It's probably wise not to fully depend on any Debuff.
Ya you're right.
No relying on debuffs, take them out. Intercepts all day long.
Not wise to rely on our buffs either so take them out too. Not regens no furies no problem.
Revives should cost a mortgage payment too. Better yet if we lose we pledge our soul to Kabam for eternity.
Anything else, sunshine?
When you have content like AQ that changes every Season, it's not wise to Rank specifically for that and expect one Debuff to carry you through. There are over 100 Champs in the game with a range of Abilities, and it's not reasonable to rely on Bleed all the way through every Season of AQ. Things will change from time to time, and you'll have to use other Champs. There's no such thing as a team that will beat all content indefinitely.
They listened to feedback. That doesn't mean they could stop everything. They had to gather data to make adjustments. Once things are set in place, you wouldn't really find a total rollback. History shows this. They take the feedback as the data as apply it to the template implemented.
Had they listened they would never have pushed the server side update for AQ.
Had it been a client side update that would be a different story, there's a lot more moving parts and dealing with the play/app stores.
It makes me cring that there's no roll back plan for any software updates or a way to block a push to production. That's just dangerous development practices, but I digress.
There's a difference between taking in feedback and obeying orders. They haven't removed Sentinels. They're adjusting them. Their intentions weren't to have it as difficult. There was no way for us to gauge that until it went live. They're making adjustments to be closer to what they wanted.
You are right there is a difference.
Taking feedback they would have done a testing phase like LC/RH proposed update, and not a push to production without user acceptance testing.
There's absolutely no need to go live with a change like this without player based testing. They proved post 12.0 they have the capability to do UAT. If they are doing UAT and still released these changes then their player sample is severely flawed.
This was a situation is the same as the update to AW where the player based looked at the proposed changes, pointed out flaws in the plan which were ignored. The result was an absurd change that had alliances placing no to few defenders and winning.
The Beta Program is not working right now, which was explained at the beginning of the month. You can't reasonably expect them to not make any changes without consulting us first. It's their game. I don't consider Players trying to find a loophole to War as a flaw. Part of that whole bit was in protest to the changes. That loophole didn't last long. Regardless of how we feel entitled, it's their choice what they want to do.
There's a standard development process which includes User Acceptance Testing. It's not about permission it's about ensuring the changes hit their mark and and doesn't have unexpected consequences. A testing type which Kabam has claimed to perform in the past. Their history has shown that their acceptance testing hadn't been working. If it had we would not have had so many debacles with their updates. That's where the beta test platform comes in.
It is reasonable to expect if a company can not properly perform testing on an update then the code should not be pushed to production.
With the AW points system, players telling a company there's a flaw, exactly what the flaw is and yet the update gets pushed out is not players looking for a loophole, that's just bad development practices.
Expecting a company to follow basic best practices including the testing they claim they do isn't being entitled, it's reasonable expectation of product that many people are paying for.
And LBS is exactly who I’ve been trying to talk about, we know gw isn’t as affected as he runs map3, very casually. it’s the mid level up and coming players who used to be able to handle map 5, to be honest with game progression map 5 had become doable with 1/2 right champs at a medium level and good gameplay, there was always a big time commitment and that was a good way to keep people hooked on map 5 without having to make it too hard, it also meant higher level players could keep doing story and war and leave their b team in aq on map 5, even with the nerfed sentinels I’m not sure it’s going to be doable for people like him, my r4 5* Ultron Barely made it through the top left path of map 3 on day 5 after running A very relaxed 55333 last week, 13k powergaining and stun shrugging sentinels aren’t fun to fight 4 in a row. I can’t imagine that with a 4/40. even with the nerf I don’t think those champs will clear map 5 anymore, give the sub 300k range players a couple rdts or stop the sentinels building charges if we have to double evade which of course is inevitable,
They listened to feedback. That doesn't mean they could stop everything. They had to gather data to make adjustments. Once things are set in place, you wouldn't really find a total rollback. History shows this. They take the feedback as the data as apply it to the template implemented.
Had they listened they would never have pushed the server side update for AQ.
Had it been a client side update that would be a different story, there's a lot more moving parts and dealing with the play/app stores.
It makes me cring that there's no roll back plan for any software updates or a way to block a push to production. That's just dangerous development practices, but I digress.
