HG war bug solution does not help

SmiffSmiff Member Posts: 8 ★
in General Discussion
As someone who spent over 1K on black Friday/cyber weekend deals, who never comments on the changes you guys make and do to this game. I find it appalling that your solution is to lower rewards claim by one war, which we don't even have that many wars left, and then say this war doesn't count. There are numerous alliances that are on the verge of moving up a bracket that this war not counting will deem their seasons dead. You guys are literally coming off your most profitable weekend and us players are now being screwed out of rewards that we work for and have even spent time, money, and resources to obtain through war efforts. Weather it through buying deals or grinding arena and content for what we want. I hope you take this comment and reconsider your plans, or at least have some sort of massive compensation
«13

Comments

  • rockykostonrockykoston Member Posts: 1,505 ★★★★
    Totally agreed. All the effort that the leaders, officers and the entire alliance have put in is going into the bin.

    So many alliances know they can move up, or atleast have a fair chance of doing so, but this cancellation isn't going to make that possible.

    How are we supposed to stay motivated?
  • Blue_007Blue_007 Member Posts: 43 ★
    1000% agree! I wish Kabam would drop this war and add one more to the season. This way all is balanced out and no alliances get hurt by this issue. Because that one less war can and will be the deciding factor between one bracket to another for so many alliances and it’s absolutely not their fault.
  • Blue_007Blue_007 Member Posts: 43 ★
    StevieManWonder said:

    How did you spend over 1K on the CW deals? The cash deals tap out at 595 and would net you 17700 units and all the unit deals came out to 27000 units which means you would have to buy 3 more odins to get them all (assuming you had no units to begin with). That only brings the total up to 895.
    Unless you're not in the US, then disregard this comment.

    That’s what you see wrong here lol. He might have purchased more unit to get all the unit deals as well.
  • CoppinCoppin Member Posts: 2,601 ★★★★★
    StevieManWonder said:

    How did you spend over 1K on the CW deals? The cash deals tap out at 595 and would net you 17700 units and all the unit deals came out to 27000 units which means you would have to buy 3 more odins to get them all (assuming you had no units to begin with). That only brings the total up to 895.
    Unless you're not in the US, then disregard this comment.

    Could be 1k pesos
  • SmiffSmiff Member Posts: 8 ★
    TyEdge said:

    It’s ridiculous that you’ve been through 9 wars, you aren’t in whatever bracket you’re talking about, but you’re convinced these last 3 wars will get you there.

    Putting aside changing multipliers as you go, the options for 3-war and 2-war finales have these options to move you up or down.

    3-0
    2-0
    2-1
    1-1
    1-2
    0-2
    0-3

    A 2-0 finish (out of 2) will do more for you than a 2-1 finish (in three wars). Unless you’re waving a magic wand and deciding your group will go 3-0, there’s no reason to believe you’re categorically worse off. Does this narrow the range of outcomes? Absolutely. If you’re upset about that, take a moment to reflect and consider whether your desired outcome was actually realistic to begin with.

    well when one victory means the differnce between t1 and t2 yeah i am gonna be concerned about every win and loss at the stage im at
  • SheepSheep Member Posts: 1 ★
    I hundred percent agree I enjoyed this game spent money and grew my account however I’m very disappointed in this decision as it causes more complications I’m close to first platinum 4 highest ever got and bet there are loads others who will suffer now it saddens me that minor things are being implemented to this fix
  • DiablordDiablord Member Posts: 567 ★★★
    edited December 2021
    Grub said:

    Or you could’ve lost and been even further.

    They should end the season and just give some compensation that bumps people to next tier. Easy fix.

    @Grub

    No. Imagine a master 2 ally getting comp .
    By your logic, it should recieve masters 1 rewards?

    For tiers that are lower than p4, this comp solution is fine, but for alliances above plat4, where it gets very competitive, this would cause rage. Alliances would complain about unfair ways of giving rewards to players who did not deserve.
  • SmiffSmiff Member Posts: 8 ★
    TyEdge said:

    Smiff said:

    TyEdge said:

    It’s ridiculous that you’ve been through 9 wars, you aren’t in whatever bracket you’re talking about, but you’re convinced these last 3 wars will get you there.

