**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options

“Fixed alliance war matchmaking”

124

Comments

  • Options
    ItsDamienItsDamien Posts: 5,626 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    Stop it. He's already dead. 😂😂😂
  • Options
    ZomagedonZomagedon Posts: 31 ★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
  • Options
    DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,660 Guardian
    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    What "that" are you referring to? I'm not calling any "that" a strawman.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    What "that" are you referring to? I'm not calling any "that" a strawman.
    Very clever. Also, a bag of wooden nickels.
  • Options
    ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 4,773 ★★★★★
    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
  • Options
    FrostyFrosty Posts: 485 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    You say excuses we say reasons.

    Reasons, excuses, same thing. All of which ignore the problem. Making people go through it is not a fix. Their Season is suffering. Their Wars are being used as a balancing agent. Their experience is miserable. Their desire to even bother is leaving. THAT is what we're looking at now. Not the system as it will be when everything settles. Not what people didn't get for Rewards. Not some hypothetical situation or witty analogy to justify not caring. This right here. I'm not accepting them anymore because it's not just collateral damage. They're not pawns. They're people.
    So since their season is suffering as you say. Did you by chance speak up the last 10 seasons for all those alliances who suffered under the old system? How many alliances had low placed seasons under the old system? You could have been trying to improve the system before it got so bad.

    Stop and think that its not all about a few lost wars and there is a bigger picture for once.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    give one way fair to everyone.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Frosty said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    You say excuses we say reasons.

    Reasons, excuses, same thing. All of which ignore the problem. Making people go through it is not a fix. Their Season is suffering. Their Wars are being used as a balancing agent. Their experience is miserable. Their desire to even bother is leaving. THAT is what we're looking at now. Not the system as it will be when everything settles. Not what people didn't get for Rewards. Not some hypothetical situation or witty analogy to justify not caring. This right here. I'm not accepting them anymore because it's not just collateral damage. They're not pawns. They're people.
    So since their season is suffering as you say. Did you by chance speak up the last 10 seasons for all those alliances who suffered under the old system? How many alliances had low placed seasons under the old system? You could have been trying to improve the system before it got so bad.

    Stop and think that its not all about a few lost wars and there is a bigger picture for once.
    Here's the strawman argument we were talking about.
  • Options
    OnmixOnmix Posts: 508 ★★★
    You have literally the exact same War Rating. There is no fairer matchup possible.

    Doesn’t matter how many times people try to (unsuccessfully) justify how this could be wrong.
    Doesn’t matter how many threads get closed by those baseless arguments.

    Every time, the response will be the same.
    If the War Rating is similar, it’s a fair matchup.
    If the War Rating is equal. Well. I think it’s obvious.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Frosty said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    You say excuses we say reasons.

    Reasons, excuses, same thing. All of which ignore the problem. Making people go through it is not a fix. Their Season is suffering. Their Wars are being used as a balancing agent. Their experience is miserable. Their desire to even bother is leaving. THAT is what we're looking at now. Not the system as it will be when everything settles. Not what people didn't get for Rewards. Not some hypothetical situation or witty analogy to justify not caring. This right here. I'm not accepting them anymore because it's not just collateral damage. They're not pawns. They're people.
    So since their season is suffering as you say. Did you by chance speak up the last 10 seasons for all those alliances who suffered under the old system? How many alliances had low placed seasons under the old system? You could have been trying to improve the system before it got so bad.

    Stop and think that its not all about a few lost wars and there is a bigger picture for once.
    Here's the strawman argument we were talking about.
    That is not a strawman, he did not take your position and change it to something else.
  • Options
    FrostyFrosty Posts: 485 ★★★
    edited July 2020
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Frosty said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    You say excuses we say reasons.

    Reasons, excuses, same thing. All of which ignore the problem. Making people go through it is not a fix. Their Season is suffering. Their Wars are being used as a balancing agent. Their experience is miserable. Their desire to even bother is leaving. THAT is what we're looking at now. Not the system as it will be when everything settles. Not what people didn't get for Rewards. Not some hypothetical situation or witty analogy to justify not caring. This right here. I'm not accepting them anymore because it's not just collateral damage. They're not pawns. They're people.
    So since their season is suffering as you say. Did you by chance speak up the last 10 seasons for all those alliances who suffered under the old system? How many alliances had low placed seasons under the old system? You could have been trying to improve the system before it got so bad.

    Stop and think that its not all about a few lost wars and there is a bigger picture for once.
    Here's the strawman argument we were talking about.
    Nice rebuttal

    I asked my question as you like to speak up about injustice which i assume you did for the past 10 seasons
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
  • Options
    Fantasy_91Fantasy_91 Posts: 243 ★
    KDoggg2017 said:


    We run 1BG in AW. Often don't place all defenders. All we want is the loyalty. We are outscoring opponents 10-1.
    This can't be fun for our opponents.