There's a difference between taking in feedback and obeying orders. They haven't removed Sentinels. They're adjusting them. Their intentions weren't to have it as difficult. There was no way for us to gauge that until it went live. They're making adjustments to be closer to what they wanted.
You are right there is a difference.
Taking feedback they would have done a testing phase like LC/RH proposed update, and not a push to production without user acceptance testing.
There's absolutely no need to go live with a change like this without player based testing. They proved post 12.0 they have the capability to do UAT. If they are doing UAT and still released these changes then their player sample is severely flawed.
This was a situation is the same as the update to AW where the player based looked at the proposed changes, pointed out flaws in the plan which were ignored. The result was an absurd change that had alliances placing no to few defenders and winning.
The Beta Program is not working right now, which was explained at the beginning of the month. You can't reasonably expect them to not make any changes without consulting us first. It's their game. I don't consider Players trying to find a loophole to War as a flaw. Part of that whole bit was in protest to the changes. That loophole didn't last long. Regardless of how we feel entitled, it's their choice what they want to do.
There's a standard development process which includes User Acceptance Testing. It's not about permission it's about ensuring the changes hit their mark and and doesn't have unexpected consequences. A testing type which Kabam has claimed to perform in the past. Their history has shown that their acceptance testing hadn't been working. If it had we would not have had so many debacles with their updates. That's where the beta test platform comes in.
It is reasonable to expect if a company can not properly perform testing on an update then the code should not be pushed to production.
With the AW points system, players telling a company there's a flaw, exactly what the flaw is and yet the update gets pushed out is not players looking for a loophole, that's just bad development practices.
Expecting a company to follow basic best practices including the testing they claim they do isn't being entitled, it's reasonable expectation of product that many people are paying for.
They test. They don't have a fully running Beta Program that tests all content yet. As for what's involved with their processes, I do not know. Testing is a reasonable expectation, sure. It's not reasonable to expect them to forego any change people don't like.
There is still a massive thing we have overlooked, swiping back should not build charges, I’m having to bait l1s until I build up dozens of charges, and to evade the l1s I need to use 2-3 swipes back, it’s still bs, they are an unfair mechanic
They're passive and getting them to bait is hard. Might take 7 total swipe backs to get them to evade, building up more charges. It's a cash grab.
Yap.! It’s annoying when you try to bait sp1 specially the mystic senti and you get cornered while you have fury on next thing you know they have sp2 and you have no where to go.
If more people played at your relaxed level they probably would have a less emotional viewpoint of the game and probably enjoy it more, but some of these players have thousands of dollars invested in this game so they can be emotional, no need to wind them up questioning everytime they question kabams motives, nobody will ever win that argument, I’d rather see this topic stay on track unlike the dozens of threads I’ve seen you almost single handedly close down by questioning those who post from an emotional viewpoint. Seriously kabam I hope this did hurt your bottom line like I suspect it did, and hope you learn a lesson that customers are worth keeping happy to a certain extent, yes the game needs changes to keep us interested, but I think all these balance of alliance focus swings have upset alliances like mine who still haven’t decided what our aq maps will be and whether we will be war or aq focused, this is very unstabilisimg while we are trying to recruit replacements, hopefully the sentinels are much more manageable for the mid tier player with the changes, only next week will tell
Really. Based on what? Fighting them in EQ with Nodes on them? Based on their Immunity? They're going to be "harder" is not a quantitative analysis to adjust anything on. There's usually a reaction to every change. "Oh, well since the reaction is that it will be harder, we've decided not to go through with it.". Doesn't exactly fly. They need something to go on to make adjustments.
@GroundedWisdom I fought sentinels (minions) in uncollected, I have fought symbioids in quests as well. I can then comparatively look at both of them and realise that sentinels are clearly more difficult to fight. It’s not rocket science.
Adding them to AQ is the direction they chose to go. Having it that much more difficult wasn't what they wanted, which is why they made adjustments. Until they went live, it wasn't possible to gauge how much they had to make those adjustments. Whether people knew they would be harder or not is irrelevant. Adding them is the decision they made.
First of all, I'd like to acknowledge your iron will and resolve. Your continued persistence to justify and follow up on your opinion despite receiving so much resistance is simply and truly something to be marvelled at; it's a trait that not many people have - especially under pressure.
