Developers Thoughts: Improving Alliance Wars Discussion Thread

Hey Summoners!

We've just posted a brand new behind the scenes look at the future of Alliance Wars, including some new changes coming to Alliance Wars Season 5! Make sure you take a read of the post over on our Blog: https://playcontestofchampions.com/developer-thoughts-improving-alliance-wars/

The Rotating Global Buffs kick off on October 17th! Prepare yourselves!

Comments

GroundedWisdom

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

RagamugginGunner

Still using the same 4 champs as always. Guess the changes didn't do what they said it would.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

ManChild

@BrianGrant i just posted in suggestions about tanking and its effect on off seasons and seasons. How do you feel about it.....

RagamugginGunner

Amateur_Hour wrote: »

@BrianGrant i just posted in suggestions about tanking and its effect on off seasons and seasons. How do you feel about it.....

Why not post a link se people don't need to search for it?

Drake

Whatever you do, remove hidden nodes. The game has evolved into something much more complicated than when you decided it was a good way to increase the challenge without having to put in any thought or developement time. By far the most fun I ever had in AW was when you guys stopped hidding champs. It added to the strategy and planning and champ selection. As it is now, I have to assume every single champ is my worst matchup and end up using the same handful of champs. Tech? Just have to assume it's IMIW and bring Corvus or Venom. Science or Mutant? Have to assume is an evader and bring Killmonger or Iceman. Mystic? Gotta bring Blade or GHulk. If I try to bring champs that are fun, I'll pay dearly for it. So if they don't have ability reduction, heal block, armor break, evade cancel... they can't come into AW. But if I can actually see all the champs on my path and there are no evaders or IMIW... whoa! I might get to bring something fun!

dkatryl

On the subject of cheating alliances/players that get dropped down in rankings and then ROFLstomp lower level alliances or whatever.

Why don't:
1) Offending players are given a cheater designation so that anyone can see it. Similar to how forum members have the jail sign for violating forum rules.
2) Offending players are restricted to a "Cheaters" bracket, with reduced rewards per tier compared to the regular brackets.

This designation is temporary, and would last the remainder of the current season and the entirety of the next one.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

OKAYGang

RagamugginGunner wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

When we said the intention of introducing Rotating Global Buffs was not to find a way to increase difficulty, we truly meant that . The goal is to ensure there is more variety in Alliance Wars, and that we can continually keep the mode fluid, and ever changing.

Can you please explain to me how, exactly, adding global nodes does not make AW more difficult? Thanks.

I'd also like to know how this increases variety? Like many of us have already said, buffing old champs to make them more usable, adding new powerful synergies, and providing more rank up materials will increase variety. This will do the exact opposite as all it does is makes less champs in the already small pool usable. Archangel, GwenPool, and X-23 are three that immediately come tmind as completely useless on attack now. Blade, KM and others are still useful but take a signifigant hit on their effectiveness. The use of Medusa, Modok, and other already overused champs on defense is encouraged by this change. This appears to be headed the wrong direction of the stated goal.That is my only problem with it, I could care less about an increase in difficulty or not.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

Having the strongest Team possible is logical, yes. Having a system that graduates Resources at a pace when dealing with higher Raritites is also logical. As you go higher in Star Level, you have to taper off the speed of Ranking. TL:DR - Stronger Champs should take more time and effort to Rank.
The alternative is a system that places the bulk of Resources to acquire Champs at the Top Percentile, and the means to Rank them much faster than anyone else. Seems like a fair deal on paper, however no one else would be able to progress. The Top would become a Perpetual Motion Machine and continually grow, and no one else would be able to compete or catch up. I'm not talking about the usual lull in movement, or stagnancy patches. I'm talking about literally no chance of moving up because the higher you go, the more you grow. With having higher Rarities within a Tiered system, you have to make it harder to Rank the higher ones.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

Having the strongest Team possible is logical, yes. Having a system that graduates Resources at a pace when dealing with higher Raritites is also logical. As you go higher in Star Level, you have to taper off the speed of Ranking. TL:DR - Stronger Champs should take more time and effort to Rank.
The alternative is a system that places the bulk of Resources to acquire Champs at the Top Percentile, and the means to Rank them much faster than anyone else. Seems like a fair deal on paper, however no one else would be able to progress. The Top would become a Perpetual Motion Machine and continually grow, and no one else would be able to compete or catch up. I'm not talking about the usual lull in movement, or stagnancy patches. I'm talking about literally no chance of moving up because the higher you go, the more you grow. With having higher Rarities within a Tiered system, you have to make it harder to Rank the higher ones.

