AW scoring

WayntosWayntos Member Posts: 601 ★★
in General Discussion
I don't care losing but when you lose because of 1% exploration and the other team has 88 deaths. Shouldn't defender kills mean more. Diversity is a joke. Had only 7 peeps in war only 2 duplicate champs. they had more champs in and more duplicate champs but since they had 10 place they got more points. done ranting. let the disagrees begin!



Comments

  • winterthurwinterthur Member Posts: 8,058 ★★★★★
    Diversity was implemented to get Summoners to play with more Champs instead of focusing on a niche few.

    Eons ago, AW was just fighting Nightcrawler.
  • Noobmaster555Noobmaster555 Member Posts: 91 ★
    edited May 20
    Points of every aspect is pre defined. Just play accordingly. Nothing is gonna change just because you lost. If you already know diversity is very important now, then maintain it.
  • WayntosWayntos Member Posts: 601 ★★
    It's is what it is! It's just defender kills should count for more weight in scoring. which proves it's like a pay to win situation. Team A walks through teams B defense, say misses one path. Team B dies way more times and clears 1% more. Making it clear if one team just clears one percent more no matter the amount of death they win. No skills require. Just pump units/money into revives for the win. Second diversity is clearly comes down of how many champs not how many duplicate champs. Yes we need more active members. Defender kills should count for more, than just tie breaker. My opinion have a bless day moving on.
  • LordSmasherLordSmasher Member Posts: 1,525 ★★★★★
    edited May 20
    The scoring system is the scoring system, you play to it so no point complaining there. A team of 7 can do 42 kills so the 9 skipped cost you the war.

    Diversity is flawed thou. You should start at max (50 per battleground) and lose 1 per duplicated defender. As it is, if you can't field a full BG not only are you disadvantaged by not having as many attackers and defenders, you get penalised a whole pile of points because you couldn't fill it up.
    In this case one alliance had 7 participants so it had a 3 * 5 * 3 = 45 kill disadvantage before a single fight was made, even if they placed no duplicates. Thats rubbish.
  • winterthurwinterthur Member Posts: 8,058 ★★★★★
    edited May 20
    LordSmasher said:


    In this case one alliance had 7 participants so it had a 3 * 5 * 3 = 45 kill disadvantage before a single fight was made, even if they placed no duplicates. Thats rubbish.

    At lower tier map, 6 participants is 100% exploration, so kill “disadvantage” is not fatal.
  • SummonerNRSummonerNR Member, Guardian Posts: 12,249 Guardian
    They did recently increase greatly the points for Diversity.
    Prior to that, you probably would have won, if opponents had less than 16 duplicates.

    But people can always say, why are points (like Attack Bonus) set at 80 each, and not 70 or 90. Etc.

    You’re only doing 1 BG wars (with only 7 people). Not like you are getting very high rewards anyways though.
  • Noobmaster555Noobmaster555 Member Posts: 91 ★
    Wayntos said:

    It's is what it is! It's just defender kills should count for more weight in scoring. which proves it's like a pay to win situation. Team A walks through teams B defense, say misses one path. Team B dies way more times and clears 1% more. Making it clear if one team just clears one percent more no matter the amount of death they win. No skills require. Just pump units/money into revives for the win. Second diversity is clearly comes down of how many champs not how many duplicate champs. Yes we need more active members. Defender kills should count for more, than just tie breaker. My opinion have a bless day moving on.

    You always get exploration rewards at 100% everywhere in the game, not at the 99%. Your opponent got the full exploration points.
    And change in diversity was for the better, otherwise best of luck fighting map full of Bullseye and Serpent.
  • SummonerNRSummonerNR Member, Guardian Posts: 12,249 Guardian
    Looking at pic again, seems like both sides were far, far, away from 100% (or even 99%)

    Poster looks like they only killed 33 out of 50 defenders.
    Opponents only killed 23 out of 35 defenders.

    So probably around the 70% explore range for each.
  • BlueSmirnBlueSmirn Member Posts: 11 ★
    Diversity is certainly a main contributer here.
    The alliance I am in is struggling with the new points system in how it punishes non-full teams.
    We are a relaxed alliance in Tier 6 running 2 BGs. We don’t use comms (besides in game chat) and AW is not mandatory so we frequently have less than 20 participants.
    It did not used to be a problem, we would win some lose some and we felt the scoring was fair.
    Note - we always try and run 100% diversity with the players who join
    Now it is difficult.
    It is much more of case of organisation > skill as, even though players do not place the defenders, any missing player costs us 5 diversity points.
    We now lose more frequently even though we feel we far out skilled the other team and the teams we win against also have low diversity points.
    I do understand the need to have the change to stop teams putting same defender multiple times but why count “no defender” as a duplicate?
    What is the logic behind that?
Sign In or Register to comment.