That being said, I respect your opinion as it is valid and equal as any other, however, I have to disagree with that the added difficulty "wasn't what they wanted". I'm not saying or implying that Kabam intended to make it difficult more for us or to "milk the playerbase" (as some might put it). Rather it's the certainty and absoluteness of your opinion that I have to disagree with. Unless if you have some form of insider knowledge that the average player doesn't know about and/or have concrete evidence to back up this claim, you, I, or anyone else can't possibly know exactly "what they wanted" with absolute 100% certainty. However, if you do have insider knowledge or any definitive evidence to ensure your claim, then I would like to sincerely apologise to you for my accusations as clearly I'm the wrong party here.
My personal opinion (not fact), whether it matters or not, is that Kabam did know that there was some added difficulty by introducing Sentinels to AQ but after some considerable backlash and opposition, 'buckled under the pressure' and compromised with us players to reach a mutual agreement. Do I have any concrete evidence to back this claim? I will openly say that I don't and if you want to dismiss my opinion as invalid, biased or just straight up trash, it is more than fair and justifiable to do so. However, we are on the same boat here, I don't have any evidence to back my claim and you don't too so until someone or Kabam themselves reveal their truest intentions of adding Sentinels to AQ, my opinion, your opinion and frankly everyone's opinion is mere speculation - nothing can be said with absolute certainty.
Really. Based on what? Fighting them in EQ with Nodes on them? Based on their Immunity? They're going to be "harder" is not a quantitative analysis to adjust anything on. There's usually a reaction to every change. "Oh, well since the reaction is that it will be harder, we've decided not to go through with it.". Doesn't exactly fly. They need something to go on to make adjustments.
@GroundedWisdom I fought sentinels (minions) in uncollected, I have fought symbioids in quests as well. I can then comparatively look at both of them and realise that sentinels are clearly more difficult to fight. It’s not rocket science.
Adding them to AQ is the direction they chose to go. Having it that much more difficult wasn't what they wanted, which is why they made adjustments. Until they went live, it wasn't possible to gauge how much they had to make those adjustments. Whether people knew they would be harder or not is irrelevant. Adding them is the decision they made.
First of all, I'd like to acknowledge your iron will and resolve. Your continued persistence to justify and follow up on your opinion despite receiving so much resistance is simply and truly something to be marvelled at; it's a trait that not many people have - especially under pressure.
That being said, I respect your opinion as it is valid and equal as any other, however, I have to disagree with that the added difficulty "wasn't what they wanted". I'm not saying or implying that Kabam intended to make it difficult more for us or to "milk the playerbase" (as some might put it). Rather it's the certainty and absoluteness of your opinion that I have to disagree with. Unless if you have some form of insider knowledge that the average player doesn't know about and/or have concrete evidence to back up this claim, you, I, or anyone else can't possibly know exactly "what they wanted" with absolute 100% certainty. However, if you do have insider knowledge or any definitive evidence to ensure your claim, then I would like to sincerely apologise to you for my accusations as clearly I'm the wrong party here.
My personal opinion (not fact), whether it matters or not, is that Kabam did know that there was some added difficulty by introducing Sentinels to AQ but after some considerable backlash and opposition, 'buckled under the pressure' and compromised with us players to reach a mutual agreement. Do I have any concrete evidence to back this claim? I will openly say that I don't and if you want to dismiss my opinion as invalid, biased or just straight up trash, it is more than fair and justifiable to do so. However, we are on the same boat here, I don't have any evidence to back my claim and you don't too so until someone or Kabam themselves reveal their truest intentions of adding Sentinels to AQ, my opinion, your opinion and frankly everyone's opinion is mere speculation - nothing can be said with absolute certainty.
Really. Based on what? Fighting them in EQ with Nodes on them? Based on their Immunity? They're going to be "harder" is not a quantitative analysis to adjust anything on. There's usually a reaction to every change. "Oh, well since the reaction is that it will be harder, we've decided not to go through with it.". Doesn't exactly fly. They need something to go on to make adjustments.
@GroundedWisdom I fought sentinels (minions) in uncollected, I have fought symbioids in quests as well. I can then comparatively look at both of them and realise that sentinels are clearly more difficult to fight. It’s not rocket science.