Fully agree with everything you said and it actually supports the argument to allow players to recycle their roasters at least once every year or two. Because of the rarity of resources and the time it takes to max out characters, by the time players are able to max out one or two champs, meta of the game is completely changed. If you're playing at tier 1, you know that only 5/65 champs are getting you through nodes with full bonus and sometimes that too with using biggest boosts. If I were to utilize my newest addition fully in contents like AW, I'll have to wait forever to obtain resources to max it out nd by the time one reaches there, meta is totally shifted to something else. And I think that's what burning people out. So either allowing players to recycle their roasters once every two years is a fair thing to ask.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

Having the strongest Team possible is logical, yes. Having a system that graduates Resources at a pace when dealing with higher Raritites is also logical. As you go higher in Star Level, you have to taper off the speed of Ranking. TL:DR - Stronger Champs should take more time and effort to Rank.
The alternative is a system that places the bulk of Resources to acquire Champs at the Top Percentile, and the means to Rank them much faster than anyone else. Seems like a fair deal on paper, however no one else would be able to progress. The Top would become a Perpetual Motion Machine and continually grow, and no one else would be able to compete or catch up. I'm not talking about the usual lull in movement, or stagnancy patches. I'm talking about literally no chance of moving up because the higher you go, the more you grow. With having higher Rarities within a Tiered system, you have to make it harder to Rank the higher ones.

Fully agree with everything you said and it actually supports the argument to allow players to recycle their roasters at least once every year or two. Because of the rarity of resources and the time it takes to max out characters, by the time players are able to max out one or two champs, meta of the game is completely changed. If you're playing at tier 1, you know that only 5/65 champs are getting you through nodes with full bonus and sometimes that too with using biggest boosts. If I were to utilize my newest addition fully in contents like AW, I'll have to wait forever to obtain resources to max it out nd by the time one reaches there, meta is totally shifted to something else. And I think that's what burning people out. So either allowing players to recycle their roasters once every two years is a fair thing to ask.

It doesn't support Rank Downs at all, actually. On the contrary. It describes the necessity of the way the system operates now.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

Having the strongest Team possible is logical, yes. Having a system that graduates Resources at a pace when dealing with higher Raritites is also logical. As you go higher in Star Level, you have to taper off the speed of Ranking. TL:DR - Stronger Champs should take more time and effort to Rank.
The alternative is a system that places the bulk of Resources to acquire Champs at the Top Percentile, and the means to Rank them much faster than anyone else. Seems like a fair deal on paper, however no one else would be able to progress. The Top would become a Perpetual Motion Machine and continually grow, and no one else would be able to compete or catch up. I'm not talking about the usual lull in movement, or stagnancy patches. I'm talking about literally no chance of moving up because the higher you go, the more you grow. With having higher Rarities within a Tiered system, you have to make it harder to Rank the higher ones.

Fully agree with everything you said and it actually supports the argument to allow players to recycle their roasters at least once every year or two. Because of the rarity of resources and the time it takes to max out characters, by the time players are able to max out one or two champs, meta of the game is completely changed. If you're playing at tier 1, you know that only 5/65 champs are getting you through nodes with full bonus and sometimes that too with using biggest boosts. If I were to utilize my newest addition fully in contents like AW, I'll have to wait forever to obtain resources to max it out nd by the time one reaches there, meta is totally shifted to something else. And I think that's what burning people out. So either allowing players to recycle their roasters once every two years is a fair thing to ask.

