**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.

New AW Updates

13

Comments

  • SummonerNRSummonerNR Posts: 10,602 Guardian
    Adjerius said:

    I am concerned about the impact of smaller win bonuses on alliances that don't run three groups.

    Those win bonuses are a substantially bigger percentage of our total score, so if they get reduced in favor of more exploration points, it's going to put us at an even bigger disadvantage than we are now. Currently, a 2-group win is worth more points than a 3-group loss. With this change, those will flip, and those of us running fewer groups are going to start seeing our rankings drop.

    Great point (reduced Win points), wish it would remain 50,000 (although I can understand how a 2 BG Ally Win had maybe been artificially inflating our 2 BG season score vs some not-as-good 3 BG Ally's that had lesser wins during the season).

    But don't think that is coming at the expense of increased Explore (the Explore sounds like will directly offset the removal of “Defenders Remaining” points, although not sure it is an exact replacement).

    ———
    Also (regarding TIES) some others have brought up. They should finally implement partial-win points for a TIE. Not on the order of 50/50 % split. But at least like 33/33 % split (so teams won’t conspire for a tie as some potential points will still be lost).
  • Fear_of_Clowns2099Fear_of_Clowns2099 Posts: 892 ★★★
    Zaynou said:

    What about the traditional game crash = 1 KO, 2 crashes = 2 KOs?

    Do we still keep this unique tradition?

    Most likely so. Not like they have announced anything on it yet
  • SummonerNRSummonerNR Posts: 10,602 Guardian
    Adjerius said:



    In most of the wars we do (tier 6), there are rarely any defenders remaining, so the removal of surviving defender points has minimal impact. Each BG has somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 nodes, so 50 more points means an extra 5k or so points per group.

    Over the course of a 12 war season, these changes will give a 3-group alliance roughly 60k more (new) points than a 2-group alliance with an identical record and exploration—before factoring in modifiers. That amounts to a whole extra win (and more!) in the current system.

    Ah, you’re right. I was just thinking about extra points for exploring those previously-unbeaten nodes (vs losing of the Defender Remaining pts). But it adds to all the other explore nodes along the whole map. Definitely favoring 3 BG Ally’s.

    And @Ebony_Naw , it means that now there will be a whole lot more 10m Ally's who run 3 BG jumping Medals above those 30m high-prestige Ally’s who prefer to just run 2 BG and were happy with G3-S1 rewards. Forcing ally's into pushing everyone into War, even though some ppl don’t care about it.
  • TyEdgeTyEdge Posts: 2,965 ★★★★★
    The rationale behind changing exploration is ill-conceived. Let’s say that a team skips one lane in each pod in phase 2, and that they 100% phase 1. They leave 6 defenders standing and 8 nodes unexplored, assuming they skip lane 5. (I don’t have the map in front of me...apologies if that’s one off.)

    The net result for that in the current system is a 2700 point swing, 150*8=1200 for exploration, and 250*6=1500 for defenders remaining.

    In the new scoring system, the attackers lose 200*8=1600 and the defenders gain nothing. It’s only a 1600 point net swing. You forego possible attack bonuses on nodes you skip, but you might recoup those by being healthier when you fight shared nodes and minis.

    In other words, I think these changes hurt a boss rush that only hits one lane or one pod. Getting to 100% is less important, and now I think diversity is (again) more important by proxy, as are attack bonuses.
  • zuffyzuffy Posts: 2,132 ★★★★★
    Just realized the reduction in win bonus from 50k to 30k will hurt alliances playing 1BG war. We play between T4/5. In season 26, we won either 8 or 9 wars and we ranked 394 in gold 3. If we win 8 wars in season 27, that is potentially 640k less points. Enough to possibly put us in silver 1.
  • The_Sentry06The_Sentry06 Posts: 7,781 ★★★★★
    Yes finally some changes for lower-end allys, hope the rewards buff is good for Gold alliances.
  • AdjeriusAdjerius Posts: 68 ★
    Ebony_Naw said:

    I'm guessing it's an unintended side effect, but why should a 2 BG alliance outrank a 3 BG alliance even with a couple more wins? A 3 BG alliance needs more depth to fight, and if I were Kabam I would always want to incentivize more alliances to use maximum battlegroups. If an alliance wants to take it easy, I understand that they still want g3 rewards (for example) but why should they pass the s1 ally that runs 3 BG and puts in work every single war?

    I'm not suggesting that a 2-BG alliance should have a leg up over a 3-BG alliance. I believe exactly the opposite, in fact, because it's significantly more difficult to wrangle those extra ten players.

    The current system already accounts for this, as having that extra group theoretically nets a bit under 40% more points (assuming a 50% win/loss ratio) compared to a 2-BG alliance at the same tier. That's a big advantage, baked right into the scoring. If a 2-BG alliance wants similar rewards, they have to play at a much higher tier in order to make up the difference with bigger point multipliers. That means stiffer competition, and potentially tougher maps--certainly not taking it easy. :p There is also a practical limit as to how high they can ultimately reach.

    This new system, as described, is basically going to force 2-BG alliances to either play at an even higher tier, or win one extra war each season, just to maintain the same spot they occupy right now. It's hard enough as it is to earn respectable rewards with only two groups. I don't think it needs to be made harder yet, particularly considering how unpopular war is in general.
  • The_Sentry06The_Sentry06 Posts: 7,781 ★★★★★
    Boss rushing was never an intended thing, especially as a way to win wars. If you win wars like this, good for you but I 100% understand why Kabam encourages exploration.
  • AMS94AMS94 Posts: 1,776 ★★★★★
    We already have many tags in game....I seriously don't understand the need to have AW specific tags
    If the developers are smart enough to build nodes around in-game tags fr variants & story content, they cn surely do it fr AW content as well
  • joke1004joke1004 Posts: 258 ★★★
    I’m just sad that Kabam doesn’t seem to care about my favorite game mode. They’ve been telling us to wait for how long now?
  • SeraphionSeraphion Posts: 1,496 ★★★★
    I really hope they open the floodgates for 5 and 6* shards on the rewards.

    If not no change will be good enough.

    At least imo
  • PolygonPolygon Posts: 3,830 ★★★★★
    High ground seems like a direct quake nerf. Don’t understand why the need to nerf a champ that requires the most skill to play? Since shes only available as a 5* shes going to lose relevancy in story mode as healthpools continue to rise. Wish the team was more transparent about these controversial defense tactics
Sign In or Register to comment.