Adding them to AQ is the direction they chose to go. Having it that much more difficult wasn't what they wanted, which is why they made adjustments. Until they went live, it wasn't possible to gauge how much they had to make those adjustments. Whether people knew they would be harder or not is irrelevant. Adding them is the decision they made.
First of all, I'd like to acknowledge your iron will and resolve. Your continued persistence to justify and follow up on your opinion despite receiving so much resistance is simply and truly something to be marvelled at; it's a trait that not many people have - especially under pressure.
That being said, I respect your opinion as it is valid and equal as any other, however, I have to disagree with that the added difficulty "wasn't what they wanted". I'm not saying or implying that Kabam intended to make it difficult more for us or to "milk the playerbase" (as some might put it). Rather it's the certainty and absoluteness of your opinion that I have to disagree with. Unless if you have some form of insider knowledge that the average player doesn't know about and/or have concrete evidence to back up this claim, you, I, or anyone else can't possibly know exactly "what they wanted" with absolute 100% certainty. However, if you do have insider knowledge or any definitive evidence to ensure your claim, then I would like to sincerely apologise to you for my accusations as clearly I'm the wrong party here.
My personal opinion (not fact), whether it matters or not, is that Kabam did know that there was some added difficulty by introducing Sentinels to AQ but after some considerable backlash and opposition, 'buckled under the pressure' and compromised with us players to reach a mutual agreement. Do I have any concrete evidence to back this claim? I will openly say that I don't and if you want to dismiss my opinion as invalid, biased or just straight up trash, it is more than fair and justifiable to do so. However, we are on the same boat here, I don't have any evidence to back my claim and you don't too so until someone or Kabam themselves reveal their truest intentions of adding Sentinels to AQ, my opinion, your opinion and frankly everyone's opinion is mere speculation - nothing can be said with absolute certainty.
I have their comments and actions to base it on. Their official statements are as close to fact as any of us will come on the Forum, save for the actual timeline of events and actions, and those both support their comments. I see no reason to question the validity of whether they intedned to make it as difficult as it was because that is contrary to the statements and evidence. Furthermore, there are some who just breed mistrust because they are skeptical of anything they do, and I will not feed that. There is enough conspiracy, suspicion, and overall negativity on here, that it does not need my contribution. I'm sorry, but that argument comes up constantly, and it's a Catch-22. None of us will know anything beyond a shadow of a doubt in terms of their statements. We can however, examine the evidence with an open mind, rather than a jaded view. I choose to look for the validity, not to find errors in their statements. Which is why I'm labeled a contrarian. I am not among those who do not trust them. If I were, I would not spend my time playing the game or frequenting the Forum. If I don't agree with something to the point of absolute suspicion, I don't invest my time and energy into it.
They listened to feedback. That doesn't mean they could stop everything. They had to gather data to make adjustments. Once things are set in place, you wouldn't really find a total rollback. History shows this. They take the feedback as the data as apply it to the template implemented.
Had they listened they would never have pushed the server side update for AQ.
Had it been a client side update that would be a different story, there's a lot more moving parts and dealing with the play/app stores.
It makes me cring that there's no roll back plan for any software updates or a way to block a push to production. That's just dangerous development practices, but I digress.
There's a difference between taking in feedback and obeying orders. They haven't removed Sentinels. They're adjusting them. Their intentions weren't to have it as difficult. There was no way for us to gauge that until it went live. They're making adjustments to be closer to what they wanted.
You are right there is a difference.
Taking feedback they would have done a testing phase like LC/RH proposed update, and not a push to production without user acceptance testing.
There's absolutely no need to go live with a change like this without player based testing. They proved post 12.0 they have the capability to do UAT. If they are doing UAT and still released these changes then their player sample is severely flawed.
This was a situation is the same as the update to AW where the player based looked at the proposed changes, pointed out flaws in the plan which were ignored. The result was an absurd change that had alliances placing no to few defenders and winning.
The Beta Program is not working right now, which was explained at the beginning of the month. You can't reasonably expect them to not make any changes without consulting us first. It's their game. I don't consider Players trying to find a loophole to War as a flaw. Part of that whole bit was in protest to the changes. That loophole didn't last long. Regardless of how we feel entitled, it's their choice what they want to do.
