Is it against the terms of service

"BobcatSkywalker;c-2087579" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2087336" wrote:

"BobcatSkywalker;c-2087324" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2087321" wrote:

"BobcatSkywalker;c-2087315" wrote:
I make more complicated algorithms everyday for my work...a shard split algorithm isnt that hard to write... maybe they just need some competent people or maybe they just dont care that their most competitive mode is really a collusion racket of friends manipulating their system to get extra Crystal's by coordinating their payouts so they all get 1st place. Maybe if CG thought of the collusion as stealing from them they would address it.

maybe they understand that a solution like this is a bad idea because it is not fair to the entire player base and could do more harm than good to the stability of the game.

just moving people around would be very detrimental to the F2P base. I'm sure you can see this, and adding any element to keep that "fair" to them is much more complicated than just shifting players.

How is it not fair, other than because you say so. How is this detrimental to f2p?

The shards would be based on when you started playing. That's how they were built years ago so reorganizing them based on when you started playing is exactly as fair as it is now.

Currently shards are based on when you started playing.

Proposed shards being shuffled but keeping players within a couple months base of when they started playing is essentially the same exact thing but it prevents shard chats from easily forming. If anything it requires more work for people to constantly locate their shard members and set up a colluding ring before the next shuffle so it makes it harder for people to cheat the system.

Unless your saying that its not fair to take away people's ability to collude for top spots because then those same people would just quit the game and that's bad for the game because less players..... But some would counter argue that those people quitting because they can no longer collude and lock others out of top spots that would be good for the game because it removed the collusion aspect of arena.
Therefore it would actually improve the health of the game.

correct, they are based on that. Do you think all shards are the same? shards within the same month all have the same level of difficulty?

I dont think they do. There are shards with more or less players that have focused on mods, or $$ in this game. each shard even in close range to each other are unique.

it has nothing to do with collusion. it has to do with the fact that people have grown into their shard, this is especially true for old shards that were around before a lot of our current events. each player was shaped by arena as that was one of the few focal points in the game.

taking a player that can do well in one shard and throwing them into another doesn't mean they will do well there. much like meta shifts disturb the balance. if this was the way it was from the beginning then players would have developed differently, to make this change now would cause an upheaval to a main system of the game. F2P players have a harder time dealing with major shifts and changes, which is why i bring them up but it would have a similar effect on $$ players too. they have invested a certain amount that gets them to the position they want to be in. this change could devalue that, by changing their situation to now not allow them to place where they want.

the situation is different then just how the shards were built in the first place due to this growth and settling that has happened on each shard over time.

this is also one of those problems that has a massive effect on everyone, but is "fixing" (which it may not, because we all know how to find each other) a problem for "few". that is where the fairness really derives its importance.

to have a broader effectiveness on the fix, information would have to be blocked out, again adding to the headship felt by the players who can now not easily identify their targets, making the climb more difficult.

So shards were built unevenly in the first place even created within the same month. Its known some shards are easy to get first while others are packed with whales.

This was intended?
To make some players easily get a free 500 a day while others can barely make the top 100 then have them all compete against each other down the road in GAC and in TWs.

I understand people have grown into their shards and some people have gotten used to colluding and getting higher or lower payouts than they would have achieved if they had to battle people who aren't letting them win.

At some point someone said this could not be fixed and that it's too complicated.

I was simply stating that it's not very complicated to program. it could be fixed to make things more even and fair for everyone who started within a time frame.

A system many would say is better than the current system of your in a shard maybe it's hard or easy but it is what it is. Sure some would complain.

If the truth is they dont want to fix it because having some easy arenas and some hard arenas is intended then okay but leta not kid ourselves and act like this is too complicated to program or impossible to do. They could do it and it's easy to do. Thuth is they dont see any money in it so it's unlikely to happen.

I never said they couldnt do it. The problem is doing it in such a simple way changes the game drastically and could destabilize the game. That has to be a consideration due to the extensive number of players a change like this touches.

Other games have seasons and shuffles and all that stuff, they are built differently and some play them and others do not, due to those styles of game mode. To change this game mode to that would be huge, and I dont believe that would be good for the game as a whole.

I just think it takes a solution that has the most effect on the problem and the least effect on the player base. We all have to remember that this is a problem for a few, that is cause by (a bigger) few, with a solution that would probably affect everyone.

No I dont knownwhat that is, but a blind shard shuffle with no caring towards the general "fairness" would just end in disaster.