Alliance Wars Season 3 Discussion Thread

1282931333437

Comments

  • mostlyharmlessnmostlyharmlessn Posts: 855 ★★★
    The fix is a cultural change inside of Kabam. Right now we are not seen as being very valuable because they know as long as they keep a certain tier of players happy enough (Seatin/Muttmatt/Diggity/Other Content Creators) the game will continue to get cash out of them.

    It took messing with AW and them getting annoyed for Kabam to even think about changing their minds on anything.

  • mostlyharmlessnmostlyharmlessn Posts: 855 ★★★
    That they think its about diversity and reinstating it will calm people down, proves how much out of touch the decision makers are with the community, this has be bubbling for a while, AW changes just happen to be the point where people have had enough, It is just one of many decisions that led to the uproar.
    Nerfing champs "accidently" and not fixing them, being lenient with Whales that are piloting, colluding and cheating which affects every other alliance playing legit, introducing way OP defenders for the purpose of just making people spend, these are a few other things that people are mad about that have all happened in the last month or two.

    It's because it's what pushed the MCOC top tier players to start chiming in.
  • BCdiscmanBCdiscman Posts: 348
    hurricant 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.

    If you want to make it more difficult to 100% complete, why not remove items and methods of payment?

    You bring 5 champs instead and there is no reviving/pots allowed. This would highlight true skill.

    Also, add prove yourself to mini bosses.

    LOL. I actually was about to post the exact thing. If this is truly an attempt to make Alliance Wars more competitive and stop 100% completion and not just yet another attempt to squeeze every red cent from the player base that KABAM can get from us then this would be the obvious route to take.
  • GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 742 ★★★
    @Kabam Miike can you address the decision behind making AW harder for the same rewards? To me and many people in the community saying that we shouldn't 100% the map seems like we have to play this game the way you want instead of the way we want.
  • StewmanStewman Posts: 731 ★★★
    WE DON'T WANT WAR DIFFICULTY INCREASED.
    GET RID OF THE NEW "MINI BOSSES"
  • Vincew80Vincew80 Posts: 195 ★★
    Increasing rewards is a moot point since clearly their objective is deepest pocket wins.
  • KoperBoyKoperBoy Posts: 208 ★★
    "Our plan is 100% should not be achievable".

    Where have I heard this?

    Oh right... "Map 6 costs so much because it's not intended to be played on all five days".
  • pseudosanepseudosane Posts: 421 ★★★
    My 2 cents.

    I'm an officer in a gold 1 alliance. At the end of season 2 we had several people retire due to the stress of AW. Season 3 is slated to be more stressful. Alliances are crumbling, alliances are scrambling to keep their ranks filled and alliances are merging to continue playing this game. If you increase the difficulty of the maps you better expect more people retiring or moving their accounts into more relaxed or "retirement" alliances. This only adds more stress to the officers who need to keep the alliance at 30 members to stay competitive.

    Kabam has put me personally in a bit of a conundrum with these changes. I'm not a big spender at all. I only have about $300-$350 tied up in this game in about 2.5 years of play. Not even close to a whale by any measure but not a f2p player either. They announce these major changes right before the July 4 sale. I was planning on buying any and all decent offers this time around just so I could beef up my unit supply for buying L4 potions for AW since I use most of my glory for these and therefore face a serious t1a shortage.

    Now I don't want to buy any offers because my alliance is going to change to a "no item war" stance if the additional mini bosses are added as planned. We WILL NOT demand our alliance mates revive/heal in AW anymore causing them to use even more glory and units than in season 2. We simply won't do it. This means I no longer need the July 4 offers and neither do several of my alliance mates. This means Kabam makes less money from myself and my alliance. Of course this won't hurt their bottom line much. I strongly suspect others had a similar idea as well though, and if many, many others pass on the July 4 sale for this reason then it will hurt their bottom line.

    I believe Kabam should make money. They are a business and the game doesn't exist if they do not. I don't feel bad spending when the offers are worth it. I do not want to spend on a game that is in constant flux though. I have no idea what hair-brained scheme is coming next. I have no idea when long standing bugs will be fixed. I have no idea which of my champs are going to be nerfed and when. I have no idea why they thought Domino was a good idea in her current state. I have no idea because Kabam doesn't communicate with us and makes these decisions without any input from the community.