There's a standard development process which includes User Acceptance Testing. It's not about permission it's about ensuring the changes hit their mark and and doesn't have unexpected consequences. A testing type which Kabam has claimed to perform in the past. Their history has shown that their acceptance testing hadn't been working. If it had we would not have had so many debacles with their updates. That's where the beta test platform comes in.
It is reasonable to expect if a company can not properly perform testing on an update then the code should not be pushed to production.
With the AW points system, players telling a company there's a flaw, exactly what the flaw is and yet the update gets pushed out is not players looking for a loophole, that's just bad development practices.
Expecting a company to follow basic best practices including the testing they claim they do isn't being entitled, it's reasonable expectation of product that many people are paying for.
They test. They don't have a fully running Beta Program that tests all content yet. As for what's involved with their processes, I do not know. Testing is a reasonable expectation, sure. It's not reasonable to expect them to forego any change people don't like.
A standard practice for any application development is:
Development (Make our changes here).
QA (make sure we didn't break anything obvious, quality assurance)
UAT (User Acceptance Testing make sure we didn't introduce unexpected side effects, general user impact testing).
Beta Testing (Larger pool of testing by users).
Production (Go live to everyone).
QA is where they should have caught bugs like extra nodes on maps. Visual glitches when screens change, math still works out for champs ect,.
UAT or Beta would have pointed out they missed their mark. Since, like you said, Beta was not working, then UAT needs to be more complete. Especially when touching any changes that is core to the game.
When people start yelling that this is going to do XYZ and that is bad... UAT testing needs to check that out, and if it turns out to be true which it often is, hold deployment.
This is no longer a fledgling game, it should be delivering based on better practices by now. It is a mature application offering and we should be demanding better. There is not way they are following these practices and still having the number of problems getting through. They shouldn't still be missing the mark so often, and they certainly should not still be releasing maps with extra lines anymore.
IF they are testing like they claim, then there's no excuse for many of these things which regularly occur.
This is why I can't buy that increasing the difficulty was not intended. a half decent UAT would have pointed it out right away.
Everyone in here completely sells Kabam short on their ability to analyze trends and make changes that positively benefit their bottom line. They wanted to make it harder, because that makes them more money. It is understandable, but like any business they have to do enough to get more revenue but not too much to alienate the customer base. They went too far, but will there be compensation for the excessive item use? That is the question. Otherwise they win on both fronts.
I don’t see compensation coming. Halls of healing was compensation ahead of time which proves they knew the difficulty jump was there
This is why I believe they did know as well - working as intended in my opinion. Too many good players are leaving because of the ridiculousness of it as well which is ultimately going to hurt their bottom line which is why the "update" but I think that too much **** has gone on for too long and many paying players are going to look elsewhere. Congrats Kabam for killing a really good game. Already changed my app rating on it in apple store.
The damage that was done to alliances is irreversible in the near future. Long time groups have been decimated and will take time to get reestablished. This is what I have an issue with. They destroyed things we built years building in less than two weeks before caving in and admitting it was a failed attempt. No consideration was given to the player base for the damage and lost units, items, and rewards. I expected more when they admitted they were wrong with their assessment, but their stubbornness is too strong.
Hopefully they will feel the effects on their bottom line for a long time to come, and think things through better next time they decide to make a bad decision that the players protest immdiately as the players are the ones supporting the developers.
They didn't intend for the difficulty to be increased as much as it was.
I'm not sure what is a more damning accusation. That Kabam did intend the difficulty to be much harder and they just went overboard, or they didn't intend the difficulty to be much harder and the developers actually can't tell the difference when they design content.
Another data point. Because we were down a player on days four and five we actually scored almost two million points less in this past week. However, we climbed almost a hundred places in standing relative to last week, when we climbed two hundred places relative to the previous three weeks prior to the AQ changes after scoring about ten million points less.
