Demonzfyre wrote: » @Nick_Caine_32 also to make a point about mod comments on the thread, they have allowed those who participated in the beta feedback to announce that we participated. I was one of those. I can't/wont out anyone else unless ive seen 100% that they have announced themselves but we can help answer some questions as well. Keep in mind, we were not decision makers on the content but were allowed a early look at AQ5 and provided feedback that the devs took back to the team.
Carmel1 wrote: » " Kabam Miike wrote: » Buff 1: Force of Will:The Defender's Ability Accuracy cannot be affected by the Attacker. another creative way to "nerf" Blade without nerfing him and deal with another wave of Rank Down Tickets requests.
Kabam Miike wrote: » Buff 1: Force of Will:The Defender's Ability Accuracy cannot be affected by the Attacker.
Dean9300450 wrote: » Here is what I don't get, so 25-50-25,what if you run map 6 inbg1 and 3 and map 3 in bg2,so the cost will overall be quite low, is that working as intended?
Nick_Caine_32 wrote: » becauseicant wrote: » Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » If they did move the timers down to 30 minutes, they'd also (likely) have to massively increase the size of the maps themselves. There is no reason to lower timers and then increase the size of the map. That would mean Kabam disagrees that it takes too long to complete AQ and thus they wouldn't make the change to begin with. Changing timers is one of many solutions they could use but to lower completion time it would of course have to be without an increase in the size of the map. The whole idea here is to change the mindset of how long should it take to complete AQ with the current evolved state of the game. If we can't get past this idea of Kabam being so rigid with it's designs then nothing will ever change. Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Right now, with 30 minute timers in an active alliance, it's possible to clear Map 5 in 11-13 hours, give or take. I've done it many times with my alliance when we have those timers. That's not the intent, or the design of the map. Which is why I'm arguing that their intent and design needs to shift. I think a lot of the time people get stuck on this idea that the rules of AQ are set in stone because of how long it's been a certain way. However they could achieve it, whether it's lower timers, an increased energy cap, less paths, or something else entirely, I think a 10-12 hour completion time is much more acceptable. You said all of this PERFECTLY and so much better than I could have. Everything else in the game has changed and they’re openly admitting to trying to balance timing issues, like someone else said with the dungeons coming in the last 2 weeks of the month to give time for event quest. AQ and war run constantly with a small window between cycles...if a group because of their build and time zones can’t fjnish it perfectly at 19 hours and have time to spare, their champs get no release time in between maps. If the AQ week ends and it’s hopefully on days or the weekend when they are free, they would then be able to use those champs for event quest content. Kabam has been adding content like gwenpool and boss rush and riffs and assassin assignments on top of normal event quests as well. The arguments for keeping the exact same map energy requirements with one hour timers and NO CHANGE POSSIBLE to either gets a bit more silly as the years go on. I’ve been here for over 3 years in this game and it’s growing at a content release and availability rate that doesn’t justify keeping AQ locked like that. Great arguments there.
becauseicant wrote: » Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » If they did move the timers down to 30 minutes, they'd also (likely) have to massively increase the size of the maps themselves. There is no reason to lower timers and then increase the size of the map. That would mean Kabam disagrees that it takes too long to complete AQ and thus they wouldn't make the change to begin with. Changing timers is one of many solutions they could use but to lower completion time it would of course have to be without an increase in the size of the map. The whole idea here is to change the mindset of how long should it take to complete AQ with the current evolved state of the game. If we can't get past this idea of Kabam being so rigid with it's designs then nothing will ever change. Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Right now, with 30 minute timers in an active alliance, it's possible to clear Map 5 in 11-13 hours, give or take. I've done it many times with my alliance when we have those timers. That's not the intent, or the design of the map. Which is why I'm arguing that their intent and design needs to shift. I think a lot of the time people get stuck on this idea that the rules of AQ are set in stone because of how long it's been a certain way. However they could achieve it, whether it's lower timers, an increased energy cap, less paths, or something else entirely, I think a 10-12 hour completion time is much more acceptable.
Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » If they did move the timers down to 30 minutes, they'd also (likely) have to massively increase the size of the maps themselves.
Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Right now, with 30 minute timers in an active alliance, it's possible to clear Map 5 in 11-13 hours, give or take. I've done it many times with my alliance when we have those timers. That's not the intent, or the design of the map.
Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Nick_Caine_32 wrote: » becauseicant wrote: » Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » If they did move the timers down to 30 minutes, they'd also (likely) have to massively increase the size of the maps themselves. There is no reason to lower timers and then increase the size of the map. That would mean Kabam disagrees that it takes too long to complete AQ and thus they wouldn't make the change to begin with. Changing timers is one of many solutions they could use but to lower completion time it would of course have to be without an increase in the size of the map. The whole idea here is to change the mindset of how long should it take to complete AQ with the current evolved state of the game. If we can't get past this idea of Kabam being so rigid with it's designs then nothing will ever change. Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Right now, with 30 minute timers in an active alliance, it's possible to clear Map 5 in 11-13 hours, give or take. I've done it many times with my alliance when we have those timers. That's not the intent, or the design of the map. Which is why I'm arguing that their intent and design needs to shift. I think a lot of the time people get stuck on this idea that the rules of AQ are set in stone because of how long it's been a certain way. However they could achieve it, whether it's lower timers, an increased energy cap, less paths, or something else entirely, I think a 10-12 hour completion time is much more acceptable. You said all of this PERFECTLY and so much better than I could have. Everything else in the game has changed and they’re openly admitting to trying to balance timing issues, like someone else said with the dungeons coming in the last 2 weeks of the month to give time for event quest. AQ and war run constantly with a small window between cycles...if a group because of their build and time zones can’t fjnish it perfectly at 19 hours and have time to spare, their champs get no release time in between maps. If the AQ week ends and it’s hopefully on days or the weekend when they are free, they would then be able to use those champs for event quest content. Kabam has been adding content like gwenpool and boss rush and riffs and assassin assignments on top of normal event quests as well. The arguments for keeping the exact same map energy requirements with one hour timers and NO CHANGE POSSIBLE to either gets a bit more silly as the years go on. I’ve been here for over 3 years in this game and it’s growing at a content release and availability rate that doesn’t justify keeping AQ locked like that. Great arguments there. It's definitely a great argument, and while I like the idea, it doesn't necessarily fit with the design of a group event like AQ & AW are versus the single modes you are calling out above. In both modes, you're looking at approximately 20 hours spent moving together and working as a group to clear these modes, and the maps are designed the facilitate that length of time. While we could have shorter maps, or longer ones, or different timers, when it is a team design similar to this - I can see why there isn't a huge undertaking of change. They want it to be short enough that efficient moving rewards heroes being released earlier, but also give enough buffer time to allow for delays/timezones. For the alliances that have trouble completing it (it being AQ Map 5 in my example) because of multiple log ins - maybe they can benefit from a little better organization? After you've done it enough, you can usually estimate precisely when you need to log in and need to hop in to move 3, maybe 4 times in 24 hours. Often it's consistent times too. For example, I log in at 4:30pm EST to clear my lane in the first section (I fight through a noded fight, so I don't need to wait), then again at 9:30pm to clear my lane in the second section. Then, 8:30am the following morning, I move in and take a lane in the third section. Sometimes I hop back on at 10:30am to help do a boss kill. Often this very much coincides with other things I am logging in to do in game, including arena, AW, questing, etc.
