Can someone tell me how we lost?

Taz0911

TheUnknownX

Because of your fight duration.

Taz0911

Fight duration is for tie breaker. They died 1 more time so how is that a tie?

TheUnknownX

Maybe the one more time they died wasn’t counted (ie four deaths in the same champion).

Taz0911

Well if that's true then that's a very bad way of scoring war.

TheBair123

Taz0911 said:

Fight duration is for tie breaker. They died 1 more time so how is that a tie?

your attack bonus is the same. the defender kills don't actually give points. i'm guessing there was a fight that your alliance died 3 times and they died 4 times. neither of you get any attack bonus, but you got one more defender kill

Ayden_noah1

If they died to the same defender more then 3 times, it won't affect the attack bonus score. So I'm assuming they died 4 or more times to one defender (max attack bonus is lost after 3 fights). So the death total will be the same and now it comes down to fight duration.

Taz0911

I'm sure you are right so I'm not arguing but by that logic someone can revive 100 times on the same defender and keep dying but can still win the war.....

FluffyPigMonster

That’s amazing. Never seen an actual tie and the fight duration being the tie breaker. Well done Kabam, but sorry for the lost war.

TheBair123

Taz0911 said:

I'm sure you are right so I'm not arguing but by that logic someone can revive 100 times on the same defender and keep dying but can still win the war.....

yes you're right about that. after the attack bonus goes away, the amount of kills doesn't matter

Ayden_noah1

Taz0911 said:

Well if that's true then that's a very bad way of scoring war.

There's no perfect way since someone will not like it no matter what but it's the current scoring system that makes the most sense.

Taz0911

Thank you everyone for clearing that up. It would be nice tho for someone from kabaam to give the reason they value attack bonus over deaths...

Panchulon21

Fight duration. You guys fought slower than them. That’s the tie breaker.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Panchulon21

Attack bonus and defender kills is about the same. Because if your defender gets a kill you lose an attack bonus.

If they had 1 more death that means they did 4 times to 1 defender. That’s why yoj guys tied. Math checks out

Noobda

Only the first 3 kills matter on any defender. Once the 3 attack bonuses are lost then it doesn't matter even if you give 20 kills on the same defender because there are only 3 attack bonuses to achieve each fight.
You lost because of time difference.

Chatterofforums

The fact that only first 3 kills give points for the defender isn't a sece.ret and is widely known and has been this way for as long as I can remember. I'm honestly surprised you claim to have been unaware of this.

GroundedWisdom

This system has taken quite a bit of forethought to implement. It accounts for skill because the objective is still to take the Node down without dying, but it doesn't penalize people for using Items. Which is as it should be. People shouldn't have to PAY to lose Points. It also allows people to prioritize other scenarios because moving past Nodes is sometimes more useful than dying less. That hasn't been a specific metric for years. I don't know why people keep focusing on it.

Demonzfyre

Taz0911 said:

Thank you everyone for clearing that up. It would be nice tho for someone from kabaam to give the reason they value attack bonus over deaths...

They have when they introduced this new scoring.

Krishna24

I think Kabam should give a touch up to AW points awarding system

Taz0911 said:

Well if that's true then that's a very bad way of scoring war.

Real_Madrid_76_2

Krishna24 said:

I think Kabam should give a touch up to AW points awarding system

Taz0911 said:

Well if that's true then that's a very bad way of scoring war.

they should in fact do a lot more to improve this game, but step by step

Agent_X_zzz

Because they have more points than you

Qwerty12345

tie breakers that would make more sense:

*fewest items used
*average %health left after every fight
*average %damage dealt in deaths (calculated against health at start of fight... granted with timeout issue, this might not be so good righ now)
*First ones to complete their final fight.

or... gasp:
each alliance picks one (or possibly 3 or 5) members to do a battleground fight against opponent. Fight to commence at the starting time of the next war (giving about 1 day to prepare who, and make sure someone can be available at the appropriate time). All tie breakers to be monitored by Kabam for "shady results".

ItsDamien

Qwerty12345 said:

tie breakers that would make more sense:

*fewest items used
*average %health left after every fight
*average %damage dealt in deaths (calculated against health at start of fight... granted with timeout issue, this might not be so good righ now)
*First ones to complete their final fight.

or... gasp:
each alliance picks one (or possibly 3 or 5) members to do a battleground fight against opponent. Fight to commence at the starting time of the next war (giving about 1 day to prepare who, and make sure someone can be available at the appropriate time). All tie breakers to be monitored by Kabam for "shady results".

Or you know… time is fine.

Mauled

FluffyPigMonster said:

That’s amazing. Never seen an actual tie and the fight duration being the tie breaker. Well done Kabam, but sorry for the lost war.

It's a little bit more common in higher tier wars where deaths are consistently in the single digits.

K00shMaan

Fight Duration encourages high tier war players to boost as hard as possible even when a fight is relatively straightforward. With the amount of compensation going around it's just about the only way they can monetize this specific game mode.

Pikolu

Back in my day, you got points for defender kills, but they stopped doing that so really hard bosses don't cause you to lose. Also in high tier war, people typically will only die once to one fight if they die at all.