ASV27 wrote: » It really sucks that they waited until after everyone got the season 2 rewards and ranked another r5 before telling of these changes.
JRock808 wrote: » It wasn’t an accident. They wanted us to use as many of those resources as possible before this announcement. Just 100% shady, no two ways about it.
Kabam Miike wrote: » hurricant wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » NevvB wrote: » So you made the nodes harder, any changes in rewards? The rewards have not changed (aside from Season rewards being halved to match the change in length). This is because Alliances were still finding these Maps far too easy. The goal of these changes is to put an end to the near 100% of wars ending in 100% Exploration. what's wrong with 100% exploration? people will continue to pay for 100% you know that right? 100% exploration should be a rare instance, and if achieved, should be helping to decide the winner of a War. It should not be a common occurrence for both Alliances to be able to hit 100%, and then the deciding factor becomes Attacker Bonus points.
hurricant wrote: » Kabam Miike wrote: » NevvB wrote: » So you made the nodes harder, any changes in rewards? The rewards have not changed (aside from Season rewards being halved to match the change in length). This is because Alliances were still finding these Maps far too easy. The goal of these changes is to put an end to the near 100% of wars ending in 100% Exploration. what's wrong with 100% exploration? people will continue to pay for 100% you know that right?
Kabam Miike wrote: » NevvB wrote: » So you made the nodes harder, any changes in rewards? The rewards have not changed (aside from Season rewards being halved to match the change in length). This is because Alliances were still finding these Maps far too easy. The goal of these changes is to put an end to the near 100% of wars ending in 100% Exploration.
NevvB wrote: » So you made the nodes harder, any changes in rewards?
PaytoPlay wrote: » Progressive item capacity is the solution. The higher tier the alliance the less item they are allowed to use. Since piloting is somewhat under control this will work. Lower alliances aren't going to be as competitive on kill count and exploration anyways so 15 items will do. That way 100% map will be alot harder already. Be creative!!
FimsonCrog wrote: » It's so frustrating to put all your hard earned resources (and time getting them) into certain champs that no longer serve the purpose of you ranking them up for in the first place. It feels dirty. The feeling of being betrayed.
Brainimpacter wrote: » PaytoPlay wrote: » Progressive item capacity is the solution. The higher tier the alliance the less item they are allowed to use. Since piloting is somewhat under control this will work. Lower alliances aren't going to be as competitive on kill count and exploration anyways so 15 items will do. That way 100% map will be alot harder already. Be creative!! Kabam want more spending not less, it would not surprise me if they make maps overly difficult and their solution is to lift the item cap, win win for them.
Manch_Atlantis wrote: » 1125 t5b reward gold1. So it needs 240weeks to gain 1t5b complete. 4.6 years... cant stop laughing To upgrade an 6*champ i need 3 of them
SmokingSurfer wrote: » Have we gotten a list of what the node buffs do yet?
ZachAttack06 wrote: » Forfeiting a day and not logging in is a lot more of a sacrifice then a couple of pointless crystals. The 4th is a Wed. Which right in the middle of an arena. Lost of points lost by not logging in for a day. For those who grind for units and BCs that’s a lot of time. Plus it’s when Aw placement opens. If no one logs in your ally losses a war. Even if it’s a lose that’s missed shards. I get it. Unite and so them up. But only 1 day isn’t goin. To do anything. Even to them they know the next day will be back to normal business. Drop in the bucket if you ask me. We need another spending protest. That will effect stuff and can be prolonged as long as we want it to last.