Nick_Caine_32 wrote: » Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Nick_Caine_32 wrote: » becauseicant wrote: » Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » If they did move the timers down to 30 minutes, they'd also (likely) have to massively increase the size of the maps themselves. There is no reason to lower timers and then increase the size of the map. That would mean Kabam disagrees that it takes too long to complete AQ and thus they wouldn't make the change to begin with. Changing timers is one of many solutions they could use but to lower completion time it would of course have to be without an increase in the size of the map. The whole idea here is to change the mindset of how long should it take to complete AQ with the current evolved state of the game. If we can't get past this idea of Kabam being so rigid with it's designs then nothing will ever change. Aria_Lerendeair wrote: » Right now, with 30 minute timers in an active alliance, it's possible to clear Map 5 in 11-13 hours, give or take. I've done it many times with my alliance when we have those timers. That's not the intent, or the design of the map. Which is why I'm arguing that their intent and design needs to shift. I think a lot of the time people get stuck on this idea that the rules of AQ are set in stone because of how long it's been a certain way. However they could achieve it, whether it's lower timers, an increased energy cap, less paths, or something else entirely, I think a 10-12 hour completion time is much more acceptable. You said all of this PERFECTLY and so much better than I could have. Everything else in the game has changed and they’re openly admitting to trying to balance timing issues, like someone else said with the dungeons coming in the last 2 weeks of the month to give time for event quest. AQ and war run constantly with a small window between cycles...if a group because of their build and time zones can’t fjnish it perfectly at 19 hours and have time to spare, their champs get no release time in between maps. If the AQ week ends and it’s hopefully on days or the weekend when they are free, they would then be able to use those champs for event quest content. Kabam has been adding content like gwenpool and boss rush and riffs and assassin assignments on top of normal event quests as well. The arguments for keeping the exact same map energy requirements with one hour timers and NO CHANGE POSSIBLE to either gets a bit more silly as the years go on. I’ve been here for over 3 years in this game and it’s growing at a content release and availability rate that doesn’t justify keeping AQ locked like that. Great arguments there. It's definitely a great argument, and while I like the idea, it doesn't necessarily fit with the design of a group event like AQ & AW are versus the single modes you are calling out above. In both modes, you're looking at approximately 20 hours spent moving together and working as a group to clear these modes, and the maps are designed the facilitate that length of time. While we could have shorter maps, or longer ones, or different timers, when it is a team design similar to this - I can see why there isn't a huge undertaking of change. They want it to be short enough that efficient moving rewards heroes being released earlier, but also give enough buffer time to allow for delays/timezones. For the alliances that have trouble completing it (it being AQ Map 5 in my example) because of multiple log ins - maybe they can benefit from a little better organization? After you've done it enough, you can usually estimate precisely when you need to log in and need to hop in to move 3, maybe 4 times in 24 hours. Often it's consistent times too. For example, I log in at 4:30pm EST to clear my lane in the first section (I fight through a noded fight, so I don't need to wait), then again at 9:30pm to clear my lane in the second section. Then, 8:30am the following morning, I move in and take a lane in the third section. Sometimes I hop back on at 10:30am to help do a boss kill. Often this very much coincides with other things I am logging in to do in game, including arena, AW, questing, etc. I'm not sure if you're trying to infer that my group isn't organized enough, but that would make two responses you've done so far on this topic with condescending responses. Just because a group is having trouble on map 5 at ANY POINT in their history doesn't mean they are unorganized, and if having shorter timers didn't at least benefit someone or make this game mode go by faster and more efficiently, why does Kabam use it to "gift" players when they make errors or the servers go down? Why are there always threads about the possibility of changing it to 30 minutes? Why do people get excited when it happens? Did you miss the multiple long discussions even in recent months about this and the overwhelming response to change them? By your logic, if the game goes down for even an hour, there is no need for Kabam to ever reduce the timers - because technically the map was designed (how many years ago now) to be done in this long length and spread out to force people to do it that way. Why are they reducing it at all if groups are supposed to be perfect and even be able to finish if they're looking at a 19 hour window? You know it is possible to suggest changes on something your alliance isn't personally struggling with, or may have in the past but can feel bad for others dealing with it now? Some of us have what is called empathy. Some of us have been running map 5 for YEARS now and we are BORED. You can change the sentinels or you can change some of the nodes or you can change all this surface stuff - and yes, choosing different maps to run per battlegroup is a good change - but the rest of it hasn't really made it that much more exciting to keep running over and over for 5 days at a time! That's the whole point of asking about reduced timers or SOME kind of compromise. And I really wish, if you're gonna be the representative of either Kabam or the beta testers, that you would be a little more realistic and nuanced than "get good, get organized." My group was in expert tier all season, but even then if something comes up for more than one member in your group, you have VERY LITTLE wiggle room in each group and everyone MUST ALWAYS have their links down. You can only do so much on your end as an alliance leader or group leader, and to insinuate that those running map 5 ALL SEASON don't understand this, or need to take your advice on organizing better - and to use that as an excuse to brush of the conversation about shorter timers is just rude, to be honest. You also ignored every single one of the points I brought up and the person I responded to. It's an outdated game mode, even with the changes this is bringing. I hope in future changes Kabam can work on the balance between having a game mode where EVEN IF YOU PLAY PERFECT you have champs locked for five days in a row for 19 hours at a time or more, ON TOP of war, when you're worried about time balance in every other area of the game. This seems to be the common denominator, and if people want it and have been begging for it, and YOU REWARD THEM WHEN YOU MAKE ERRORS WITH IT, then maybe it deserves a look next time. Let me just say this too - I think those responding on here who did this beta need to ride a very fine line between answering questions, explaining your reasoning, and what happened in this beta - but you need to be respectful of others who are coming here and sharing THEIR experiences and what others they know who play this game for years are saying. Discounting or blowing off opinions because you personally don't agree or experience it on this thread makes me wonder just how much was actually accomplished in the beta itself, and makes me worried that any future content isn't going to ever have some of the long time asks from the community done, since it appears those running this program have already dismissed quite a few people on here simply stating their issues with this. Maybe think about that.