    I'm tired of Kabam throwing major horrible changes at us and then back-pedaling partially to try and calm the community. You need to listen to the community first and foremost. Deliver a game we still want to play. Deliver a game we are still willing to spend money on. Fail to deliver and your player base is going to slowly erode until this game doesn't exist.
  • WOKWOK Posts: 468 ★★
    I've read some of the latest responses from Kabam....... And IMO they have taken "insulting player intelligence" to a new level. Smh
  • WOKWOK Posts: 468 ★★
    Basically nothing has changed, and nothing will change. Im continuing with my blackout. The rewards and completion mean nothing to me for a game that has pushed things too far.
  • ErickrglErickrgl Posts: 2
    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?

    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?

    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?

    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.

    Solo han tocado el tema de diversidad, pero no es lo único que deben mencionar. No estamos de acuerdo con aumentar 5 mini bosses más, es una broma de mal gusto cuando solo 1 persona tiene que hacerse cargo de un camino. Mejor dígannos que utilizemos la tarjeta de crédito más seguido. Espero que nos escuchen porque ya todos los usuarios nos estamos uniendo para hacernos escuchar. Están tomando muy malas decisiones sin ningún respeto a la comunidad.
  • WOKWOK Posts: 468 ★★
    Just wanted to bring into the discussion something that hasn't been mentioned before, but I feel is significant and needs to be taken into consideration.

    With the statements pertaining to Mcoc and the evolving meta, I would like to point out that for many players that have been playing since day one and those playing shortly after like myself, other than release of new characters and unique theme event quests, there was never any suggestion that the game was going to change to the degree it has now(unless I missed the memo somewhere).

    As far as I and others in my little circle were led to believe, Act4 and ROL was basically the games "coup de gras" so to speak and AQ and AW were the "team" based content that allowed players the chance to have competition and gain resources to aid in progressing to finish the ACTs and ROL.
    There was never any references of an Act5, Rttl, or LOL or even 6* champs in the horizon, which other than 6*champs happens to be awesome IMO, but besides the point.

    If the changes that were in development were in fact going to be implemented, the playerbase should have been given the knowledge of it and made aware of the possibilities that what they are working/paying for can or will depreciate in value under the forseeable circumstances. But that was not and continues to not be addressed by Kabam.
    Its my personal opinion that some if not a lot of the backlash is because of this lack of information and consideration for the playerbase.

    For example, if I was made aware that 6*'s or 12* were in the horizon, I would have taken a much different approach to my decisions for which champs to rank up and use resources on.
    If I was informed, and chose to rank up the way I had, obviously I had my own reasons, which means I was and would be ok with my decisions.

    There is a big difference when decisions are able to be made with adequate information towards future changes, and not having that information at all.

    I would say that this would be less impactive if the resources, time and money invested was trivial like something I can aqcuire again in a matter of days, but in our case its not. Resources are costly and scarce, some can take months to years to gather. I myself had played "religiously" for nearly 3 yrs and still looking forward to my 1st T5b and have yet to use a T2A which my inventory is 1 shy of being full.

    I truly hope Kabam decides to take a different approach to their idea of transparency and connecting with the players.
  • AbsimiliardAbsimiliard Posts: 31
    My issue here is that people are saying this is like bait and switch for diversity. I think this feels more like Jim Sterling spoke of when it came to the loot boxes in the non-F2P (ironically, considering this game is entirely based on loot boxes). It comes off more as conditioning rather than bait and switch. Kabam has continued to push any changes that benefit them entirely (Drax, AA, AW changes, etc.), while ignoring the community. They see how far they can take it and when there is outrage they backpedal to either the last change or just the thing the community was irritated with.

    By doing this Kabam can keep pushing the envelope and get away with devaluing either our efforts or the game as a whole. Just the notion of the revive "exploit" which was, in reality, just farming like any game that has RPG elements incorporated into them, annoyed me greatly. Each excuse lately really hurts my enjoyment of the game and I don't want to fall into the Sunk Cost fallacy here.

