**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.

When you complete the aw map 100% with fewer KOs...and it still doesn't matter

Symie5Symie5 Posts: 12
edited September 2017 in General Discussion
Nothing like losing a war by 17 points when we completed the map 100%, AND easily beat them on both defender kills and defender rating. But hey, they had 1 more in defender "diversity" than we did, right? So totally "deserved" this aw win. #sarcasm

This is insane, Kabam. The new aw scoring system takes the skill (and joy) completely out of this aspect of the game. r99059a2otgd.png
«13

Comments

  • Symie5Symie5 Posts: 12
    @Dropfaith , here's a concrete example: I ranked by 4* lv60 abomination to R5 solely for aw defense. Before, we could place him in unusual spots where people weren't expecting to need a poison immune champ, and he woukd consistently gets kills each war.

    Now, however, even of you don't place him on an enhanced poison node (which would be too obvious), now everyone can see that it's a science champ and bring someone like widow to negate his poison. Sure enough, abom has gotten zero kills since the new war format started.

    I wouldn't have ranked him at all had I known.
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 4,045 ★★★★★
    Symie5 wrote: »
    To elaborate, the new system is geared not toward skill and astute champ placement, but rather toward alliances' ability to place as many different crappy defenders throughout the map as possible.

    As an aside, what about all the resources we used to build up effective defenses only to have them negated by the new system? Assuming the new system remains in place, some rank down tickets would be nice at the very least.

    You don't solve one problem by destroying the game. Let's hope we NEVER EVER see rank down tickets in the game again.
  • phillgreenphillgreen Posts: 3,682 ★★★★★
    Wasn't this the whole point of introducing diversity, as a tie breaker for close wars?

    How did the defender kills look?
  • MrMojoMrMojo Posts: 97 ★
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    No champ was changed no rank down tickets should come..


    What are you blabbing about? OP didn't mention rank down tickets.
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 4,045 ★★★★★
    MrMojo wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    No champ was changed no rank down tickets should come..


    What are you blabbing about? OP didn't mention rank down tickets.

    He responded to the 3rd post
  • PurveyorPurveyor Posts: 201 ★★
    edited September 2017
    @Symie5. Tough loss. I'm in the wasted saints. You guys should have won based on the stats. For those curious they had 89 kills we had 86 (you didn't easily beat us on kills. But you did beat us) So it was a very close war. We lost our last war to defender rating only. Everything else was tied, we had 25 more kills than our opponents. We want the old system back also so we can punch above our weight class, since one less repeat defender and you win easily. Anyway. Tough break man. You guys were good sports. Our last war:uhrj9ulvibtx.png
    me2ocq4jg915.png
  • Husky54Husky54 Posts: 244 ★★
    Symie5 wrote: »
    Nothing like losing a war by 17 points when we completed the map 100%, AND easily beat them on both defender kills and defender rating. But hey, they had 1 more in defender "diversity" than we did, right? So totally "deserved" this aw win. #sarcasm

    This is insane, Kabam. The new aw scoring system takes the skill (and joy) completely out of this aspect of the game. r99059a2otgd.png

    One of your guys died to my Civil Warrior.

    CIVIL.

    WARRIOR.

    That would have won you the war, bud. Might want to talk to that guy.
  • PurveyorPurveyor Posts: 201 ★★
    I also want to point out you crushed us in defender rating and only had three more kills. So really not a spot to talk about skill.
  • Symie5Symie5 Posts: 12
    @Purveyor, you're right! I misread the kills before my first post, so please forgive me for the flub there. Its been corrected. That said, I'd still feel bad if we'd won this war by that same margin. The scoring system is ridiculous, fights too easy, and too many wars now are close like this with no clear winner. Had we posted ONE more diverse defender we would have won, and it would have been equally ridiculous.
  • PurveyorPurveyor Posts: 201 ★★
    I agree man. Completely, as evidence of our previous war result I posted. Just wanted to get the facts straight that it was in fact a pretty equal war in terms of skill.
  • sbb75sbb75 Posts: 208 ★
    Defender kills are skewed now. Last aw I fought 3 consecutive fights with AA. The starting health was less than 1,200. I did not use any items 2W 1L. There is ZERO chance I start any of those fights if kills are counted. I also used 2 champs with min health after revive on the boss. Those are three definite defender kills that would never happened if there was a penalty.

    The new scoring MUST get fixed, it is TERRIBLE.
    Although, I have softened on defender kills.
    Maybe make defender kills 50 points. Attacker kills 150 and Diversity a 0.001 x PI bonus ea.

    This is all off the top of my head after reading the posts. So dont shoot me if the math doesn't add up.
  • PlasmaKingPlasmaKing Posts: 105
    I agree this version of AW is very disappointing but I hope you all remember those pages and pages of moans that how was it fair to face magik 10 times on a map or MD was unfair or some other complaint. Well this is their response to those complaints, people may not have asked for this exactly but this is what has resulted from it.
  • Ron_HRon_H Posts: 64
    Feel your pain dude.. we had close loss to du to diversity.. and we had literly 2 times the amount of defensive kills then oponant they died 90+ times while we only 43. Its not about skill anymore.