There are only two explanations for that happening that I believe are probable. One: even after the experience of the first week the average player in alliances in the bottom half of expert are still struggling as much or even more than the first week. Two: in general players are getting better but alliances above us are unable to score more points because of alliance disruptions (people quitting, players jumping between alliances, alliances dropping down, or alliances straight up disbanding). Those are not mutually exclusive, but I believe it is very likely that after two weeks with the current AQ configuration players are not adjusting to the difficulty at all. It will be interesting to see what happens in the third week given the announced changes. I'm skeptical they will have a dramatic impact: the changes are too small to return difficulty to anywhere near the original level. My best estimate is that scores rise maybe 10% relative to the previous two weeks, probably less. For reference, my best guess is that current scores are about 20% lower than they were before the change.
i repeat please stick to the topic at hand and dont lower yourselves to the ONE that always has to argue against solid FACTS against whats been happening to the gameplay mechanics and modes lately.
state your facts, prove your points and dont get derailed from obvious attempts from those who CLEARLY will NEVER see how WRONG they are.
lets see how this upcoming aq will go cause kabam is really needs to make up for aq becoming what it was for 2 weeks and KABAM NEEDS to fix the bugs in the game asap to make up for a lot of ground they have lost lately
They didn't intend for the difficulty to be increased as much as it was.
I'm not sure what is a more damning accusation. That Kabam did intend the difficulty to be much harder and they just went overboard, or they didn't intend the difficulty to be much harder and the developers actually can't tell the difference when they design content.
If you're trying to imply that they're incompetent because it didn't go as planned, then that would seem damning, yes. However, it wasn't the intended outcome because it's being revised. It's not that unreasonable that something needs to be adjusted after inception. As much as people expect the proceess of QA to be more, nothing is perfect.
The bottom line for me is the information provided is that it wasn't intended to be that difficult. Supported by commenting shortly after that they were monitoring the feedback and data, and followed up with revisions. I happen to think that evidence supports their claim. However, I don't see any productive end to debating whether they intended it or not, other than to generate mistrust. They're making changes. Somehow people are still not happy.
The bottom line for me is the information provided is that it wasn't intended to be that difficult. Supported by commenting shortly after that they were monitoring the feedback and data, and followed up with revisions. I happen to think that evidence supports their claim. However, I don't see any productive end to debating whether they intended it or not, other than to generate mistrust. They're making changes. Somehow people are still not happy.
As many people have stated...either they intended it to be this difficult or they are incompetent. Your facts prove one or the other as well. Kabam Miike was firm about how it wouldn’t be harder when this was first announced. And I know for a fact he plays the game. So if it wasn’t intended it only leaves one option. So what does team kabam say about it GW?
Miike said it shouldn't be that much harder, before it went live. Meaning that was the intention. It didn't go as planned. I'm not sure what level people live on where it's unacceptable that things don't work out as planned unless there's something seriously wrong, but the world I live in leaves room for error.
Miike said it shouldn't be that much harder, before it went live. Meaning that was the intention. It didn't go as planned. I'm not sure what level people live on where it's unacceptable that things don't work out as planned unless there's something seriously wrong, but the world I live in leaves room for error.
Room for error? This is a freemium game available to everyone. It’s a business. A company. It’s full of elite employees paid to do 1 job. That’s like saying there is room for error towards a restaurant that gives you food poisoning because their food checks went done properly. Smh.
And yes there can still be room for error as long as errors aren’t a daily trend. A restaurant would be shut down if they were constantly giving people food posioning. The only aspect that keeps mobile gaming companies in check is the people that play the game. Error after error after wrong doing can only stir up more and more hostility. As the proof in the pudding is simple. So many errors intended or not can only leave one more option on the table to describe the developers of the game, that we all love to play. 💕
STICK TO THE MOTHER TRUCKING TOPIC. WHY IS THAT SO HARD????
its on kabam to make it right not us. the changes they NOW made for AQ seem good to help fix their mistakes so its a start.
BUT the next thing they NEED to focus on is FIXING THESE UGLY BUGS IN THE GAME like for example my blocks dropping, double dashing back not working, evading out of the first hit of a special 1 or 2 and lag and controls misfiring. THIS is what we need to keep pointing to kabam to fix.
stop wasting time on who said this and who said that. arGuing With the nameless is ineffective and i dont want 48 pages worth of complaints to be closed because of derailing by an obvious and oblivious
Comments
When you have content like AQ that changes every Season, it's not wise to Rank specifically for that and expect one Debuff to carry you through. There are over 100 Champs in the game with a range of Abilities, and it's not reasonable to rely on Bleed all the way through every Season of AQ. Things will change from time to time, and you'll have to use other Champs. There's no such thing as a team that will beat all content indefinitely.