    I just wish Kabam would stick by their transparency statement they made after 12.0. The new season of AQ I'm not sure or but if they just reduced their prices on specials like the 4* awakening gem offer that was $50. That offer was a joke considering the current meta of the game leaning harder into 5*/6* champions. If that had been $20 I would have been sold. It's just weird considering the signature stone offer from earlier this year was great. If they make things more affordable, people will buy. There's no point in forcing the players into a corner in AW, especially since the top alliances have to play with pinpoint precision or they cost themselves a lot of rewards.
  • Sirnoob2Sirnoob2 Posts: 289 ★★
    so a suggestion I have is make two leagues for aw
    one league is the competitive aw this is same as current state of war except get rid of defender diversity this allows alliances to go all out and not gimp them

    the second league is the more casual league this league has defender diversity for those who want a more downed down aw a cap of champs in to 4 stars no buying items and and item limit that u give everybody at the begining of attack phase also side this league is ment to be more casual and easy the rewards get towned down to match


    this set up will help u guys satisfy ur players that want aw to be a challenge and those that want it to be more casual
  • SnakeDocSnakeDoc Posts: 32
    So you increase the difficulty significantly but rewards stay the same?
    You just made another og player quit the game. Congrats
  • WOKWOK Posts: 468 ★★
    Sirnoob2 wrote: »
    so a suggestion I have is make two leagues for aw
    one league is the competitive aw this is same as current state of war except get rid of defender diversity this allows alliances to go all out and not gimp them

    the second league is the more casual league this league has defender diversity for those who want a more downed down aw a cap of champs in to 4 stars no buying items and and item limit that u give everybody at the begining of attack phase also side this league is ment to be more casual and easy the rewards get towned down to match


    this set up will help u guys satisfy ur players that want aw to be a challenge and those that want it to be more casual

    Although an interesting idea, seperate leagues and different rules to abide by seems to need quite a bit of work in order to implement and run simultaneously/separately.

    Not positive if something similar had been suggested before or if it's even doable for that matter, but I just thought about this possibility.

    Change the difficulty and map layout as described and dont remove anything that has been in play till now, with just a few minor tweaks to points per/metric maybe.

    THEN add in a metric that tabulates points gained/lost for item usage instead of just being a number that has no value other than quantity available.
    Each lvl pot, revive, champ boost, class boost what have you all having its own specific point value, because although each is considered a single item, IMO their level of help potency vary greatly.
    The ally that uses any and all types of items gets those points deducted from their total and maybe even bonus points awarded to the ally having less points deducted(less significant items used).

    I thought this might be a possible middleground for those asking for items being removed completely to better showcase skill and competition and those not so much in favor of removal, but against the coined "wallet wars".

    Seemed like a decent enough idea that doesnt seem to need extensive work to put into play....... But I have no idea what actually needs to be done or if it can work like I said. @DNA3000 care to lend some thought? :wink:
  • GrubGrub Posts: 136
    @Kabam Miike

    Are there any plans to make the opponent names invisible on the map? There’s a growing trend to just change your name to bar codes to gain an advantage in wars.

    This isn’t in the spirit of the game clause.
  • Chris9Chris9 Posts: 17
    Vulkan7 wrote: »
    Loving the changes Kabam! Your continued incompetence has finally given me the resolve to quit after almost 3 years. I should have quit after 12.0 or after you broke AW with diversity. But you clearly have no clue how to treat the community. And as you drop further and further from gross ranks maybe then someone will finally realize that games with staying power, truly listen to their base, instead of the quick buck. I wish you no luck and hope your mmgt doesnt find it to another game to ruin.

    Mobile games’ business model as a whole is unsustainable; just like actividion’s patent on live services where their profits depend on players committing to just one game...the companies that make “enough changes” to temporarily satisfy the player base can buy some time. But it’s a tug of war...basically they make as much $ as they can
  • Markosan22Markosan22 Posts: 4
    Are we getting rank down tickets
  • oakoak Posts: 42
    Lol maybe on x-mass! If we're not naughty >:)
Sign In or Register to comment.