Tanking should not be the advantage in season

Off season tanking is a clear advantage for the alliances that lower their war rating on purpose by not placing defenders.. How?

An alliance that has 3400-3500 war rating (MNG-ASR, Iso8a etc) has no chance to face weak alliance in the season. Even with +5 -60, the opponent will be the equal alliance but that alliance with lower war rating because of tanking will face 80% much weaker alliances that will leave many nodes up that will give them unfair advantage against other alliances.

Season wars are like who will get the weaker alliance that will not explore the map and leave many nodes up. For that you have to lower your war rating.

Kabam you have to change your multiplier system to avoid this. Tanking proves that too many alliances are in the same tier that has the same multiplier.

For example; top 35 alliances are in Tier 1 and have x7 multiplier. Both the alliance with 3500 war rating and the alliance with 2990ish got the same points but they do not face the similar alliances.

The alliance with 2990 war rating can have a high chance to match 2700 war rating alliance which is very weak compared to them.

Comments

  • sbb75sbb75 Posts: 202
    I think alliances tank to avoid Dealing with map on Tiers 1 through 5.
    Unless you are in a high platinum level alliance then why deal with expert maps..
    Some people don’t enjoy using a ton of resources just to get 109% and lose for an app xtra 1k shards 4 weeks later.

    Kabam created this system
  • UppercutUppercut Posts: 56
    Agreed. There are a few issues here:

    1. Scoring system encourages this behavior. There should be NO bonus points awarded for defenders remaining. If this is removed it will also take care of collusion issues (e.g. I am guaranteed Platinum 1 rewards so I will leave defenders for my opponent, to let them score more points and rank in Master at the end of the season).

    2. Matchmaking is based purely on AW rating so there is insentive to lose wars (aka Tanking) in off season to get easy matchups as OP mentioned.

    3. Punished alliances getting easy wars and still get to collect season rewards - this one really makes no sense. Even banned players just waited one week and got their season 4 rewards. These alliances can easily clear the map vs easier opponent with 9 per BG so they can afford waiting for at least 3 banned players

    4. Kabam had to reset AW rating for inactive alliances. If alliances is abandoned don’t let them keep their rating for months. That’s how a well known alliance that was punished multiple times in season 4 is now in tier 1 and will compete with x7 multipllier next season.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 12,590
    I agree that Tanking is an issue. Been saying that for a while. I'm not sure that the Multiplier is the solution. I'm leaning towards separating Seasons altogether. I'm waiting to see what they're implementing for Season 5 for now.
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 1,300
    Uppercut wrote: »
    Agreed. There are a few issues here:

    1. Scoring system encourages this behavior. There should be NO bonus points awarded for defenders remaining. If this is removed it will also take care of collusion issues (e.g. I am guaranteed Platinum 1 rewards so I will leave defenders for my opponent, to let them score more points and rank in Master at the end of the season).

    2. Matchmaking is based purely on AW rating so there is insentive to lose wars (aka Tanking) in off season to get easy matchups as OP mentioned.

    3. Punished alliances getting easy wars and still get to collect season rewards - this one really makes no sense. Even banned players just waited one week and got their season 4 rewards. These alliances can easily clear the map vs easier opponent with 9 per BG so they can afford waiting for at least 3 banned players

    4. Kabam had to reset AW rating for inactive alliances. If alliances is abandoned don’t let them keep their rating for months. That’s how a well known alliance that was punished multiple times in season 4 is now in tier 1 and will compete with x7 multipllier next season.

    The banned players all got nothing i'm pretty sure
  • GamerGamer Posts: 2,510
    danielmath wrote: »
    Uppercut wrote: »
    Agreed. There are a few issues here:

    1. Scoring system encourages this behavior. There should be NO bonus points awarded for defenders remaining. If this is removed it will also take care of collusion issues (e.g. I am guaranteed Platinum 1 rewards so I will leave defenders for my opponent, to let them score more points and rank in Master at the end of the season).

    2. Matchmaking is based purely on AW rating so there is insentive to lose wars (aka Tanking) in off season to get easy matchups as OP mentioned.

    3. Punished alliances getting easy wars and still get to collect season rewards - this one really makes no sense. Even banned players just waited one week and got their season 4 rewards. These alliances can easily clear the map vs easier opponent with 9 per BG so they can afford waiting for at least 3 banned players

    4. Kabam had to reset AW rating for inactive alliances. If alliances is abandoned don’t let them keep their rating for months. That’s how a well known alliance that was punished multiple times in season 4 is now in tier 1 and will compete with x7 multipllier next season.

    The banned players all got nothing i'm pretty sure
    Pretty sure the Ban for 1 week Got the rewards
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,050
    edited October 12
    Want to lower your war rating? Fight offseason AWs without using items. Tanking by not placing defenders is an inefficient strategy. Perfect practice makes perfect, you don't improve MCOC skills by not placing defenders and not completing maps.

