**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.
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.
Comments
At least quote me, instead of stealing my post
Just kidding man it’s all good.
If you could get everyone to agree to that, you might as well convince everyone to disband their alliances and reform new ones, then fight exactly one war where no one kills anything, then have the entire game end with an identical season score, which would mean everyone would be tied for first place and qualify for master one rewards.
If nothing else, we'd be on the front page of Kotaku for a while.
What he said.
In the past, for 12.0, you have us RDTs because you made sweeping changes to champs. We could use them on anyone, not necessarily those nerfed, the rationale for which being that our decision to use rank up resources was influenced by the structure of the game at the time we made those rank ups.
When ranking up Dorm a year ago, Blade and Gulk were not factors that we relied on when ranking. Additions like new champs or masteries or content are not reasons for RDTs. But deciding to rank up Dorm very well was influenced by already-existing constructs such as MD/dexterity and defender diversity. The former will significantly reduce the number of his degen triggers, and the latter will be obsolete entirely. Such changes to in-game features that had already existed and influenced previous rankups isn’t just “changing the meta.” You’re providing us reasons to rank up champs and taking those exact reasons away.
If diversity will be permanently deleted, then RDTs are completely valid requests you should honor. But what worries me more is that you indicate it could come back. Do you really not consider diversity to be that important of a factor on game performance and resource allocation that you’re willing to just swing it back and forth in front of us as many times as needed until your little experiment tells you whether it should exist or not?
TL;DR - either keep diversity in place or give RTDs for each time you decide to take it away/bring it back.
If you remove diversity, provide rank down tickets, no matter what the future brings. Please.
A mixture of diversity and good defenders required discussions, strategy. By this, it will be easy af. Just pop some spidey, medusa, nc, etc everywhere. And letting the RNG have a big influence in defender roster. If you dont have good defenders, alliances will not need you.
Also saying by diversity matches were already decided at the start is a lie. It will be decided by this “innovation”, because the alliance with more money will win.
@Kabam Miike in a game like this where rank ups are a big decision in terms of progression, changing back and forth between diversity/not diversity its huge for the players. If thats the case, we all need rabk down tickets to adjust with this nonesense AW iterations you describe.
I wish everyone could get together and do just this, but know it will never happen. Plus, we would all need to do 5 wars to qualify for rewards otherwise no one would get anything.
Ahh...but they said the initial break (after season 1) was long because they wanted to analyze all of the data from the very first season and that the breaks between seasons would not all be the same (hinting that they could be less or could be more). That way they can always hide behind never officially answering anything. So the break was never officially 4 weeks, or 2 for that matter.
Keep diversity. But, make it cap at 90 or 120 rather than 150.
What’s the point of having a community if it’s a one way street. It take two to tango and I don’t see anyone dancing right now...
Keep diversity. But, make it cap at 90 or 120 rather than 150.
I actually like this idea too. It still benefits those that ranked up champs purely for diversity points under the old format yet gives alliances some flexibility in deciding who to place. It would be a nightmare to manage rosters still, but nothing that many of us have not already grown used to.
No mainly IMIF
Season 1 8 Weeks = X Rewards 6.5 Rewards per Year
Season 2 10 Weeks= X Rewards 5.2 Rewards Per Year a 25% Reduction.
I can explain it with apples if its easier
It seems unlikely to me that there was a surge in collusion towards the end of the season because those alliances felt "safe." It is more likely that collusion became more frequent towards the end of the season because top tier alliances were in a more informed position about the strength of the competition. For collusion to work, both sides have to agree that one side has such a high probability of winning that it is better for one side to forfeit the small chance at the victory bonus for a guaranteed chance at a higher non-winning map score. That calculus is easier to do when both sides are better informed about the other side's strengths. If both sides cannot agree on which side would almost certainly win, collusion becomes non-trivial to coordinate.
Also, your collusion announcement was posted on June 22. The season ended basically on June 26. Are you saying 2* defense wars continued past June 22, or did they stop entirely in the last week of the season?
you didnt even know what a 2* war was till 2 weeks ago and now you talking about having made a deep analysis on them for all season? You either didn't know then or knew and didn't move onto penalties till it was stirred publicly. What the heck?
He used the extra 4t2a to rank up a defender with diversity to r4 just to increase the amount of r4 defenders for the alliance and more chance for a kill.
Now, by removing diversity, his rankup choice has become a bad one since there are other better known stronger defenders he can place now without penalties.
My friend deserves to get his $800 back.