**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Comments
I'm not claiming there's nothing wrong with the matchmaking and it's perfect but claiming we're getting those rewards handed over to us with no effort because we only have to face weak players (which is kinda what you're implying) is just not true either.
That took so long to deal with that again, people started being hesitant on ranking high prestige. Or just quitting war entirely.
People are playing primarily for currency to buy what they want in the Store. Not to steal anyone's "spot". This War mentality doesn't apply to every aspect of the game.
People are hesitant to raise prestige, and many are hoping others to “outprestige” them over time, in order to get better matches at VT.
This shouldn’t be happening.
People should be after prestige, not avoiding it.
While, we have UC accounts made it GC believing they were well worth to get there, ignoring the FACT, that because of a matchmaking that favours them, they avoided the competition, which are the several Paragon stacked accounts, that should be there instead of them.
Unless they believe, that if they had matched them they could stand a chance, to not get stomped 😂
It’s really like a Deja-Vu from AW Prestige matchmaking and we still have people, denying this problematic situation.
Meanwhile, until Kabam decides to take action, these Paragon players are losing the best in game rewards, watching UC players claiming them 😠
Wait so this.... LMAO
You guys really need to make it about more than just prestige/roster size and title. time played and progress means nothing and thats a really bad system for a competitive game mode
I also don't live on the forums. And neither do the Kabam developers. Should I and they not care either?
All VT losses are -1 token
All VT wins vs a UC or CAV are +1 token
All VT wins vs a TB are +2 tokens
All VT wins vs a Paragon are +3 tokens
That would get the top players out of the VT sooner and promote building the best roster possible. You can keep the matchmaking as it is and apply an AW-like multiplier to wins.
Please, explain in detail. Thanks.
I honestly think Gold and low Platinum were the worst tiers to escape.
Last week, I tended to hit 2 out of every 3 opponents with every champ for this meta, most with at least one Legend title. For a few days, that changed and I found myself against mostly comparable rosters with the occasional sandbagger. This weekend was the return of large accounts and it bled into today as well:
This was a pretty typical run for me—mix of comparable larger, veteran accounts and then still larger accounts, until oddly this evening things opened up for me at Diamond 1:
That’s two forfeits in the span of 5 matches, presumably because of disconnections. If I recall correctly, that brought my record with matches decided by DC to something like 2-5. At least I had a couple break my way.
All of this only goes to say that there is a lot of room for improvement in matchmaking…and not punishing connection issues. I’m fine facing players who have titles on their profiles—my account isn’t small and while I don’t pretend to be the greatest, I do have a solid roster and I do have my moments. I’m also fine with facing smaller accounts who are just skilled players—and I’ve lost to more than a few of those.
But I’m really not fine with smaller accounts getting the bubble-wrap treatment any more than I am sandbaggers getting an advantage. There used to be different arena tracks for veteran and beginner accounts—I’m swell if we do something similar for BGs, as long as the prizes reflect reduced difficulty.
Side note: At least one of my most recent forfeit wins in D1 was against an account 33% the size of mine with a single R4. It doesn’t take R4 to win BGs, but near GC it gets more and more important. I’d like to see the path that account took before we met.
Longer post than I usually make. But I wanted to provide at least anecdotal commentary on where the BG matchmaking goes awry.
Dr. Zola