There's a standard development process which includes User Acceptance Testing. It's not about permission it's about ensuring the changes hit their mark and and doesn't have unexpected consequences. A testing type which Kabam has claimed to perform in the past. Their history has shown that their acceptance testing hadn't been working. If it had we would not have had so many debacles with their updates. That's where the beta test platform comes in.
It is reasonable to expect if a company can not properly perform testing on an update then the code should not be pushed to production.
With the AW points system, players telling a company there's a flaw, exactly what the flaw is and yet the update gets pushed out is not players looking for a loophole, that's just bad development practices.
Expecting a company to follow basic best practices including the testing they claim they do isn't being entitled, it's reasonable expectation of product that many people are paying for.
You and that word again. I don't think you know what it means.
They test. They don't have a fully running Beta Program that tests all content yet. As for what's involved with their processes, I do not know. Testing is a reasonable expectation, sure. It's not reasonable to expect them to forego any change people don't like.
They're passive and getting them to bait is hard. Might take 7 total swipe backs to get them to evade, building up more charges. It's a cash grab.
First of all, I'd like to acknowledge your iron will and resolve. Your continued persistence to justify and follow up on your opinion despite receiving so much resistance is simply and truly something to be marvelled at; it's a trait that not many people have - especially under pressure.
That being said, I respect your opinion as it is valid and equal as any other, however, I have to disagree with that the added difficulty "wasn't what they wanted". I'm not saying or implying that Kabam intended to make it difficult more for us or to "milk the playerbase" (as some might put it). Rather it's the certainty and absoluteness of your opinion that I have to disagree with. Unless if you have some form of insider knowledge that the average player doesn't know about and/or have concrete evidence to back up this claim, you, I, or anyone else can't possibly know exactly "what they wanted" with absolute 100% certainty. However, if you do have insider knowledge or any definitive evidence to ensure your claim, then I would like to sincerely apologise to you for my accusations as clearly I'm the wrong party here.
My personal opinion (not fact), whether it matters or not, is that Kabam did know that there was some added difficulty by introducing Sentinels to AQ but after some considerable backlash and opposition, 'buckled under the pressure' and compromised with us players to reach a mutual agreement. Do I have any concrete evidence to back this claim? I will openly say that I don't and if you want to dismiss my opinion as invalid, biased or just straight up trash, it is more than fair and justifiable to do so. However, we are on the same boat here, I don't have any evidence to back my claim and you don't too so until someone or Kabam themselves reveal their truest intentions of adding Sentinels to AQ, my opinion, your opinion and frankly everyone's opinion is mere speculation - nothing can be said with absolute certainty.
I have their comments and actions to base it on. Their official statements are as close to fact as any of us will come on the Forum, save for the actual timeline of events and actions, and those both support their comments. I see no reason to question the validity of whether they intedned to make it as difficult as it was because that is contrary to the statements and evidence. Furthermore, there are some who just breed mistrust because they are skeptical of anything they do, and I will not feed that. There is enough conspiracy, suspicion, and overall negativity on here, that it does not need my contribution. I'm sorry, but that argument comes up constantly, and it's a Catch-22. None of us will know anything beyond a shadow of a doubt in terms of their statements. We can however, examine the evidence with an open mind, rather than a jaded view. I choose to look for the validity, not to find errors in their statements. Which is why I'm labeled a contrarian. I am not among those who do not trust them. If I were, I would not spend my time playing the game or frequenting the Forum. If I don't agree with something to the point of absolute suspicion, I don't invest my time and energy into it.
A standard practice for any application development is:
Development (Make our changes here).
QA (make sure we didn't break anything obvious, quality assurance)
UAT (User Acceptance Testing make sure we didn't introduce unexpected side effects, general user impact testing).
Beta Testing (Larger pool of testing by users).
Production (Go live to everyone).
QA is where they should have caught bugs like extra nodes on maps. Visual glitches when screens change, math still works out for champs ect,.
UAT or Beta would have pointed out they missed their mark. Since, like you said, Beta was not working, then UAT needs to be more complete. Especially when touching any changes that is core to the game.