    Putting aside changing multipliers as you go, the options for 3-war and 2-war finales have these options to move you up or down.

    3-0
    2-0
    2-1
    1-1
    1-2
    0-2
    0-3

    A 2-0 finish (out of 2) will do more for you than a 2-1 finish (in three wars). Unless you’re waving a magic wand and deciding your group will go 3-0, there’s no reason to believe you’re categorically worse off. Does this narrow the range of outcomes? Absolutely. If you’re upset about that, take a moment to reflect and consider whether your desired outcome was actually realistic to begin with.

    well when one victory means the differnce between t1 and t2 yeah i am gonna be concerned about every win and loss at the stage im at
    Here’s the reality of the situation - if you’re ranked #167 after 9 wars, there’s nothing you can do in 3 wars to climb to #100. You’re averaging 1.03m pts per war. The team at the bottom of p2 averages 1.175m. You need to score 1.6mil points per war to overcome that deficit in 3 wars.

    You were NEVER going to do that. Even with 3 wars with no deaths and perfect diversity. You should thank them for sparing you from wasting resources on that hopeless climb.
    idk why your using that as an example it's not just about me and my team..... there are numerous alliances that are even closer than i am to the next bracket..... defned kabam all you want they **** a lot of people over wheter you can see it or not
  • Xguard77Xguard77 Member Posts: 570 ★★★
    While I'm not as passionate or angry as those above, i think would be an act of faith to reward all alliances one level above their current placement. Takes care of the "we were so close to the next tier!" thing, and certainly isn't going to break the game economy.
  • theMercenarytheMercenary Member Posts: 643 ★★★
    TyEdge said:

    Smiff said:

    TyEdge said:

    It’s ridiculous that you’ve been through 9 wars, you aren’t in whatever bracket you’re talking about, but you’re convinced these last 3 wars will get you there.

    Putting aside changing multipliers as you go, the options for 3-war and 2-war finales have these options to move you up or down.

    3-0
    2-0
    2-1
    1-1
    1-2
    0-2
    0-3

    A 2-0 finish (out of 2) will do more for you than a 2-1 finish (in three wars). Unless you’re waving a magic wand and deciding your group will go 3-0, there’s no reason to believe you’re categorically worse off. Does this narrow the range of outcomes? Absolutely. If you’re upset about that, take a moment to reflect and consider whether your desired outcome was actually realistic to begin with.

    well when one victory means the differnce between t1 and t2 yeah i am gonna be concerned about every win and loss at the stage im at
    Here’s the reality of the situation - if you’re ranked #167 after 9 wars, there’s nothing you can do in 3 wars to climb to #100. You’re averaging 1.03m pts per war. The team at the bottom of p2 averages 1.175m. You need to score 1.6mil points per war to overcome that deficit in 3 wars.

    You were NEVER going to do that. Even with 3 wars with no deaths and perfect diversity. You should thank them for sparing you from wasting resources on that hopeless climb.
    who told you that him and his alliance is at #167?
  • theMercenarytheMercenary Member Posts: 643 ★★★
    completely agreed with everything you said buddy. this is getting absurd. spare your compensation kabam. just fix the game.
  • SearmenisSearmenis Member Posts: 1,600 ★★★★★
    Completely agreed too. Many of us we bust our butts to play war, something we do for our alliance that, again, many of us don't even like but it's mandatory, and all this struggle is just, cancelled.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Member Posts: 21,835 ★★★★★
    ManuEL_MARVEL said:

    I completely agree, Kabam needs to recognize the investment we make into our accounts. They should also take into account the pride we get in the rankings. To just ignore the fact that certain alliances were on the verge of moving up and taking pride is extremely upsetting on top of financial aspect.

    Take in account the pride... WTF.
  • BigBlueOxBigBlueOx Member Posts: 2,111 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Cancelling a Season or War is never a decision we make without a lot of thought and while it may not be the best, it's kind of the "least worst" solution we had in this case. There are always so many different factors involved and many questions that will be left unanswered, like "would this Alliance have gone up a bracket? What if they went down instead?". These aren't things we can predict.

    We don't like having to cancel War Seasons, but maintaining the fairness of a War Season to the best of our abilities is important to us, and to do so, we often have to take the nuclear option.

