**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
It is one thing to complain about something because you believe it can and hopefully will get better. But complaining about something just to complain about it with the attitude that nothing will ever be acknowledged as resolving the complaint is nonsensical. Doing it just to try to convince others to join you in your misery is pathological.
I'll believe it will get better when I see it get better. I see what's there, not what I want to see. But if I thought the devs were not honorable actors or had no capability of solving problems, I would be wasting my time either complaining about them or suggesting solutions. That would make me the idiot, along with everyone else doing the same thing under the same preconceptions.
I have faced my fair share of cheaters, just like everyone, but rarely more than 1 or 2 times a day, and sometimes none for weeks.
“The Team has been hard at work resolving these issues and are even working to both implement new tech to make it easier to identify and reproduce these issues internally and to ultimately address them as soon as we can. Fixing bugs in Battlegrounds is a major priority for us.”
The list provided comprises seven different types of bugs. These have been problems since all of last season. For the first time this season, I encountered the bug where my first picks are auto-selected this afternoon—but otherwise my technical issues have been dropped inputs and lag (still on the Trello list as overarching bugs).
Question to the team: why is there no mention of relief for BG bugs in a fairly lengthy post?
Dr. Zola
Unless the reason you are not implementing this is not the best $$$ version for you.
They are saying in their view the primary problem with this idea is that everyone starts every season in Bronze 3, which means for a few weeks we don't have winners facing winners, because until players start to win and move up in tracks there's a wild everyone vs everyone situation, which they have tried to mitigate with roster matching. I *think* their strategy is to use progress preservation to prestart players in higher tiers relative to their previous final standings, which is an approximate measure of how strong they are. Maybe this means roster matching would then be less necessary, or maybe roster matching will have less deleterious effects (in their view, not mine).
Again, this is *my* interpretation of what they are saying. Basically, matching by track is like matching by ELO, except at the start of the season. Fix the start of the season with staggered start placement so the stronger players aren't in the same starting track as the weaker players, and we don't have to worry about them matching against each other initially, and if they match against each other later in the season it will be because the weaker players make it to the higher tiers, implying they got stronger.
Call this "ELO-lite." It has some properties of ELO, but lacks others. In my view, it does not directly address the issues with roster matching, although it might soften the problem a bit. It assumes staggered start will automatically solve progression issues that I'm not sure I would bet on, although I cannot say it won't - just that if it does it will do so more coincidentally than structurally in my opinion.
It feels a little too "magic bullet-y" to me. But it is definitely a step in the right direction. It directly addresses one of my Fs, attempts to solve another one of my Fs, and (in my opinion) kinda dances around the third one and hopes we don't notice.
Still, if you include bugs and cheating, Kabam has at least acknowledged all the fundamental problems most players have complained about, and have asserted work in every area to start mitigating or resolving them. That's about as good as we could expect for now, and we just need to see how the actual rubber meets the road when these things start to bear fruit.
And I agree with others who say that it is not just about the what, it is also about the when. All this should have happened yesterday. But we are where we are, and speed is not something that's really negotiable. Things will happen as fast as they can happen. Game developers cannot just divert impulse power to the warp drive to go faster, unfortunately.
I should point out we're talking about problems in a game mode that didn't exist a year ago, with a reward structure unheard of a year ago, prompting players to rank up champions they never thought they would be playing before, in an environment where champs are being constantly buffed and rebalanced at a higher sustained pace than ever before, on the verge of all new roster progression being added, in an environment where players have vastly more control over the champs they acquire via crystals with better options than have ever existed. AQ is simpler and less stressful, AW is cheaper and less punishing, higher progression materials have rapidly accelerated in availability pretty much everywhere, and QoL improvements dropping from the sky are a regular occurrence.
Pretty much everything has changed.
Introduce a 4th scoring criteria "pause" this will award you minus X pts per second paused in the fight
Kabam, open dialogue like this are what we need more of.
What you're describing is the kind of thing that a player advocacy position would try to take care of. Sometimes this is done internally with an official position, and sometimes this is done with a player advocacy representative or representatives from the player community empowered to communicate directly with the developers and report back on issues of interest.
This is a tricky task to perform because no matter where such a person comes from, they must be capable of representing the interests the player community without regard to their own biases or predispositions, and must also be capable of communicating with the developers on their own terms and providing feedback to the players within the limits that Kabam places on that communication while maintaining credibility on both sides. This is balancing a pencil tip on another pencil tip.
It is not a bad idea, but I don't know if that's the sort of thing Kabam is interested in doing.
Thanks for the information, acknowledgement of the communities problems with the game mode and some thoughts on how they might be addressed.
Just don't screw it up!
That will not completely stop cheaters but those having big account will surely twice before cheating, doing merc or asking help from a merc as they will definitely loose the account !
A zero tolerance might be the answer considering the number of cheaters.
Also, thanks for looking into all the BattleGrounds related issues @Kabam
Now in some difficult metas, some people were using it to get at least 15k points and hope their opponent mess their fight.
Descent players consider “pausers” always an easy win, since they always score above 15k points in any meta.
As for Kabam’s announcement, it’s a good move to the right direction, but things need to change fast.
Battlegrounds at the moment aren’t a good experience for many players.
If that is the case then it kind of defeats the purpose of Victory Tracks as a significant number of players who care about BGs somehow manage to end up in GC by the end of week 4
Better option might be to allow Paragons to start from Gold, TB & Cavalier from Silver, Uncollected & lower in Bronze
Players should still be made to CLIMB some tiers to reach GC even if they are big Paragons
Why not permanent ban on cheaters, if not permanent ban then you guys are promoting cheating as you guys don't want to lose your player base even if they are cheaters.