    I can think of one reason my above statement is false, which is alliances who tank uses so many boosts during AW Seasons it takes very little skill to clear difficult node/defender combinations. Even the least skilled tier 1 players don't die often when they start every AW fight with 50K+ health and 5K+ attack with 5/65 god tier attackers.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 1,554
    edited October 19
    Calling it tanking is deceptive. What’s objectively happening is people are sandbagging, playing at a level lower than what they are capable of playing at in order to give better chances at increased rewards.

    I cannot think of how this can be punished to correct the behavior, which means the practice of sandbagging has to put people who practice it at a distinct disadvantage during seasons where it matters.

    OTTOMH Kabam could create more tiers in order to make large swings in war rating a negative thing for allies looking to maximize points during the season by lowering thier AW rating in the off season. They don’t need to adjust the rewards for new tiers they could add in more multipliers along with an increase in ge number of tiers.

    There may also be a formula for how much war rating an ally wins/loses based on defenders placed and % explored.

    Just spit ballin which is what needs to be done rather than simply pointing out the problem. Fairly sure Kabam sees this in their participation and activity metrics during the off season.

    P.S. The situation is particularly bad for casual players who are unaware of what is happening. These causals are gifted rewards they happily accept during the off season but then during seasons are playing at a higher level than they would be absent the practice making their season extra stressful and thus significantly less enjoyable and fun.
  • HulksmasshhHulksmasshh Posts: 620
    How to solve tanking: shift some season rewards into war win / parcipitation rewards. To stop alliances from tanking without changing the overall structure of seasons, you need to incentivize alliances to win no matter what. It’ll still be worth going all out in seasons to place as high as you can. But alliances might hesitate to tank in off-season if the math shows they can get better overall rewards by winning the wars they should rather than tanking to place slightly higher in-season.
  • Such a complicated situtation OMG OmG .. what shall we do ..


    Freeze AW rating ... nah nah thats just so bad , so bad ... must think of a complicated solution
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 1,554
    Such a complicated situtation OMG OmG .. what shall we do ..


    Freeze AW rating ... nah nah thats just so bad , so bad ... must think of a complicated solution
    Alliances would be frozen out of increasing their war rating during the off season, this would slow down their climb by 33%. Not simple at all and frankly it’s short sighted.
  • CoatHang3r wrote: »
    Such a complicated situtation OMG OmG .. what shall we do ..


    Freeze AW rating ... nah nah thats just so bad , so bad ... must think of a complicated solution
    Alliances would be frozen out of increasing their war rating during the off season, this would slow down their climb by 33%. Not simple at all and frankly it’s short sighted.

    No, it is that simple.you can climb up rankings when everyone is seriously playing, not in the off season
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 1,554
    CoatHang3r wrote: »
    Such a complicated situtation OMG OmG .. what shall we do ..


    Freeze AW rating ... nah nah thats just so bad , so bad ... must think of a complicated solution
    Alliances would be frozen out of increasing their war rating during the off season, this would slow down their climb by 33%. Not simple at all and frankly it’s short sighted.

    No, it is that simple.you can climb up rankings when everyone is seriously playing, not in the off season
    Some allies, especially newer ones, are playing well below their level and take every war seriously not just the wars during seasons. Thankfully Kabam knows this.

    I was attempting to point out how useless the snarky dogmatic repost was to the topic. I feel that’s been illustrated at this point. Keep on believing brah.

  • Samspade23Samspade23 Posts: 349
    The state of the game really encourages it. My alliance basically plays to win without using items. It's not even a case of throwing wars as it's more to do with saving up items for wars that "count". There's no incentive to go all out in the off season. It is an excellent way to practice working as a team. I liken it to preseason games in football. It has a purpose but it's not very sexy.
  • BornBorn Posts: 228
    There are many reasons why an alliance may choose to lose wars during the off season.

    I ran a master alliance for 2 seasons, we dropped rating during the off seasons as allot of members weren’t willing to use items. They would rather save them for when season wars came back around. So when we faced alliances during the off season that wanted to win, it was almost impossible to beat them without boosting and using items. So our war rating dropped.

    And off the back of that, we decided to just place weaker defence so we could use our stronger champs in other areas of the game. If we weren’t going to push for wins cause guys didn’t want to use items, no point placing strong defence. And the other benefit was that the alliances we faced during the off season, wouldn’t know our season defence if we should happen to match them during seasons. But if they placed a strong defence, we would attack them and track it so that if we matched during seasons, we would know their defence.

    So it’s not just a matter of tanking to face weaker alliances during seasons, we wanted our guys to be fully stocked with potions and boosts for when the wars counted most. While also giving them a break from the stresses of season wars.

    So don’t be so quick to jump to conclusions when you see alliances doing this. Not everyone has the capability of trying to win every war. Kabam created this season/off season structure. Some alliances are just adapting the best way they can.
Sign In or Register to comment.