It doesn't support Rank Downs at all, actually. On the contrary. It describes the necessity of the way the system operates now.

You can save that post for later when the necessary changes are implemented. Many top tier players are getting burned out by not keeping up with the rapidly changing meta of the game. And I'm sure at that time you will support the changes and agree with developers like in everything you do.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

People always Rank who they feel is their best options. Inevitably, there's always going to be something new coming, or a new Champ added. They've made materials a great deal more available in the last year, and more will follow as they work on it. The argument that new Champs are added doesn't hold water because that's just not how the game operates. We don't Rank with the idea that we can recycle our Resources when something better comes along. That defeats the purpose of earning Resources to begin with. What people are suggesting is a never-ending cycle of switching Rosters when new Champs are added, or a new challenge comes. That's an entirely different game design.

Materials made more available are nowhere near enough to max out a champ on a monthly basis. And there are two new champs every month being added. Even if you stay in top level alliance and do monthly uncollected every month, it will take a few months to max out a 5* champ from rank 4 to rank 5. So it's your argument that doesn't hold water. No one is asking for rank down tickets for every single changes, but it's only fair to allow players to recycle their roasters once a year. And sooner or later kabam will realize that. For avg 24 new champs added to the game every year, resources needed for rank 1 to rank 5 as 5* are no way near of what it should be.

I never said anything about taking a Champ to Max each month. That's just not logical. The higher the Rarity, the longer it will take to Max. What I said is, Resources have been made more available, and they are continuing to work on it.

What's not logical in taking a champ to its max ability? Isn't that what's the competition is all about? Having the strongest team possible?? And your blind belief that they're continuing to work on it pales in comparison to rapid changes every month that are being added in the game. It should go side by side. Not like current scenario where changes are being imposed on us and they'll work on making more resources available for later.

Having the strongest Team possible is logical, yes. Having a system that graduates Resources at a pace when dealing with higher Raritites is also logical. As you go higher in Star Level, you have to taper off the speed of Ranking. TL:DR - Stronger Champs should take more time and effort to Rank.
The alternative is a system that places the bulk of Resources to acquire Champs at the Top Percentile, and the means to Rank them much faster than anyone else. Seems like a fair deal on paper, however no one else would be able to progress. The Top would become a Perpetual Motion Machine and continually grow, and no one else would be able to compete or catch up. I'm not talking about the usual lull in movement, or stagnancy patches. I'm talking about literally no chance of moving up because the higher you go, the more you grow. With having higher Rarities within a Tiered system, you have to make it harder to Rank the higher ones.

Fully agree with everything you said and it actually supports the argument to allow players to recycle their roasters at least once every year or two. Because of the rarity of resources and the time it takes to max out characters, by the time players are able to max out one or two champs, meta of the game is completely changed. If you're playing at tier 1, you know that only 5/65 champs are getting you through nodes with full bonus and sometimes that too with using biggest boosts. If I were to utilize my newest addition fully in contents like AW, I'll have to wait forever to obtain resources to max it out nd by the time one reaches there, meta is totally shifted to something else. And I think that's what burning people out. So either allowing players to recycle their roasters once every two years is a fair thing to ask.

It doesn't support Rank Downs at all, actually. On the contrary. It describes the necessity of the way the system operates now.

You can save that post for later when the necessary changes are implemented. Many top tier players are getting burned out by not keeping up with the rapidly changing meta of the game. And I'm sure at that time you will support the changes and agree with developers like in everything you do.

There's no such thing as attaining a place where you don't have to put effort into maintaining a position in this game. You need to put effort into earning Champs, and you need to put effort into Ranking them. Being Top Tier doesn't exempt people from having to wait long enough to earn Resources to Rank. That's not a valid argument. Everyone needs to put effort and time into it. That includes waiting.