    Wouldn't you get more loyalty if you ran more than 1 battlegroup. Even if you used the same strategy of placing lower defenders or not fully doing attack every war? Then you'd be less likely to run into uneven matchups even after ratings correct themselves. Before it didnt matter, you would have matched with like prestige...but allys with this mentality will just continue being mismatched even after everyone gets corrected.

  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
  • Options
    ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 4,773 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
  • Options
    Fantasy_91Fantasy_91 Posts: 243 ★
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
  • Options
    KDoggg2017KDoggg2017 Posts: 1,208 ★★★★
    edited July 2020
    Fantasy_91 said:

    KDoggg2017 said:


    We run 1BG in AW. Often don't place all defenders. All we want is the loyalty. We are outscoring opponents 10-1.
    This can't be fun for our opponents.

    Wouldn't you get more loyalty if you ran more than 1 battlegroup. Even if you used the same strategy of placing lower defenders or not fully doing attack every war? Then you'd be less likely to run into uneven matchups even after ratings correct themselves. Before it didnt matter, you would have matched with like prestige...but allys with this mentality will just continue being mismatched even after everyone gets corrected.

    That's fair...But we don't require AW participation. Only AQ is mandatory. So the 1BG is open for volunteers, whether it gets filled or not.
    We pushed in AW up to Gold 1 back in the day but it's not worth the stress or resources. Even then we only ran 2BGs. Being able to take AW off when players wanted was much more valuable, in my opinion. If there were more ways to get loyalty I would not run AW at all.
  • Options
    ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 4,773 ★★★★★
    Fantasy_91 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
    That's true as well. Could always make a new ally and start over. Honestly that might be the best idea for some alliances right now.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Buttehrs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
    So how is postponing the Season harmful?
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    1) that is not the claim you made.
    2) I thought making it fair for some at the expense of others was your complaint, now you are supporting it when it is how you want it.
    3) That is an opinion, not a fact. You cannot even prove what portion of the playerbase would have been affected by the majority of those actions.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Buttehrs said:

    Fantasy_91 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
    That's true as well. Could always make a new ally and start over. Honestly that might be the best idea for some alliances right now.
    Not really. One with over 100 War Rating was overmatched. 1 Mil vs. 20 Mil.
  • Options
    ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 4,773 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
    So how is postponing the Season harmful?
    Because people look for the gold and loyalty for aq tickets. Crystals and catalysts for rank ups.
  • Options
    CaptainGameCaptainGame Posts: 369 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    You don’t want fairness. You use that as a mask. You want something that you benefit from regardless of how it screws others over. Stop the charade.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    1) that is not the claim you made.
    2) I thought making it fair for some at the expense of others was your complaint, now you are supporting it when it is how you want it.
    3) That is an opinion, not a fact. You cannot even prove what portion of the playerbase would have been affected by the majority of those actions.
    I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I gave ideas. There's room for many more. If people have other ideas, by all means. That would require not waving a flag for this situation.
  • Options
    ButtehrsButtehrs Posts: 4,773 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Fantasy_91 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
    That's true as well. Could always make a new ally and start over. Honestly that might be the best idea for some alliances right now.
    Not really. One with over 100 War Rating was overmatched. 1 Mil vs. 20 Mil.
    Never said it wouldnt happen. Always a chance you get boned. Just like real life. Imagine that.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Buttehrs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
    So how is postponing the Season harmful?
    Because people look for the gold and loyalty for aq tickets. Crystals and catalysts for rank ups.
    You can get that off-season.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Buttehrs said:

    Zomagedon said:

    Arsoz said:

    Accept the loss or git gud scrub

    Calling me a scrub, I’m cavalier idiot
    Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
    Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
    For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
    I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
    I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
    That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
    Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Lormif said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    ItsDamien said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.

    Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.

    So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.

    This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
    No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
    I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
    That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
    "I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."

    Okay Karen.
    No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
    That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
    It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
    How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
    There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented.
    How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
    Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
    The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful.
    You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
    none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
    They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
    1) that is not the claim you made.
    2) I thought making it fair for some at the expense of others was your complaint, now you are supporting it when it is how you want it.
    3) That is an opinion, not a fact. You cannot even prove what portion of the playerbase would have been affected by the majority of those actions.
    I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I gave ideas. There's room for many more. If people have other ideas, by all means. That would require not waving a flag for this situation.
    This is not arguing for the sake of arguing, you make an claim, support your claim or stop making the bad claims.
  • Options
    njandynjandy Posts: 238 ★
    i honestly don’t think they changed a thing. haven’t had a good matchup all season. either we steam roll or get steam rolled. we used to be silver 2. now we’re gold 3 and actually put in less effort. we don’t belong in gold 3. everyone saying the system is working perfectly must not be seeing everyone else’s side of things. lots of promises but same old same ol for us.
This discussion has been closed.