We need to have the ability to see how many deaths someone in our alliance got in AW

Dear Kabam,

Even at least for the leader or officers, we need to be able to see how many deaths an alliance member is giving to the enemy. This should not remain a hidden fact or matter. Otherwise, these kinds of unnecessary things will happen because no one can be held accountable.

Comments

hburns03

2 defender kills vs 129…… damn

hi_im_sir

100% agree. Would love to see one of the mods respond to this.

Red867

This is info that 100% needs to be included. Say you have assigned lanes and 1 out of those 3 playes die twenty times to a lane boss but no one sees them repeatedly entering. And the three move thru. Now you have to ask alliance members did you do it? Who did it? It's odd questioning your members like your the police. Plus no one wants to snitch. But you gotta find that Lil useless mole that's throwing the war for everyone. So you can pull him outta there like the weed they are.

laserjohn26

First only 3 deaths per node matter. The rest do not matter. Second who was assigned the fight? If no one assigned who used enough potions to heal to full 3 times? Who had a champ that was a counter for the defender and node?

First I question why you would allow someone in the alliance who wouldn't be honest. At the end of the day this is a leadership problem.

pseudosane

you can see the attack bonuses per node, which is a help towards the information you want

Ironman3000

ou can figure it out with attack bonus and item use.

MrSakuragi

ou can figure it out with attack bonus and item use.

The revives that cost 1 loyalty don’t count against item use.

laserjohn26

ou can figure it out with attack bonus and item use.
The revives that cost 1 loyalty don’t count against item use.

If you are an alliance only using 1 loyalty revives then who cares?

2StarKing

Kabam has taken many actions to encourage players to participate in war.
I think the problem is... Kabam doesn't want "accountability" to mean... kick members for AW performance.

129 deaths without a word from anyone could be sabotage. I agree an easily accessible method to identify players requiring tutoring is a quality of life issue. We need a method to align individual goals with team goals.

unknown

This content has been removed.

MrSakuragi

ou can figure it out with attack bonus and item use.
The revives that cost 1 loyalty don’t count against item use.
If you are an alliance only using 1 loyalty revives then who cares?

An alliance getting 129 deaths as seen in the OP would care.

Blackfriar63

ou can figure it out with attack bonus and item use.
The revives that cost 1 loyalty don’t count against item use.
If you are an alliance only using 1 loyalty revives then who cares?
An alliance getting 129 deaths as seen in the OP would care.

Conceivably, using only 1 loyalty revives all 129 deaths could have occurred on 1 single node with a net loss of only 3 attack bonuses. Or they could have been spread out over the entire map and your attack bonus would be practically non- existent. Either way, the issue isn't how many deaths, it's how many attack bonuses your losing. The 2 are not synonymous.

crogs

Why? Regardless of attack bonus, if someone is a **** fighter dying so many times then he's better suited in an alliance with a lower war rating that has easier fights.

I think some of you focus on contrary things just to have a dissenting opinion and make the op feel like they're just needlessly whining.

Someone is in over their head and needs to be somewhere more suited to their abilities. The attack bonus angle is way beside the point.

GroundedWisdom

Showing them would just encourage Alliances to kick people left, right, and center. Besides, it's likely on the same Node. Probably a Boss. Anything after 3 Attack Bonuses doesn't matter. Then it's worth more to take the Node down.

unknown

This content has been removed.

DarkestDestroyer

I’m sure at one point it did, didn’t it?

Maybe I’m just losing it!

hi_im_sir

Showing them would just encourage Alliances to kick people left, right, and center. Besides, it's likely on the same Node. Probably a Boss. Anything after 3 Attack Bonuses doesn't matter. Then it's worth more to take the Node down.

Yeah but that can also be a good thing for leadership to see where the gaps are so they can replace them.

laserjohn26

Why? Regardless of attack bonus, if someone is a **** fighter dying so many times then he's better suited in an alliance with a lower war rating that has easier fights.

I think some of you focus on contrary things just to have a dissenting opinion and make the op feel like they're just needlessly whining.

Someone is in over their head and needs to be somewhere more suited to their abilities. The attack bonus angle is way beside the point.

This in incorrect. It is most likely on a regen character like gorr or absman. After the first 3 deaths there is absolutely no reason to boost or heal. The problem is the leadership approving the attack plan with a person taking the fight who has, in that situation, no counter. It's always better to get the node down, no matter the deaths, than not.

Mackey

Why is everyone circling back to "anything after 3 doesn't matter" ... the leaders of any given ally should be able to see who has died and how many times, yes for the war itself anythingnafter 3 don't count towards the points but if someone dies 12 times to 1 champ then that is clearly an issue one that, at this moment in time, is undetectable. If someone is dying that much to 1 fight then you could argue they're more liable to lose the AB in general, and one might want to try that person on a different path to help them get better before having to boot them. It's not always about the AB and winning wars, it's about teamwork and moving forward together, a chain is only as strong as it weakest link

hi_im_sir

Why is everyone circling back to "anything after 3 doesn't matter" ... the leaders of any given ally should be able to see who has died and how many times, yes for the war itself anythingnafter 3 don't count towards the points but if someone dies 12 times to 1 champ then that is clearly an issue one that, at this moment in time, is undetectable. If someone is dying that much to 1 fight then you could argue they're more liable to lose the AB in general, and one might want to try that person on a different path to help them get better before having to boot them. It's not always about the AB and winning wars, it's about teamwork and moving forward together, a chain is only as strong as it weakest link

Exactly

2StarKing

It was very clear we were going to lose this war. So we got permission to experiment and test interactions. Our opponents probably think we sux with 61 deaths. However, the knowledge gain is more valuable.