    Acanthus wrote: »
    While the system is indeed incredibly dumb, by this point everyone should be well aware how it works, so instead of posting your screenshots here and whining about it (it's been done enough, and kabam most likely isn't gonna revert it) how about you place those 150 unique defenders instead?
    Seeing screenshots with <100 diversity is pretty hilarious though - what did you expect going into that war, exactly?

    I get your point aswell.. but more and more are quiting game over this.. AW sucks now. And sure less players arena gets easier..but if heavy spenders start quiting there wont be a game or arena to be play in future. If people stop posting about this it certainly wont be changed.

  • MrMojoMrMojo Posts: 97 ★
    Acanthus wrote: »
    While the system is indeed incredibly dumb, by this point everyone should be well aware how it works, so instead of posting your screenshots here and whining about it (it's been done enough, and kabam most likely isn't gonna revert it) how about you place those 150 unique defenders instead?
    Seeing screenshots with <100 diversity is pretty hilarious though - what did you expect going into that war, exactly?

    Point is to highlight the horrible scoring system and how it takes away from the fun of the game. Whining not included.
  • Run477Run477 Posts: 1,391 ★★★
    Okay, a few words here.

    1. If you lose to defender RATING I would get the complaints. I think it's fair to say the majority of people in this forum agree that defender diversity is a dumb idea and the use of the buzz word "diversity" was used to try to use a pc phrase to paper over what is so clearly either a reward for big spenders of crystals/resources or a way to force 4*s to remain borderline relevant as r5 5*s and 6*s are on beir way (again, need people using resources and buying worthless 4* crystals).

    2. Defender kill scores are meaningless under the new format--and I'm not talking about from a skill or points perspective. If I'm placing 4* r3 spider gwen and Luke cage on defense for "diverity" and you are still tripling 5* r4 magiks and 5* r4 juggs both with max md on defense, yes, you should get more defender kills than me. To then post on here aboutdestroying the opponents in defender kills but losing is a pointless exercise. You placed actual strong defenders and I placed jokes. If I then beat you in defensive kills, that says a ton about your skill. But if you beat me in defender kills, it doesn't really say much. ( I recognize original post was 148 to 149 in diversity; later poster was like 82-132 diversity).

    Now, I'm not saying that either of the above scenarios happened here, but I have seen multiple posts at this point essentially with what I laid out above (see other screen shot in this thread for example). Long story short. Defender diversity is a terrible stat and a terrible idea. Kabam clearly created defensive/offensive/terrible champs--to force us to use attack and terrible champs on defense is mindbogglingly inappropriate. Also, the nodes in war are easy. Kabam has basically made it so the big spenders with below average skills can feel better about their war performance. But let's stop pretending when an alliance places 75 diverse defenders and the opponent places 150 diverse defenders, that the 75 diverse defender alliance should have "won" bc they got more defender kills (again, I see it was 148 to 149 in diversity in earlier post--but just making the point). That alliance got more defender kills bc it placed their best defenders who were more likely to get kills. In other words, the alliance didn't follow the scoring model but instead focused on a star that wouldn't win them the war. That would be like a golfer saying he should win bc he won in driving distance no matter how many times he hit the ball out of bounds.
  • andrade5184andrade5184 Posts: 285 ★★
    this is just a ploy from kabam to make you need to rank up more useless champs so they can extend there game by a very cheap, easy and lazy way.
  • Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,469 ★★★★
    175 defender kills would have easily won any war in the old format. Even placing 5* rank 4 champs that is still a really bad skill to give up that many kills. Defender kills should matter because if you face an alliance that had a stronger lineup and much less skill than you should win. Alliance wars are no longer skill based because you can easily spend to win and that's a terrible mentality for what should be a competitive aspect of the game
  • Katy_CandyKaty_Candy Posts: 175 ★
    This new AW is so bad. Really takes the motivation out of the game.
    Hope they fix something soon.
  • Run477Run477 Posts: 1,391 ★★★
    Deadbyrd9 wrote: »
    175 defender kills would have easily won any war in the old format. Even placing 5* rank 4 champs that is still a really bad skill to give up that many kills. Defender kills should matter because if you face an alliance that had a stronger lineup and much less skill than you should win. Alliance wars are no longer skill based because you can easily spend to win and that's a terrible mentality for what should be a competitive aspect of the game

    False. If you are in tier 2 and they got to 100% explore (or close to it) and your alliance refuses to go on a spending spree, you aren't beating the opponent just bc you got 175 kills.

    Defender kills, outside of wars in tier 1 that were constantly around 100% explore, defender kills were rarely a tiebreaker. Maybe u guys always 100%. We definitely did not--but still won way more wars than we lost. The losses we tended to have were the ones I laid out above--massive kill numbers bc opponent would spend to almost 100% all maps
  • Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,469 ★★★★
    Not many alliances ever got to 100% in tier 1 but we won plenty of wars on defender kills and lost a few as well from that
This discussion has been closed.