alliances that will have to go through that. Factor in how it feels. What you get is a miserable experience that could be prevented with some better forethought. But by all means, you go ahead and keep trying to explain how those peoples' experiences don't matter in the long run. I'm not having it.
Before prestige matching started we were t3-5 earning appropriate rewards for our level. We are now t5-7. Doesn't sound that bad? Consider this.. We've only gotten *stronger* since then and have gone *down* in tier when we should have gone up. Even if our strength remained static during this time, that's still a considerable loss of rewards. But factor in the fact that we should have progressed, but instead fell down in rank and it's very unfair.
It's not just about the fact that lower prestige alliances were effectively taking rewards from people they never have to face in competition and skewing the ranks/tiers. That's only one part of it. The prestige matching system fundamentally changed the entire concept of how the game mode functioned. The concept of how war has always worked in this game is as follows... Win a war? Congrats, you will now face a slightly tougher oppenent. Win again.. next one will be harder still, etc. Until at a certain point, you meet your match and lose. You then receive a slightly less difficult match, etc.. until you level off at a certain point in the rankings.
With prestige matching, this is no longer the case. In two separate and opposite ways. Lower prestige alliances have been able to perpetually move up in ranks and rewards without any meaningful increase in difficulty. I have real knowledge of this because I have friends in lower prestige alliances who have given me the information. I'm not just speculating. Meanwhile, higher prestige alliances can lose 10 wars in a row and the difficulty never decreases. In fact, in my own personal experience, I can tell you that we were almost always matched with someone 20-30% larger than us. All because the system reaches across many factors just to match prestige. Even during a losing streak. This is never how war worked in the history of the game. During season 17 in particular, we threw up our hands because with each loss the difficulty *increased* ..like significantly..each time. I think you've grossly underestimated how many mid to mid/high level alliances were negatively affected by this. It's not just the "fat cats" or "top dogs" or whatever you want to call them.
Do I think that this correction to the rankings will be rough for a brief time for lower prestige alliances? Yes, I do.
Do I think it's the travesty of justice you seem to be describing? Absolutely not. The loss of rewards my alliance and alliances in similar situations experienced over months and the extra rewards that lower prestige alliances have been given is far more impactful. To call it revenge is just plain ignorant and insulting. We've been working for years to grow our alliance. We've paid our dues. Newer players are progressing faster than ever. Along with a sense of entitlement. It takes hard work and dedication to grow your alliance. You have to pay your dues to earn higher ranks and rewards. They won't be handed to you.
its only even an issue cus the current system is broken and alliance are sitting where they do not belong.
the only way to change this is to reset it.
they could reset everyones rating to 0 bu that will be even worse temporarily.
the way in which the current system is broken is the problem.
noone is saying small alliances and noobs don't matter.
noobs do matter, but noobs should not be able to beat experienced players because of a broken system.
if noobs and veterans are playing for the same rewards then they need to play each other.
if you believe they shouldn't play each other then they need to play for different reawrds.
but here you are.
either continue talking or not.
but if you are going to say you are done then be done.
a 5 million alliance should not be fighting in tier 5.
the high tiers should be for the strong allies.
the fact that a 5 mil ally gets to tier 5 while fighting only 5 mil allies is the problem.
they will only be stuck fighting stronger allies for a while because they need to go back where they belong.
in what world does a 5mil ally deserve to be at the top getting top dog rewards because they are the best 5mil ally while a 20mil ally is t10 getting low rewards because they are the worst 20 mil ally?
they are still better than the 5mil ally and should be rewarded as such. if the two fought we know who would win hense why you are complaining.