**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.
Comments
cus well most of us dont want the BS, stress and frustrations from playing map7.
hense why we are unhappy the changes to war make more stress and headache.
for most of us more stress and headache = less fun and enjoyment
while you might be right to atleast a point.
it doesnt change the fact that we shouldnt have to adapt.
the whole collusion thing was a problem only for alliances in t3-t1.
now this system negatively impacts alliances everywhere.
surely there was a better solution to fix the problem
No, I don’t need those items for map5 (or 6), so don’t tell me that I can use them there.
So glad it works for you. You are now a minority 😂
It doesn’t work for us and a lot of other people. We will not enlist in war just to lose, so no war is happening in our alli till kabam sort it or half the alli quits cos they are fed up.
You may as well join for participation rewards. At least you get something rather than nothing; no way else to really collect loyalty. We will likely be doing the same thing.
And the war before that, I slept through the end of it. That being said, it ended 8 hours earlier than the wars we launched based on our preferences...
Considering no one has opened map7 crystals yet.. how do you know if they are better or not?
A lot of other alliances will be needing to know too that only play 3 groups in the season like us.
@Kabam Miike
they have got them, the alliances playing map 7 get one for every bg that clears every day, just like map 5 and map 6 alliances
I can say the same thing about unplanned server downtime.
It was not a trial period, but Kabam said last week they were taking feedback into consideration for possible changes to a number of aspects of the new system, including the match making schedule.
According to Kabam, the infrastructure can't support starting all the wars simultaneously. Some people in the thread seem to think that they are somehow wrong, but that's completely irrelevant. If Kabam thinks the servers cannot handle that possibility, there's literally no way to convince them to do it.
At least in my battlegroup our alliance made adjustments to deal with the new timing. It is generally always *possible* to do so, and we were able to do that but the fact that we can complete glosses over the actual problems. In order to complete, we now *must* race to finish all the critical paths before people sign off. If there's ever a hitch, we now have almost no margin for error to try to catch up the next morning, because there is no next morning. And we've lost the tactical option of waiting on the boss. I either go in maximally boosted to try to bring that boss down before I sign off, without knowing if that is even necessary, or I hand off the boss to whoever else is going to take a swing at it much later because I won't be there at all to help at the end.
Focusing on the "can complete or not" reduces the problem to a trivialized energy-counting exercise. That was never the problem we were going to face. The problem we were going to face is that by taking away our ability to choose when to start, we were going to lose all of the options for conducting the war we crafted over basically the entire existence of alliance war. To put it another way, the new system doesn't so much hurt alliances as singular entities, it just harms members of the alliances by treating them as meaningless cogs.
Just the language alone discussing how alliances should "adapt" to the changes proves the point. Just move people, or replace them, or recruit better. The alliance can adjust by just changing the people in it. For many alliances this shuffling will be relatively painless. For others it could be quite painful. The question is whether that pain was necessary, unavoidable, and worth the benefits. It appears to be none of those things. It wasn't necessary or unavoidable: many suggestions demonstrate that. And it doesn't seem to be worth it either, given the fact that even if the changes hurt a small percentage of alliances, that number is almost certainly higher than the number affected by matchmaking manipulation. And I'm not even counting the problems with the matching system being apparently bugged itself.
Kabam should learn from from their new parent company, Netmarble. Marvel Future Fight has the infrastructure to support all alliance content at the same time. However, they do not do their alliance content live as we see it. It’s cool, but if it will make the servers operate much better if we do not see each other move live, I think it should go.
Regardless, the new system should have staggered start times as others have mentioned, though this may compromise matchmaking in ways that may give out advantages to some. If the majority want to start at 12pm eastern, then those who choose to start at 4pm will have a smaller pool for matchmaking.
well they could do random times but....
atm they start in a 4hr window from
2am AEDT to 6am AEDT.
before the ealiest war was 6am AEDT.
make the 4hr window from 6am AEDT to 10am AEDT would be better than this atleast.
atleast then peeps get war closer to wat they are used to.
so fair match.
but these guys have not placed like 4 peeps in 1 bg.
they have placed some 1*, 2* and 3* defenders.
firstly there is no reason to offseason tanking in t7. it is stupid and pointless at this level. it only makes things worse.
so i feel they are only doing this due to frustration and anger over the new war system.
we will take the easy win but why would a t7 alliance sand bag when a win here would put them in t6???
On the list of problems I foresee likely to affect AW more than AQ, this doesn't show up in the top twenty.
BUT, the OVERALL ENDING OF DAY-5 does in fact all end at the exact same time. Evidently no problems for their servers, because the individual day-5 rewards still come out within minutes (just the overall week rewards take time to calculate, just like the overall AW Season rewards do).
** PS: Would love to see a similar type of ENROLLMENT FOR SUBSEQUENT AQ DAYS, although allow the starting time to be decided by each alliance (and also allow an excess window of time on the back end to complete a full 24 hours for day-5, like maybe 5 days + 8 hours total in which to run 5x 24 hr AQ days).