GroundedWisdom

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

I'm stating that the system has plateaus for various reasons. I also explained in detail that things have to be paced, and it's not as simple as just giving the Top Tier the means to Max as much as they want, when that would be impossible for Tiers down the line to catch up with. I said you have to add Resources sparsely and make sure it doesn't offset the balance of other Tiers. Again. The higher you go, the more progress slows. Otherwise you have a system where people keep growing more and more, and the higher they grow, the faster they grow. Ergo, Perpetual Motion Machine.
I said they're working on it because that's what they said. Do I have concrete evidence of such? No. I am not present in their meetings, and I don't have a Crystal Ball. I can however, gauge over the span of the last year or two, and observe that they've added more Resources at a reasonable rate, in tandem with what I've been saying.
Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected. If the Top 5% doesn't have the means to get past a Bleed Immune Node, there's something gravely wrong. I'm willing to wager they can. What you're describing is that selecting a Max Champ should encompass everything that comes, and I'm afraid that's limited to the Champ. No Champ exists that will work for everything. Sooner or later, something will counter it. That doesn't make them indebted to give the means to swap Rosters. What's the point of changing anything to begin with if people don't have to put an effort into getting used to it? It's literally one Season cycle, and the reaction is as if the Champs themselves are being disemboweled. Can't use your Max Champ? Use one at R4. There are a number powerful enough. In fact, I'm leery of any reliance on one specific type in general. Can't rely on Bleed all the time, and if people can't function without it, that's all the more reason to switch it up, in my mind.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

I'm stating that the system has plateaus for various reasons. I also explained in detail that things have to be paced, and it's not as simple as just giving the Top Tier the means to Max as much as they want, when that would be impossible for Tiers down the line to catch up with. I said you have to add Resources sparsely and make sure it doesn't offset the balance of other Tiers. Again. The higher you go, the more progress slows. Otherwise you have a system where people keep growing more and more, and the higher they grow, the faster they grow. Ergo, Perpetual Motion Machine.
I said they're working on it because that's what they said. Do I have concrete evidence of such? No. I am not present in their meetings, and I don't have a Crystal Ball. I can however, gauge over the span of the last year or two, and observe that they've added more Resources at a reasonable rate, in tandem with what I've been saying.
Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected. If the Top 5% doesn't have the means to get past a Bleed Immune Node, there's something gravely wrong. I'm willing to wager they can. What you're describing is that selecting a Max Champ should encompass everything that comes, and I'm afraid that's limited to the Champ. No Champ exists that will work for everything. Sooner or later, something will counter it. That doesn't make them indebted to give the means to swap Rosters. What's the point of changing anything to begin with if people don't have to put an effort into getting used to it? It's literally one Season cycle, and the reaction is as if the Champs themselves are being disemboweled. Can't use your Max Champ? Use one at R4. There are a number powerful enough. In fact, I'm leery of any reliance on one specific type in general. Can't rely on Bleed all the time, and if people can't function without it, that's all the more reason to switch it up, in my mind.

Agreed on there's something gravely wrong. And it's not on players. They've developed limited amount of characters that can be used to get through most hard nodes. Like 4-5 in total. On the top of that, even alliances that are ranked in top 3 won't have more than 5 maxed out champs to be used for both defense nd offense. If you claim you can clear center lanes using only r4 champs at tier 1, I would like to see you prove it with evidence than same rhetorics you've been repeating in every reply.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected.

Above sentence is totally wrong and immoral. First if 90% of the community is telling you it's bad it's an indication to take it sincerely. If community is divided in even 60-40 in opposition, you can say it's not a deciding factor. And how do you know how many of those players aren't in the tiers that are affected? I suppose you can't because you don't know for sure. That's the biggest problem with every argument that you've made so far on every post. They're far away from facts and in your attempt to tune in with everything on them, you blatantly make up points based on your own assumption rather than looking at facts nd things that are evident on this thread. And l would welcome every change with some kind of counter measures but locking champs out on their essential ability and not offer any solution in return is just as wrong and immoral. And I'm proud of the community here on speaking out against it even if it doesn't matter and they're going ahead with changes anyway without offering any kind of solution.

Al3x

So, will there be any improvement to matchmaking?

