So there obviously is a mistake in your spreadsheet right?
There should be a max of 485 points in attack bonus and not 450 since there are 55 nodes in each bg were we can place defenders on and empty nodes give us 3 points automatically.
If Diversity is really intended to be a tie breaker only, it should award only 1 point to the alliance with the highest number of unique defenders. It only takes 1 point to break a tie
I didn’t read the whole thread, so I apologize if repeating.
Because of the 1st change in AW ( big bonus for diversity) a lot of people wasted gold and tier 4 basic and class catalysts as well as iso.
With the new change (good one) can we get the tokens to lower those hero we wouldn’t upgrade if it wasn’t for the diversity.
Have to say, after trying the new system out, I like it. I find it's a compromise of alot of ideas, and it's easier to keep track of than I expected. Just wanted to give credit.
Not sure how I feel about this new system either, just lost a war by 120 points which sucks but some played poorly which cost us in the end but it is what it is people are just going to have to adjust to all this again until they pull out more changes again which are most likely coming until we reach the final version
I don't think they will. Personally I'm fine with not having to burn masteries on class detect lol. Especially with the (removed by moderator) nodes they have now. But they should hide the defenders.
Could it be possible to display the defenders when adjusting the defence *without* the boost from their nodes?
I mean just like it was, that made it easier for officers to replace some heroes. Now I have no idea what the heroes base values are without the node.
new AW update is great, only thing i dont like is it has brought mystic defenders back. its interacting with mystic dispersion is so bad. people die for evading.
I really hope that problem with mystic dispersion gets fixed.
and also the AW rewards feels very outdated. Nobody is excited for a war victory crystal.
2 ongoing issues ... we can still see non-mini boss/boss defenders (not hidden).... and the un-announced change to AW matchmaking (used to be just based on War Rating, now it's on War Rating+Prestige) is resulting in ridiculously long matchmaking times.
The rewards need to get buffed. Tier 1 war rating of 3k has nearly the same rewards as tier 2 1700 rating. The amount of resources used in a war don't justify the means, in this case the rewards. Please buff the rewards, add t1 and t2 alpha fragments along with 6 star shards. And please, please, please hide the defenders. It's killing wars terribly that u can still see every defender on the map.
Lost out on matching for a 3rd war last night, since the first 2 matches took 1.5-2.5 hours to find a match, then the final one did not find a match after a little over an hour.
#NeedLoyalty
Kabam, please return the AW matchmaking to just based off of War Rating ... this is getting ridiculous ... and you still have not announced or even acknowledged the awful change to the AW matchmaking algorithm.
Lost out on matching for a 3rd war last night, since the first 2 matches took 1.5-2.5 hours to find a match, then the final one did not find a match after a little over an hour.
#NeedLoyalty
Kabam, please return the AW matchmaking to just based off of War Rating ... this is getting ridiculous ... and you still have not announced or even acknowledged the awful change to the AW matchmaking algorithm.
If match making has indeed been changed to matching based on both war rating and prestige, then:
1. This should be disclosed in patch notes. This is a player-facing change explicitly of a kind that @Kabam Miike stated way back during 12.0 discussions that Kabam "always" discloses in patch notes.
2. There are two ways to do this: using a synthetic metric that combines war rating and prestige, and by two-dimensional match making where both war rating and prestige are simultaneously matched independently. The former has balance issues. The latter only works if you have enough alliances looking for matches in every single rating and prestige partition non-stop. Apparently, that isn't true. To implement this correctly would require a lot of alliance war participation analysis, which was clearly not done. This is not something to just try and see.
3. If this was done it sounds like something done to address player complaints about matching solely by war rating being "unfair." This is actually a variation of the problem that originally afflicted AW in 15.0: competition was not prioritized so it fell by the wayside. Matching by war rating always has a chance - even when done perfectly correctly, which I'm not saying the game does - to match alliances against much stronger alliances. That's because the point to war rating is to state, as a matter of principle, that any alliance that wins a lot demonstrates that their actual strength is higher than their alliance prestige or rating would imply, and that therefore the "fair" thing to do would be to match them against alliances that are stronger than their rating. That is the *definition* of fair in the rating-match system. By definition, you can't argue it is unfair when you run up against a numerically higher alliance. That's just what happens when you win often enough.