    We know it isn't perfect, but we did this to do the best that we could without pressuring Alliances to still win in a war that was not supposed to count towards the Season in the end.

    Fair to interpret this as, the cards will fall where they fall and awards will be handed out based on current placements? Or in the face of another bugged game mode will the player base participating and affected by this be compensated outside of those rewards?

    Asking for a “friend”
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Member Posts: 9,264 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Cancelling a Season or War is never a decision we make without a lot of thought and while it may not be the best, it's kind of the "least worst" solution we had in this case. There are always so many different factors involved and many questions that will be left unanswered, like "would this Alliance have gone up a bracket? What if they went down instead?". These aren't things we can predict.

    We don't like having to cancel War Seasons, but maintaining the fairness of a War Season to the best of our abilities is important to us, and to do so, we often have to take the nuclear option.

    We know it isn't perfect, but we did this to do the best that we could without pressuring Alliances to still win in a war that was not supposed to count towards the Season in the end.

    Not that I’m demanding or asking for this in any sense, but is there an explanation for why there isn’t the decision to give people a little extra rewards? (maybe not the bracket above, but a little extra) in case people had made it up to the next one.

    I definitely can see the answer to this being game economy, I get that it may not be realistic and would fully understand that. I was just wondering if this is ever a conversation going on in situations like this.
  • VTA92VTA92 Member Posts: 374 ★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Cancelling a Season or War is never a decision we make without a lot of thought and while it may not be the best, it's kind of the "least worst" solution we had in this case. There are always so many different factors involved and many questions that will be left unanswered, like "would this Alliance have gone up a bracket? What if they went down instead?". These aren't things we can predict.

    We don't like having to cancel War Seasons, but maintaining the fairness of a War Season to the best of our abilities is important to us, and to do so, we often have to take the nuclear option.

    We know it isn't perfect, but we did this to do the best that we could without pressuring Alliances to still win in a war that was not supposed to count towards the Season in the end.

    Is the usual vetting of scores still going to take place?
  • CoppinCoppin Member Posts: 2,601 ★★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Cancelling a Season or War is never a decision we make without a lot of thought and while it may not be the best, it's kind of the "least worst" solution we had in this case. There are always so many different factors involved and many questions that will be left unanswered, like "would this Alliance have gone up a bracket? What if they went down instead?". These aren't things we can predict.

    We don't like having to cancel War Seasons, but maintaining the fairness of a War Season to the best of our abilities is important to us, and to do so, we often have to take the nuclear option.

    We know it isn't perfect, but we did this to do the best that we could without pressuring Alliances to still win in a war that was not supposed to count towards the Season in the end.

    This decision is still not "in all fairness" like you have said.. there is no way to know if they would have gone up or down a bracket. At the same time the people who are most worried about going up pr down are the top brackets... The same way AQ was not suspended and the special compensation was what? Doubling down the potions?... Meanwhile map 7 and 8 were unaffected and got their full glory and compensation as well.
    The game is catering to a few... And just to the few on top and calls it balanced.
    The compensations.. it stops being a compensation after an x ammount of times, the turn into straight up excuses after.
    I still dont understand how AQ wasnt shut down when entry level players and mid tier were affected. Maps 1-6 all messed up .. but 7 and 8 kept on going and received their proper weekly reward.

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,511 ★★★★★
    BitterSteel said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I'm on the fence about the idea of bumping the Rewards a Tier. Now, I would certainly be grateful if that was the case, but in the past we've seen Win Rewards as a Compensation. What doesn't sit well with me about it is it goes against the core function of War. It's a competition based on cumulative results. We earn based on what we fight. Not based on what we *could have* fought. I'm not opposed to some kind of Comp, although I'm not really petitioning. I can't necessarily say the idea of bumping everyone up a Tier sits well with me. You earn what you fight. Not what you couldn't fight.

    I think that’s where I am, if it happens I’d be grateful. But I think it’s reasonable if it doesn’t.

    I don’t think an entire tier is reasonable though, I think just a bit extra for each tier if anything was going to happen. I mean you look at some of the differences between tiers it’s pretty crazy
    Well yes, but then you have a Compensation that benefits some and not others.
Sign In or Register to comment.