Carnage313

War has just worse and worse. It’s literally breaking alliances apart. I’ve ran an alliance for two years now and I’ve been debating on quitting just because I’m sick of the game mode. Has no fun value, tedious and exhausting. And when you add in all the bugs that just continue to not be fixed it makes for a miserable experience.

mostlyharmlessn

So do your groups even talk to each other in Kabam? I mean there's obviously been planning before deciding to go with bleed immune global node, and there is planning when it comes to deals...

Demonzfyre

mostlyharmlessn wrote: »

So do your groups even talk to each other in Kabam? I mean there's obviously been planning before deciding to go with bleed immune global node, and there is planning when it comes to deals...

AW isnt the only game mode. They can still be useful in other modes.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected.

Above sentence is totally wrong and immoral. First if 90% of the community is telling you it's bad it's an indication to take it sincerely. If community is divided in even 60-40 in opposition, you can say it's not a deciding factor. And how do you know how many of those players aren't in the tiers that are affected? I suppose you can't because you don't know for sure. That's the biggest problem with every argument that you've made so far on every post. They're far away from facts and in your attempt to tune in with everything on them, you blatantly make up points based on your own assumption rather than looking at facts nd things that are evident on this thread. And l would welcome every change with some kind of counter measures but locking champs out on their essential ability and not offer any solution in return is just as wrong and immoral. And I'm proud of the community here on speaking out against it even if it doesn't matter and they're going ahead with changes anyway without offering any kind of solution.

First of all, the Forum doesn't represent 90% of the community. It's a small percentile of the Player Base. Secondly, you have to filter that number down to the number of people actually being affected by the Nodes.
As for wrong and immoral, that's highly dramatic. It's also a shaky suggestion because it implies whatever you have enough complaints on doesn't pass. That means the Players are controlling the game, not the ones who create it. There's a fine line between feedback and demands. Especially when there's very little data to go on, and just reactions.

Dhruvgajjar

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected.

Above sentence is totally wrong and immoral. First if 90% of the community is telling you it's bad it's an indication to take it sincerely. If community is divided in even 60-40 in opposition, you can say it's not a deciding factor. And how do you know how many of those players aren't in the tiers that are affected? I suppose you can't because you don't know for sure. That's the biggest problem with every argument that you've made so far on every post. They're far away from facts and in your attempt to tune in with everything on them, you blatantly make up points based on your own assumption rather than looking at facts nd things that are evident on this thread. And l would welcome every change with some kind of counter measures but locking champs out on their essential ability and not offer any solution in return is just as wrong and immoral. And I'm proud of the community here on speaking out against it even if it doesn't matter and they're going ahead with changes anyway without offering any kind of solution.

First of all, the Forum doesn't represent 90% of the community. It's a small percentile of the Player Base. Secondly, you have to filter that number down to the number of people actually being affected by the Nodes.
As for wrong and immoral, that's highly dramatic. It's also a shaky suggestion because it implies whatever you have enough complaints on doesn't pass. That means the Players are controlling the game, not the ones who create it. There's a fine line between feedback and demands. Especially when there's very little data to go on, and just reactions.

How much of a community it represents?? And how do you know other players who aren't active on forums are positive towards these changes? You can't. Again proving my point of making blatant assumptions ignoring facts and information that's available right here. It's not dramatic. Players who have given so much love to this game have a right to voice their opinions. It's up to the developers how to take it and eventually it will reflect in overall sales. It's because of people voicing their opposition that many of the drastic changes had to be walked back or resolved with counter measures. 12.0, AQ initial sentinel changes or dropping diversity last war to name a few. This change is going to be implemented without any countermeasures and it will reflect in overall feedback.

