Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
1) that is not the claim you made. 2) I thought making it fair for some at the expense of others was your complaint, now you are supporting it when it is how you want it. 3) That is an opinion, not a fact. You cannot even prove what portion of the playerbase would have been affected by the majority of those actions.
I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I gave ideas. There's room for many more. If people have other ideas, by all means. That would require not waving a flag for this situation.
This is not arguing for the sake of arguing, you make an claim, support your claim or stop making the bad claims.
I disagree with that. I'm quite positive you're coming from the perspective of finding flaws in whatever I say. That's the impression I'm getting.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
So how is postponing the Season harmful?
because it costs you rewards.
Not if you're not competing for them. You don't get Rewards unless the competition starts. You're not owed them.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
So how is postponing the Season harmful?
Because people look for the gold and loyalty for aq tickets. Crystals and catalysts for rank ups.
You can get that off-season.
Not the catalysts. For some people that's a major source of them.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
1) that is not the claim you made. 2) I thought making it fair for some at the expense of others was your complaint, now you are supporting it when it is how you want it. 3) That is an opinion, not a fact. You cannot even prove what portion of the playerbase would have been affected by the majority of those actions.
I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I gave ideas. There's room for many more. If people have other ideas, by all means. That would require not waving a flag for this situation.
This is not arguing for the sake of arguing, you make an claim, support your claim or stop making the bad claims.
I disagree with that. I'm quite positive you're coming from the perspective of finding flaws in whatever I say. That's the impression I'm getting.
You made a hasty generalization. When someone uses an absolute statement, such as "there was a way to make it fair for EVERYONE", it is quite easy to find flaws in the argument, especially when you ask them to backup the claim and they cannot. Part of a debate is to get the opposing persons point of view and reconciling it with your own, which leads to additional poking it to find flaws. That is the natural part of debate. Claiming that someone is arguing in bad faith, arguing for the sake of arguing, because of that is in and of itself bad faith. Dont make claims you cannot back up, or when you realize you cannot back them up back off, apologize for the bad claim, and start with a better claim.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
So how is postponing the Season harmful?
because it costs you rewards.
Not if you're not competing for them. You don't get Rewards unless the competition starts. You're not owed them.
Incorrect. There are a maximum of I think 12 reward cycles in the game per year. That means I have an opportunity to win prizes 12 times. If they take the game down for month that hurts the entire AW playerbase because they lose an opportunity for rewards. The fact that I dont own them does not change that loss.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
That's true as well. Could always make a new ally and start over. Honestly that might be the best idea for some alliances right now.
Not really. One with over 100 War Rating was overmatched. 1 Mil vs. 20
As long as someone can create a new alliance, this will always be a problem.
Personally, I wish Kabam would implement some way for allys not participating in seasons to loose part or all of their war rating. The war tiers are a percentage of all allys with a war rating wether they participate in war now or not. This affects what war map you are on & what your season multiplier is. So ultimately it will affect what your season score will be. Kabam hasnt done anything because technically they aren't taking up a season spot if they dont play. But that just means it takes longer for an ally to shift tiers to get a bigger multiplier and into a higher season bracket. Eventually those allys that just stopped playing instead of disbanding wouldnt be taking up a higher tier....nor could someone just happen to take over an ally with a war rating they haven't earned.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
Anybody that truly believes Kabam should have reset it to zero, can easily rectify it on their end. Create a new ally, shift everybody over. Problem solved for those few people that believe it would help on their case.
That's true as well. Could always make a new ally and start over. Honestly that might be the best idea for some alliances right now.
Not really. One with over 100 War Rating was overmatched. 1 Mil vs. 20
As long as someone can create a new alliance, this will always be a problem.
Personally, I wish Kabam would implement some way for allys not participating in seasons to loose part or all of their war rating. The war tiers are a percentage of all allys with a war rating wether they participate in war now or not. This affects what war map you are on & what your season multiplier is. So ultimately it will affect what your season score will be. Kabam hasnt done anything because technically they aren't taking up a season spot if they dont play. But that just means it takes longer for an ally to shift tiers to get a bigger multiplier and into a higher season bracket. Eventually those allys that just stopped playing instead of disbanding wouldnt be taking up a higher tier....nor could someone just happen to take over an ally with a war rating they haven't earned.
Something may have changed when I was on break but I thought war ratings decayed if you did not compete for a season
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
I kinda want kabam to do a war reset on in gent and wipe the slate clean
Then you shouldnt have any problem beating a lowly gold alliance should you.
Maybe if there were 19 other players in my alliance exactly like me. Or maybe if recruiting for players as good as me was easy. My alliance is 6 mil, battling a 16 mil alliance. You think we stand a chance?... we don’t
For all you know, they could have only 2 guys like yourself and the rest are newer players as well with low ratings. This is why alliance rating doesnt mean anything in the long run.
I looked at their alliance, and 95 percent of their players are lv 60. Only 3 of mine are lv 60
I agree. They shouldve reset everyone back to zero instead of half. But again lvl 60 doesnt mean anything other than you explored a few acts.
