'Replace Defenders' function

Kimil

I've had a situation in our alliance where we have decided to switch to Stubborn defense tactics. Being the organised officer that I am, I placed my Villains nice and early believing that we would continue with everyone's favorite tactic, Flow.

More fool me, now I have placed defenders that won't benefit from the tactic, while the guys who are slower to place can make more informed choices.

What is stopping us having the ability to switch out defenders if needed, and would this be a nice quality of life change to introduce to stop alliances only having a tiny window of opportunity to discuss tactics between war end and matchmaking?

Interested to hear if this has been discussed at any point from a development perspective @Kabam Miike ?

Cheers!

Duck_of_Doom

You mean you didn't look at the tactics before hand.

Kimil

Duck_of_Doom said:

You mean you didn't look at the tactics before hand.

Well no, I said what I meant. Tactics can be changed at anytime during placement.

Panchulon21

They can be but then you as an organized officer should have discussed with the other officers if you planned on changing defensive tactics. That something that’s discussed way before hand not during placement. I changed our defense from flow to stubborn during a war and by the time placement began my whole BG already knew who their defenders were to place

Kimil

Panchulon21 said:

They can be but then you as an organized officer should have discussed with the other officers if you planned on changing defensive tactics. That something that’s discussed way before hand not during placement. I changed our defense from flow to stubborn during a war and by the time placement began my whole BG already knew who their defenders were to place

Good for you, dude.

AzKicker316

This is not a kabam issue, it's an alliance/bg issue. Communication between officers and bg members is critical to ensure people know who to place and where.

Kimil

AzKicker316 said:

This is not a kabam issue, it's an alliance/bg issue. Communication between officers and bg members is critical to ensure people know who to place and where.

Yeah, I understand that's an element to consider. My question is why does it have to be locked? What is the benefit of locking defenders in once placed? By your logic, it just increases the pressure on officers and alliances which is something that has been addressed as a specific area that Kabam are looking to improve.

I get that "it's my fault", but moving on from that, there's potentially a discussion to be had.

AzKicker316

I don't think it increases the pressure on officers, if you plan accordingly, the defenders are selected and placed and then everyone can move on with their lives. It puts more pressure if folks wanted to change their mind all the time and keep swapping defenders.

Remeli

Get back to the question guys, no matter whos fault it is in this particular case.

Why does it have to be that way? Why locking the defender as soon as they are placed instead of only once AW attack phase starts?

Kimil

I mean we do just fine and don't have issues with defense. It was just a circumstance that I thought might be worth looking at with the introduction of Tactics that weren't there when war was introduced.

I think someone who chopped and changed defenders all the time during placement would be a different issue altogether and can't imagine they'd last very long in a decent alliance.

SummonerNR

He at least brings up a couple good points...

Why wouldn’t AW Defense Tactics be selected more like AQ, you can’t change AQ Modifiers once you start AQ.
Yes, AW is little more “murky” as to what counts as being “started”, but maybe Tactics should be selected at time of ENLISTMENT. (although, yes because AW is more Murky, some border-tier teams don't even know if they will be in Tier for doing Tactics until previous war actually ends, thus a definite problem).

-OR- as OP requests, be able to change your Defenders even after initial placement. Problem here though (or maybe a benefit, depending on your point of view) is that weaker placed unique champs can then be replaced after they are no longer unique because someone later brings in their stronger champ as your weaker one. This would allow you to replace your “now NOT-unique” champ with someone else who is unique again, before Defender Placement phase ends.

*BENEFIT... Would let Ally’s make sure they have a FULL DIVERSE defense.

*DRAWBACK... Would let Ally's make sure they have a FULL DIVERSE defense (and thus make Diversity a worthless stat in wars if both sides can guarantee they could always have FULL DIVERSE very easily).

Kimil

I didn't think about the diversity issue as a drawback to be fair, so that's a really interesting point. We actually purposefully don't place for diversity, and would rather have 2-3 Dooms/ Annihilus per BG as they can cause roadblocks where an alternate would be cleared.

I think selecting Tactic alongside enlistment would be a neat solution to this specific issue.

Thanks for your input @SummonerNR

SummonerNR

Thx. And maybe “potential” Tactics could be selected by all Ally's within one Tier away from where they are actually available, JUST IN CASE winning their current war would be enough to bump them up into the Tier that begins to use Tactics.
(and if they don't move up into that tier, or for Ally's that fall down below, then the pre-selected Tactics just wouldn’t be used (it would go away once defense placement started).

(not sure if at the very highest Tiers if there is a difference in available Tactics, or if they are the same for all tiers that use Tactics)

Unknown

This content has been removed.