linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches.
MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches. I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing. Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums.
linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches. I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing. Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums. Yes, specific tiers are associated with specific maps. But if you have an alliance at T11 and they get the intermediate map, and they're matched up to an alliance in T12 with the novice map (I"m not sure these are the boundary points, but it's possible to dig up the post if needed) -- then both alliances will get either the novice or the intermediate map, with the choice (according to kabam) at random. Neither alliance has an advantage; for the T11 alliance, the worst that will happen is that they will see the map they'll get if they lose a few matches (if they get the novice map); and for the T12 alliance, the worst that will happen is they'll see the map they'll get if they win a few matches (if they get the intermediate map). So long as both alliances get the same nodes, the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. But so long as you explore enough (where enough is much less than 100%), you'll get all the exploration rewards and it's just a question of if you get winner or loser awards. It seems pretty minor in the scheme of things, and I don't have a better solution unless they're going to fix matching much more broadly. War rating is a poor way to do matching because it takes a long time to settle, and is easily subject to abuse (e.g. alliance hoping for easy 5* shards, as well as taking far too long for new alliances to reach a rating that makes sense -- leading to very boring and lopsided matches). So if they worked on improving that, and along the way avoided surprises for alliances near the border between different maps -- that'd seem reasonable. But I don't have a problem with the surprises, despite the fact that it sometimes gives us T1 nodes for T2 rewards.
linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches. I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing. Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums. Yes, specific tiers are associated with specific maps. But if you have an alliance at T11 and they get the intermediate map, and they're matched up to an alliance in T12 with the novice map (I"m not sure these are the boundary points, but it's possible to dig up the post if needed) -- then both alliances will get either the novice or the intermediate map, with the choice (according to kabam) at random. Neither alliance has an advantage; for the T11 alliance, the worst that will happen is that they will see the map they'll get if they lose a few matches (if they get the novice map); and for the T12 alliance, the worst that will happen is they'll see the map they'll get if they win a few matches (if they get the intermediate map). So long as both alliances get the same nodes, the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. But so long as you explore enough (where enough is much less than 100%), you'll get all the exploration rewards and it's just a question of if you get winner or loser awards. It seems pretty minor in the scheme of things, and I don't have a better solution unless they're going to fix matching much more broadly. War rating is a poor way to do matching because it takes a long time to settle, and is easily subject to abuse (e.g. alliance hoping for easy 5* shards, as well as taking far too long for new alliances to reach a rating that makes sense -- leading to very boring and lopsided matches). So if they worked on improving that, and along the way avoided surprises for alliances near the border between different maps -- that'd seem reasonable. But I don't have a problem with the surprises, despite the fact that it sometimes gives us T1 nodes for T2 rewards. ...the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. Exactly. This happened weeks ago where people in very high tiers were on the intermediate map. That hard map is not "slightly" harder; it's a big boost in difficulty compared to intermediate, IMHO. You have added bleed and poison nodes, Bane, Spite, All or Nothing, Buffet, Masochism, more unblockables, Power Shield.... the list goes on. It just isn't consistent that we played 3 wars in Tier8 and 2 of them were on the intermediate map and 1 on the hard map. Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier7 - Hard Map (Win) Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss) Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win)Tier8 - Hard Map (?) I assume you're left column (tier) is from your opponents, not your rewards? Based on http://mcoc-guide.blogspot.com/2017/09/mcoc-aw-update-v150-alliance-war.html , if you're in tier 8 you're on the border between advanced (8-10) and hard (4-7). You should expect to occasionally move up into tier 7 and get the hard map. I realize the hard map is much harder than advanced one, but given that you're close to moving up (or perhaps that was your tier), this seems a more-or-less reasonable compromise. If you mean to argue that you don't like hard+ AW maps because they have BS nodes ... that's a plausible argument. But it seems different from arguing that you should never be bumped up a small distance to the next bracket for matching.
MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches. I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing. Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums. Yes, specific tiers are associated with specific maps. But if you have an alliance at T11 and they get the intermediate map, and they're matched up to an alliance in T12 with the novice map (I"m not sure these are the boundary points, but it's possible to dig up the post if needed) -- then both alliances will get either the novice or the intermediate map, with the choice (according to kabam) at random. Neither alliance has an advantage; for the T11 alliance, the worst that will happen is that they will see the map they'll get if they lose a few matches (if they get the novice map); and for the T12 alliance, the worst that will happen is they'll see the map they'll get if they win a few matches (if they get the intermediate map). So long as both alliances get the same nodes, the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. But so long as you explore enough (where enough is much less than 100%), you'll get all the exploration rewards and it's just a question of if you get winner or loser awards. It seems pretty minor in the scheme of things, and I don't have a better solution unless they're going to fix matching much more broadly. War rating is a poor way to do matching because it takes a long time to settle, and is easily subject to abuse (e.g. alliance hoping for easy 5* shards, as well as taking far too long for new alliances to reach a rating that makes sense -- leading to very boring and lopsided matches). So if they worked on improving that, and along the way avoided surprises for alliances near the border between different maps -- that'd seem reasonable. But I don't have a problem with the surprises, despite the fact that it sometimes gives us T1 nodes for T2 rewards. ...the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. Exactly. This happened weeks ago where people in very high tiers were on the intermediate map. That hard map is not "slightly" harder; it's a big boost in difficulty compared to intermediate, IMHO. You have added bleed and poison nodes, Bane, Spite, All or Nothing, Buffet, Masochism, more unblockables, Power Shield.... the list goes on. It just isn't consistent that we played 3 wars in Tier8 and 2 of them were on the intermediate map and 1 on the hard map. Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier7 - Hard Map (Win) Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss) Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win)Tier8 - Hard Map (?)
MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » linux wrote: » MikeHock wrote: » There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards. This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards. I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches. I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing. Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums. Yes, specific tiers are associated with specific maps. But if you have an alliance at T11 and they get the intermediate map, and they're matched up to an alliance in T12 with the novice map (I"m not sure these are the boundary points, but it's possible to dig up the post if needed) -- then both alliances will get either the novice or the intermediate map, with the choice (according to kabam) at random. Neither alliance has an advantage; for the T11 alliance, the worst that will happen is that they will see the map they'll get if they lose a few matches (if they get the novice map); and for the T12 alliance, the worst that will happen is they'll see the map they'll get if they win a few matches (if they get the intermediate map). So long as both alliances get the same nodes, the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. But so long as you explore enough (where enough is much less than 100%), you'll get all the exploration rewards and it's just a question of if you get winner or loser awards. It seems pretty minor in the scheme of things, and I don't have a better solution unless they're going to fix matching much more broadly. War rating is a poor way to do matching because it takes a long time to settle, and is easily subject to abuse (e.g. alliance hoping for easy 5* shards, as well as taking far too long for new alliances to reach a rating that makes sense -- leading to very boring and lopsided matches). So if they worked on improving that, and along the way avoided surprises for alliances near the border between different maps -- that'd seem reasonable. But I don't have a problem with the surprises, despite the fact that it sometimes gives us T1 nodes for T2 rewards. ...the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. Exactly. This happened weeks ago where people in very high tiers were on the intermediate map. That hard map is not "slightly" harder; it's a big boost in difficulty compared to intermediate, IMHO. You have added bleed and poison nodes, Bane, Spite, All or Nothing, Buffet, Masochism, more unblockables, Power Shield.... the list goes on. It just isn't consistent that we played 3 wars in Tier8 and 2 of them were on the intermediate map and 1 on the hard map. Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier7 - Hard Map (Win) Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss) Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win)Tier8 - Hard Map (?) I assume you're left column (tier) is from your opponents, not your rewards? Based on http://mcoc-guide.blogspot.com/2017/09/mcoc-aw-update-v150-alliance-war.html , if you're in tier 8 you're on the border between advanced (8-10) and hard (4-7). You should expect to occasionally move up into tier 7 and get the hard map. I realize the hard map is much harder than advanced one, but given that you're close to moving up (or perhaps that was your tier), this seems a more-or-less reasonable compromise. If you mean to argue that you don't like hard+ AW maps because they have BS nodes ... that's a plausible argument. But it seems different from arguing that you should never be bumped up a small distance to the next bracket for matching. Thank you. That link is very helpful and shows that tier8 shouldn't be fighting the Hard map, although I know that is based on 15.0. Perhaps my list above might not have been clear (Tier Level - Map Difficulty - Result) Played Tier8 - Intermediate Map and we won Played Tier7 - Hard Map and we won.... Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss) Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier8 - Hard Map? (ended today) I'm just looking for consistency when fighting in Tier8. 2 Wars were on the intermediate map and this last War was on the hard map. I do appreciate everyone's time and energy responding to, and trying to explain everything to me.
MikeHock wrote: » Here's a breakdown of our last few wars: Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier7 - Hard Map (Win) Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss) Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss) Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win) Today: Tier8 - Hard Map !? Last 2 tier8 Wars were on the intermediate Map. Today in tier8, Hard Map. Makes no sense.
Supa420 wrote: » Way to promote stacking maps again kabam!! MD, spiders, NCs, and all the cheap champs everywhere again!! Thanks! I guess y’all need more money.
Slig wrote: » Is the new scoring system live?
mess wrote: » well, actually looking at the opponent's defenders first thing that came up to my mind is that diversity wasnt that bad... now map is full of Mordo's, Night Crawlers, Mephistos, Juggernauts, Icemans, Magiks, Hyperions... Ah and Dormamu :P Diversity shouldnt be a win/loss decider but it should be important enough for people to care about it.