Darkness275

Showing them would just encourage Alliances to kick people left, right, and center.

I may agree with this stance, but to be honest - this shouldn't be part of the consideration of whether or not death info should be shared.

Kabam's response across the board whenever people complain about being kicked from an alliance before rewards has been almost unilaterally "We don't manage Alliances and the decisions made by those leaders." I'm paraphrasing but, that's effectively been the response.

Other than in cases of clear collusion, Kabam won't get involved.

Let's say you're right and this data being provided to alliance leadership (or the alliance as a whole since limiting it to only officers would probably be even more of a hassle) gives them even more reason to kick people. At that point it's a data driven decision. Aren't you all for those? No, it may not be the best decision, but it's driven by data. You or I might caution and prefer to coach an individual, work with them to figure out what the issue was, but whether or not the leaders decide to coach the issue isn't up to anyone but those involved.

If anything, this would create more avenues for discussion and planning.

GroundedWisdom

People also need to communicate within their Alliance. Just ask who died that many times.

TyEdge

Why is everyone circling back to "anything after 3 doesn't matter" ... the leaders of any given ally should be able to see who has died and how many times, yes for the war itself anythingnafter 3 don't count towards the points but if someone dies 12 times to 1 champ then that is clearly an issue one that, at this moment in time, is undetectable. If someone is dying that much to 1 fight then you could argue they're more liable to lose the AB in general, and one might want to try that person on a different path to help them get better before having to boot them. It's not always about the AB and winning wars, it's about teamwork and moving forward together, a chain is only as strong as it weakest link

Unless you’ve got a bunch of dingdongs in the same BG putting up zero-AB fights at the same time, you do know where people are taking excess deaths. They’re taking them on the zero AB nodes.

Graves_3

Why is everyone circling back to "anything after 3 doesn't matter" ... the leaders of any given ally should be able to see who has died and how many times, yes for the war itself anythingnafter 3 don't count towards the points but if someone dies 12 times to 1 champ then that is clearly an issue one that, at this moment in time, is undetectable. If someone is dying that much to 1 fight then you could argue they're more liable to lose the AB in general, and one might want to try that person on a different path to help them get better before having to boot them. It's not always about the AB and winning wars, it's about teamwork and moving forward together, a chain is only as strong as it weakest link
Unless you’ve got a bunch of dingdongs in the same BG putting up zero-AB fights at the same time, you do know where people are taking excess deaths. They’re taking them on the zero AB nodes.

What if it’s on a section mini or node 22/23? Or even a miniboss fight that has zero AB? How will you figure who is the dingdong?

GroundedWisdom

By not having people in your Alliance that refuse to communicate. It's a pretty key aspect of having people in a group together. We've had wheel spinning, sometimes even myself. Not to the tune of hundreds, but sometimes I'm just determined to take it down once I'm in the hole. I talk to my guys about it and let them know. It's really an in-house issue if people are just bouncing around in an Ally and not talking to each other.
To be honest, I don't agree with displaying it because it just encourages more unhealthy habits than anything. There's a reason Defender Kills don't count anymore.

Demonzfyre

Dear Kabam,

Even at least for the leader or officers, we need to be able to see how many deaths an alliance member is giving to the enemy. This should not remain a hidden fact or matter. Otherwise, these kinds of unnecessary things will happen because no one can be held accountable.

You can see how many attack bonuses are left on the path nodes. It will say either 3, 2, 1 or 0. After the 3 attack bonuses are gone, those extra kills don't matter.

Lets take your picture for example, lets say those deaths were one node. Your score is actually 3 deaths to their 2 deaths. 40% team revives don't count towards item use so reviving doesn't really matter.

The only thing that can come into play is time to fight. So all the extra attempts could affect the score.

Demonzfyre

Why is everyone circling back to "anything after 3 doesn't matter" ... the leaders of any given ally should be able to see who has died and how many times, yes for the war itself anythingnafter 3 don't count towards the points but if someone dies 12 times to 1 champ then that is clearly an issue one that, at this moment in time, is undetectable. If someone is dying that much to 1 fight then you could argue they're more liable to lose the AB in general, and one might want to try that person on a different path to help them get better before having to boot them. It's not always about the AB and winning wars, it's about teamwork and moving forward together, a chain is only as strong as it weakest link

Because dying 20 times is the same as dying 3 times. Set your standards to less than 3 deaths per node and you're doing exactly what you are talking about.