If Kabam is going to try to "fix" this problem, they first have to understand that this is only a subjective problem that some but not all players believe to be the case. To "fix" it, they have to redefine what a fair war is, and when they do they will create problems for all the players that don't agree. They need to communicate why they are siding with some players against others.
The long match making times are just a nasty side effect of doing this in a way that I think will eventually redefine what a fair fight is in ways I don't think will be acceptable to everyone even if they fix the match making timers.
Also, I'm very worried Kabam will take the easy way out: speed up match making by relaxing the match making match window. In other words, allow alliances to be matched against other alliances with both war rating and prestige that is farther away, which will make it easier to find a "match." That's going to be a worst of all worlds solution.
Comments
When the final boss of Act 5 is easier than a crummy node in AW, then there's something really wrong here.
FIX NODE 24!
So there obviously is a mistake in your spreadsheet right?
There should be a max of 485 points in attack bonus and not 450 since there are 55 nodes in each bg were we can place defenders on and empty nodes give us 3 points automatically.
Because of the 1st change in AW ( big bonus for diversity) a lot of people wasted gold and tier 4 basic and class catalysts as well as iso.
With the new change (good one) can we get the tokens to lower those hero we wouldn’t upgrade if it wasn’t for the diversity.
You're right. For some reason I had it in my head it was after maintenance.
I have a theory that they will make it permanent.
I mean just like it was, that made it easier for officers to replace some heroes. Now I have no idea what the heroes base values are without the node.
I really hope that problem with mystic dispersion gets fixed.
and also the AW rewards feels very outdated. Nobody is excited for a war victory crystal.
Evading/expiring buffs = power gain?
How original.
#NeedLoyalty
Kabam, please return the AW matchmaking to just based off of War Rating ... this is getting ridiculous ... and you still have not announced or even acknowledged the awful change to the AW matchmaking algorithm.
If match making has indeed been changed to matching based on both war rating and prestige, then:
1. This should be disclosed in patch notes. This is a player-facing change explicitly of a kind that @Kabam Miike stated way back during 12.0 discussions that Kabam "always" discloses in patch notes.
2. There are two ways to do this: using a synthetic metric that combines war rating and prestige, and by two-dimensional match making where both war rating and prestige are simultaneously matched independently. The former has balance issues. The latter only works if you have enough alliances looking for matches in every single rating and prestige partition non-stop. Apparently, that isn't true. To implement this correctly would require a lot of alliance war participation analysis, which was clearly not done. This is not something to just try and see.
3. If this was done it sounds like something done to address player complaints about matching solely by war rating being "unfair." This is actually a variation of the problem that originally afflicted AW in 15.0: competition was not prioritized so it fell by the wayside. Matching by war rating always has a chance - even when done perfectly correctly, which I'm not saying the game does - to match alliances against much stronger alliances. That's because the point to war rating is to state, as a matter of principle, that any alliance that wins a lot demonstrates that their actual strength is higher than their alliance prestige or rating would imply, and that therefore the "fair" thing to do would be to match them against alliances that are stronger than their rating. That is the *definition* of fair in the rating-match system. By definition, you can't argue it is unfair when you run up against a numerically higher alliance. That's just what happens when you win often enough.
If Kabam is going to try to "fix" this problem, they first have to understand that this is only a subjective problem that some but not all players believe to be the case. To "fix" it, they have to redefine what a fair war is, and when they do they will create problems for all the players that don't agree. They need to communicate why they are siding with some players against others.
The long match making times are just a nasty side effect of doing this in a way that I think will eventually redefine what a fair fight is in ways I don't think will be acceptable to everyone even if they fix the match making timers.
Also, I'm very worried Kabam will take the easy way out: speed up match making by relaxing the match making match window. In other words, allow alliances to be matched against other alliances with both war rating and prestige that is farther away, which will make it easier to find a "match." That's going to be a worst of all worlds solution.