GroundedWisdom

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Dhruvgajjar wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Essentially, it's the same as saying, "We're on top and we deserve the means to stay on top no matter what because it's your fault we don't have what we need.". Paraphrasing, but that's the gist of it. It really doesn't matter what position you hold. There's something people have to wait on. Go to Mid Tier, they're tired of waiting for Cats to R5 and R4. Go to the Lower Tier, they're tired of waiting on Champs.
In pretty much any game that I can think of similar to this, it's the same. The higher you go, the more progression slows down. That's necessary for overall progression. It's not as simple as just adding more Resources in the mix. You need to do so gradually, and with the other areas in mind. When you rebalance one, you have to make sure it doesn't imbalance another. It's a constant process of checks and balances. As I said. They've made Resources more available and they will continue to do so. However, the argument doesn't hold just because people are Top Tier.

You're repeating 2-3 points that you can. You're talking with blind faith without substantial information that they're actually working on to fixing it. Problem is bigger in mid tier nd lower tier players because while it takes a few months for top tier players to max out a champ, it takes from six months to a year for them. When 99% of the community playing this game nd know it, when they oppose something they're not stupid. Take this thread for an example that over 90% feedback has been negative and while there has been some content creators on YouTube and many other members of the community took their time to come up with suggestions to implement the changes right way without being unfair to everyone on this thread, it's really makes me sad that no steps have been taken to help us deal with the fundamental problem we're going to face before slapping those changes on the community's face.

Whether 90% of the feedback wants something or not is not always a deciding factor as to whether it goes through or not. A great deal of the feedback is coming from people who aren't even in the Tiers affected.

Above sentence is totally wrong and immoral. First if 90% of the community is telling you it's bad it's an indication to take it sincerely. If community is divided in even 60-40 in opposition, you can say it's not a deciding factor. And how do you know how many of those players aren't in the tiers that are affected? I suppose you can't because you don't know for sure. That's the biggest problem with every argument that you've made so far on every post. They're far away from facts and in your attempt to tune in with everything on them, you blatantly make up points based on your own assumption rather than looking at facts nd things that are evident on this thread. And l would welcome every change with some kind of counter measures but locking champs out on their essential ability and not offer any solution in return is just as wrong and immoral. And I'm proud of the community here on speaking out against it even if it doesn't matter and they're going ahead with changes anyway without offering any kind of solution.

First of all, the Forum doesn't represent 90% of the community. It's a small percentile of the Player Base. Secondly, you have to filter that number down to the number of people actually being affected by the Nodes.
As for wrong and immoral, that's highly dramatic. It's also a shaky suggestion because it implies whatever you have enough complaints on doesn't pass. That means the Players are controlling the game, not the ones who create it. There's a fine line between feedback and demands. Especially when there's very little data to go on, and just reactions.

How much of a community it represents?? And how do you know other players who aren't active on forums are positive towards these changes? You can't. Again proving my point of making blatant assumptions ignoring facts and information that's available right here. It's not dramatic. Players who have given so much love to this game have a right to voice their opinions. It's up to the developers how to take it and eventually it will reflect in overall sales. It's because of people voicing their opposition that many of the drastic changes had to be walked back or resolved with counter measures. 12.0, AQ initial sentinel changes or dropping diversity last war to name a few. This change is going to be implemented without any countermeasures and it will reflect in overall feedback.

Without countermeasures? Disagree on that one. There are a number of Champs that can function without Bleed.
When talking about 12.0, those were major changes, not only to the Champs, but to the very system itself. They knew the magnitude of the changes, but they never anticipated it to have as much of a reaction as it did, or the fact that it was too much, too fast. We talked, they listened.
They're listening now. That doesn't mean any little change will have the same response. It's not even close to being on the same magnitude. It's a temporary Node that will affect the first 5 Tiers in War. When the Node shifts, it will change. Nowhere was it ever stated that Bleed Champs would dominate War for every Season. That's not a given. War is continually evolving. That means we will have to use different strategies from time to time. That also doesn't mean that our best Champs will always be suited for it.
We're going to have to disagree in general because it's getting nowhere. Not even close to 12.0, and not every new change will be cause to picket.

unknown

This content has been removed.

GroundedWisdom

Googleplexian wrote: »

Revamp the war crystals while you’re at it.

That I wouldn't mind. Lol.