That would've been worse as then you could have 2mil alliances matching with the likes of kenob. Then how do you decide who's in which map tier if everyone is even at the beginning
Because eventually itll even itself out just like it is right now. Would take a little longer is all.
Just stop. Drop down from what? Bronze 3? Against a Gold 3? Just stop.
Actually, you should stop. You're not looking at the whole picture here. Both alliances have 800-ish rating. That implies roughly 1600 rating last season, plus or minus a few wars. No 1600 alliance is likely to place Bronze 1 unless they either didn't fight all twelve wars or were fighting with less than three groups. So this alliance probably fought with one or two groups, or didn't fight in all the wars, or both. But the other alliance got to Gold 3, and that's almost impossible to do at 1600 rating unless they were fighting with three groups.
So you can't compare a Bronze 1 alliance against a Gold 3 alliance when they were not fighting with the same number of participants or even possibly the same number of wars last season. Two alliances exactly equal in fighting strength could end up in those widely separated brackets if they were not participating at the same level, and there seems to be no way those two alliances were participating at the same level last season given the brackets they ended up in.
This is yet another reason why it is so important to focus *only* on war rating, and not on anything else. When people focus on other things, like season bracket, which are influenced by things completely different from strength like number of participants or number of wars fought, they reach the wrong conclusions consistently.
No. I've had quite enough of the excuses for these Matches.
I've seen many people use strawmen, but I have never seen anyone cosplay as one.
That's not a strawman. I'm at the end of my tolerance for the abhorrent Matches that are taking place and I'm not going to stay silent while everyone keeps saying all is well. It is not.
"I'm not getting what I WANT so I'll complain even though the previous issue hurt WAY more people."
Okay Karen.
No, you're right. Let's not care about anyone else being harmed because YOUR side is getting what it wants.
That is exactly what you are doing when you act like this fix is not worth the short term pain the other system is causing. You dont mind that vastly more people were harmed in the other system, that is causing short term pain in fixing, you just want it your way, no matter the harm to others that is being caused. Atleast we are looking at it as a cost to fix a broken system and making it fair for everyone.
It's quite honorable of you to throw in that short term pain when you're not the one that has to go through it. "My way" is not what it's about. It's about what isn't harmful to ANYONE. What we have here is a portion of people taking the L so others can benefit. That's not a Season competition. That's not even skill. That's valuing one section of the Player Base over the other.
How do you know who is and is not going through it. Talking about bad logic. I thought it was not about L, you always come back around to the loss. And no, it is valuing the entire player base. There was no way to do this to make the transition fair to everyone, but the new system is fair to everyone. No matter what they did in the transition someone would feel pain.
There are ways to make it fair for everyone. This exposure solution was hasty. There were many options that could have been implemented. How do I know? You honestly can't be asking me that. They've been posting since the change, and many more are still going through it that haven't posted. I mean I knew that people were brushing it off, but to not see it entirely.....
Ok, so what's one way they could have made it fair for everyone. I'll wait.
The Season could have been postponed until a solution was devised for starters. Doing this during the most competitive and productive part of War was much more harmful. You want ideas? I've given them. Make manual adjustments based on the calculated inflation for one thing. That was an idea. Use a combination of both systems in order to soften the effects of jarring the system until things normalize. That was another. Wipe them completely and have a qualifying period that places Alliances in appropriate starting points could have been a solution. They could have reset Ratings back to "last known good configuration". If they calculated that they were inflated, there must have been a starting point to that gauge. Shall I go on because I can continue thinking of ways it could have been handled without making it a total slaughter in the name of balance.
none of thsoe would have been fair to everyone. They would have been fairer to different segments of the playerbase, but none of them, not even taken together would have been fair to all of them. In fact the first (waiting) one would have been the least fair to the largest portion.
They would have been a great deal more fair than what we have now.
But we asked for fair to EVERYONE equally. IT DOESNT EXIST.
So how is postponing the Season harmful?
because it costs you rewards.
Not if you're not competing for them. You don't get Rewards unless the competition starts. You're not owed them.
Incorrect. There are a maximum of I think 12 reward cycles in the game per year. That means I have an opportunity to win prizes 12 times. If they take the game down for month that hurts the entire AW playerbase because they lose an opportunity for rewards. The fact that I dont own them does not change that loss.
No it doesn't. You don't earn anything unless the Season is underway. It's not a given. It's not a mandate. It's not owed Rewards. It's a competition from the beginning of the Season to the end, and it's certainly worth postponing for another week or two if the objective is to come up with a solution that doesn't make it a write-off for many people. That's what's happening now regardless. You have Wars which should be discounted because they're not winnable for one side, that are being calculated towards the final score. Points that are necessary for the final outcome are unattainable through mismatches and not because of performance. Look around. That's what we have now.
Alright all, we've had to close enough of these threads that devolve into arguing. We've let you all know the reasoning behind Matchmaking changes. We expect for the matchmaking to even out over time (hopefully sooner, rather than later), but it does need time to normalize.
Comments
Sup @DalBot. 😂