When people start yelling that this is going to do XYZ and that is bad... UAT testing needs to check that out, and if it turns out to be true which it often is, hold deployment.
This is no longer a fledgling game, it should be delivering based on better practices by now. It is a mature application offering and we should be demanding better. There is not way they are following these practices and still having the number of problems getting through. They shouldn't still be missing the mark so often, and they certainly should not still be releasing maps with extra lines anymore.
IF they are testing like they claim, then there's no excuse for many of these things which regularly occur.
This is why I can't buy that increasing the difficulty was not intended. a half decent UAT would have pointed it out right away.
This is why I believe they did know as well - working as intended in my opinion. Too many good players are leaving because of the ridiculousness of it as well which is ultimately going to hurt their bottom line which is why the "update" but I think that too much **** has gone on for too long and many paying players are going to look elsewhere. Congrats Kabam for killing a really good game. Already changed my app rating on it in apple store.
Hopefully they will feel the effects on their bottom line for a long time to come, and think things through better next time they decide to make a bad decision that the players protest immdiately as the players are the ones supporting the developers.
I'm not sure what is a more damning accusation. That Kabam did intend the difficulty to be much harder and they just went overboard, or they didn't intend the difficulty to be much harder and the developers actually can't tell the difference when they design content.
There are only two explanations for that happening that I believe are probable. One: even after the experience of the first week the average player in alliances in the bottom half of expert are still struggling as much or even more than the first week. Two: in general players are getting better but alliances above us are unable to score more points because of alliance disruptions (people quitting, players jumping between alliances, alliances dropping down, or alliances straight up disbanding). Those are not mutually exclusive, but I believe it is very likely that after two weeks with the current AQ configuration players are not adjusting to the difficulty at all. It will be interesting to see what happens in the third week given the announced changes. I'm skeptical they will have a dramatic impact: the changes are too small to return difficulty to anywhere near the original level. My best estimate is that scores rise maybe 10% relative to the previous two weeks, probably less. For reference, my best guess is that current scores are about 20% lower than they were before the change.
state your facts, prove your points and dont get derailed from obvious attempts from those who CLEARLY will NEVER see how WRONG they are.
lets see how this upcoming aq will go cause kabam is really needs to make up for aq becoming what it was for 2 weeks and KABAM NEEDS to fix the bugs in the game asap to make up for a lot of ground they have lost lately
If you're trying to imply that they're incompetent because it didn't go as planned, then that would seem damning, yes. However, it wasn't the intended outcome because it's being revised. It's not that unreasonable that something needs to be adjusted after inception. As much as people expect the proceess of QA to be more, nothing is perfect.
You're BOTH derailing the thread.
As many people have stated...either they intended it to be this difficult or they are incompetent. Your facts prove one or the other as well. Kabam Miike was firm about how it wouldn’t be harder when this was first announced. And I know for a fact he plays the game. So if it wasn’t intended it only leaves one option. So what does team kabam say about it GW?
Room for error? This is a freemium game available to everyone. It’s a business. A company. It’s full of elite employees paid to do 1 job. That’s like saying there is room for error towards a restaurant that gives you food poisoning because their food checks went done properly. Smh.
And yes there can still be room for error as long as errors aren’t a daily trend. A restaurant would be shut down if they were constantly giving people food posioning. The only aspect that keeps mobile gaming companies in check is the people that play the game. Error after error after wrong doing can only stir up more and more hostility. As the proof in the pudding is simple. So many errors intended or not can only leave one more option on the table to describe the developers of the game, that we all love to play. 💕
Hold on a second I’m taken back by your not so sincere apology...
Putting words down that I didn’t say. I said they make errors, daily.
its on kabam to make it right not us. the changes they NOW made for AQ seem good to help fix their mistakes so its a start.
BUT the next thing they NEED to focus on is FIXING THESE UGLY BUGS IN THE GAME like for example my blocks dropping, double dashing back not working, evading out of the first hit of a special 1 or 2 and lag and controls misfiring. THIS is what we need to keep pointing to kabam to fix.
stop wasting time on who said this and who said that. arGuing With the nameless is ineffective and i dont want 48 pages worth of complaints to be closed because of derailing by an obvious and oblivious
dude just stop youre gonna get this thread closed. theres no point in debating with those who dont understand how a debate works.