TriasEU wrote: » Idk how this whole alliance quest seasons works so my question is: " Do we get any rewards when the season ends?" I ask this question because I wanted to start a new alliance but don't want to mis out on rewards.
Demonzfyre wrote: » TriasEU wrote: » Idk how this whole alliance quest seasons works so my question is: " Do we get any rewards when the season ends?" I ask this question because I wanted to start a new alliance but don't want to mis out on rewards. No, just the peak milestone rewards and the rank rewards at the end of each weekly AQ cycle.
Nick_Caine_32 wrote: » @Demonzfyre I actually listed a lot more reasons for them than boredom and if that's all you took from my posts then you missed something. And every thread including the large one on 30 minute timers brings up some very detailed and worthwhile reasons beyond just boredom. But if the intent is to change AQ aspects to encourage people to run higher maps or to try and address the boredom and monotony, as Kabam stated, this aspect of it and the time required is absolutely worth discussing. I really hope you in particular read what I said in that post and take it to heart. I often see you on here with a very combative tone and generally pretty dismissive of people's opinions. You admitted you were in the beta testing, and you seem to want to answer people's questions on this thread and their concerns - but you don't speak for Kabam, and I think you could do well to maybe try and listen and let people voice their concerns, issues and wishes for future changes instead of dismissing them because you personally don't like them, or they don't bother you individually. If the beta worked like that, and it was not a place where ideas were given thought and considered and able to be expressed, then I wonder how much of this was Kabam's original idea and how much you all influenced at all. Please try to understand what I'm saying and remember that just because something doesn't affect you personally doesn't mean it's not valid (which I also pointed out to Aria as well on here), or that you can't try to understand and empathize with them. If boredom isn't a reason to look at reduced timers, why is it a valid reason to do these changes and why did Kabam say that in this post announcement? What other content in the game locks people's champions for 5 days in a row for up to 19+ hours? Even war requires less time and uses less energy on the maps. It's a valid discussion to have and if people aren't going to be allowed to bring their ideas and concerns up on here then i'm not sure why we're even having a discussion at all.
Werewrym wrote: » I can't remember in the short story that I read, but was KP going to have his sig ability?
V1PER1987 wrote: » Werewrym wrote: » I can't remember in the short story that I read, but was KP going to have his sig ability? Yes since it’s not as punishing as Dormammu’s.
Kabam Miike wrote: » This is not the place for this conversation. This thread is for the discussion of Season 5 of Alliance Quests, and any further posts that are off topic or are deemed aggressive will be deleted, and infractions/warnings will be applied.
Lurker wrote: » 25-75-25 does increase the overall cost of AQ no matter how you calc the donation split (all 30 or just your bg) and worse, map 5 gold return doesn't return as much. The best example to highlight this is a group doing 5x5 currently but wanting to try 1 group of map6. The map 5 cost is 75% but returns 66% of what it used to and map 6 returns nothing. The cost is still prohibitive of trying map6.
Shaun01 wrote: » Imo, if every member of the alliance receive the points, rewards, and crystals from every map played in AQ then the costs should be evenly shared as well.
Cat_Murdock wrote: » I have a question about how prestige rises and falls in this new system. Currently, we generally have only two battle groups fill up. Occasionally, a couple people will join BG3, but not always. Because that group doesn’t get cleared, we lose a little bit of prestige. In the new system, we have to decide from the get-go whether to open 2 or 3 groups, as a third can’t be opened later. Choosing two automatically excludes members, which isn’t super great for our style of alliance. Say we opened 3, to have the option just in case, but no one ends up joining the third one. Does it count as a lost group that causes a loss in prestige? Or will it only go down if someone joins it? I hope this makes sense.
