**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.
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.
Options
How to "Fix" Alliance Wars: Give us options for our war parameters
jaylerd
Posts: 113 ★
TL;DR - let use choose wars and disable use of: potions, boosts, or diversity as we see fit.
Here are some of the problems that became clear recently re: Alliance Wars:
The solution is simple: when we search for a war match, GIVE US PARAMETERS TO CUSTOMIZE THE MATCH. You will then be matched with an alliance selecting similar parameters.
Three toggles come to mind:
1. "Potion Amount - 0, 5, 15" --- select one of these three options to allow us NO potions per war (if you die, you die. it's ALL skill), some potions (everyone sneezes and makes a mistake mid-match sometimes) or full potions (go nuts, whales).
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): No. Some alliances will still insist no conspiring and buying wins. They will fund, as they always do. And those who don't use potions will continue doing exactly that: not using them. Kabam loses no revenue stream.
Will it hurt players? No. Those who use potions sometimes or can't afford to use any / have no inventory will continue not using them, and they won't be punished by demanding alliances or fighting against a whale alliance. They will have the matches that suit their spending intentions and have more fun.
2. "Diversity or Attack Bonus" --- What will be the "bonus, tie-breaking" factor of your battle? Will it be how diverse your defenders are, or how many kills they get?
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): Nope! If you want diversity, you'll go after as many champs as you can. If you go after attack bonus, you'll go after the strongest and newest, dropping units to buy whatever Nth Iron Man or Captain America variant we get. Both of these options might make alliances want to play with potions because you'll expect to tie on diversity: ensure a completion for your win, and do that with revives. Are you playing Attack Bonus mode? Well, you're going to go through hell. POTIONS!
Will it hurt players? No. We get to pick how we place champs, and therefor how we rank.
3. "No Boosts" --- Straightforward. No boosting, so you have who you have and play how you play and if you're stuck or too weak, tough. Like "No Potions" this gives alliances more transparency into skill and ability.
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): Maybe. Players might start making a point to not spend loyalty on the more significant boosts (invulnerability). They might also buy fewer boosts to save only for questing rather than buying for both questing and wars. But they also be more inclined to use boosts knowing they won't be pissed away in a war they're destined to lose anyway.
Will it hurt players? It will hurt you as an attacker but not as a defender. It'll make sure nobody barrels through your defenders because they bought a significant number of Attack / Health boosts that you don't have the same luxery of exploiting.
Here are some of the problems that became clear recently re: Alliance Wars:
- * Alliances conspire to throw matches - this cannot be fixed, Kabam can only look out for people using 2* champs to do so.
- * Kabam doesn't think we should be able to 100% a map - this cannot be fixed. Top-tier alliance can and will require members to acquire potions and secure their win. Alliances that don't or can't afford to buy victories will be left struggling and have no fun.
- * Diversity was only meant to be a tie-breaking mechanic - However, since we can 100% maps and all generally use the same attackers (Blade) and defenders (Iceman, Nightcrawler, Medusa), it wasn't functioning this way: diversity determined the victor, and it's *rolleyes* not in the spirit of the game that alliances with the largest rosters should get the win. The emphasis should be skill.
- * Removing diversity, just like the old days! - Reverting to the non-divserity system has its problems - beyond simply "I ranked a champ and regret it" - diversity is insurance that we won't have to fight 10 versions of any one Champ - Dorm, Medusa, Iron Man Infinity War, etc (Kabam Miike glossed over the entire point by saying "Dorm isn't a significant defender anymore, though!", but the fact remains: 10x ANY champ is a pain. Back in the olden days of war when Yellowjacket and Electro were kings, that didn't matter. Now? GFY. Give me my safety net.
- * POTIONS POTIONS POTIONS! - No matter what Kabam offers - making maps more difficult or not - it comes down to how many potions that they can sell us. That makes them greedy a-holes and the community bitter and tints every decision they make as "how are they screwing us today".
The solution is simple: when we search for a war match, GIVE US PARAMETERS TO CUSTOMIZE THE MATCH. You will then be matched with an alliance selecting similar parameters.
Three toggles come to mind:
1. "Potion Amount - 0, 5, 15" --- select one of these three options to allow us NO potions per war (if you die, you die. it's ALL skill), some potions (everyone sneezes and makes a mistake mid-match sometimes) or full potions (go nuts, whales).
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): No. Some alliances will still insist no conspiring and buying wins. They will fund, as they always do. And those who don't use potions will continue doing exactly that: not using them. Kabam loses no revenue stream.
Will it hurt players? No. Those who use potions sometimes or can't afford to use any / have no inventory will continue not using them, and they won't be punished by demanding alliances or fighting against a whale alliance. They will have the matches that suit their spending intentions and have more fun.
2. "Diversity or Attack Bonus" --- What will be the "bonus, tie-breaking" factor of your battle? Will it be how diverse your defenders are, or how many kills they get?
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): Nope! If you want diversity, you'll go after as many champs as you can. If you go after attack bonus, you'll go after the strongest and newest, dropping units to buy whatever Nth Iron Man or Captain America variant we get. Both of these options might make alliances want to play with potions because you'll expect to tie on diversity: ensure a completion for your win, and do that with revives. Are you playing Attack Bonus mode? Well, you're going to go through hell. POTIONS!
Will it hurt players? No. We get to pick how we place champs, and therefor how we rank.
3. "No Boosts" --- Straightforward. No boosting, so you have who you have and play how you play and if you're stuck or too weak, tough. Like "No Potions" this gives alliances more transparency into skill and ability.
Will Kabam lose money with this (ie not do it?): Maybe. Players might start making a point to not spend loyalty on the more significant boosts (invulnerability). They might also buy fewer boosts to save only for questing rather than buying for both questing and wars. But they also be more inclined to use boosts knowing they won't be pissed away in a war they're destined to lose anyway.
Will it hurt players? It will hurt you as an attacker but not as a defender. It'll make sure nobody barrels through your defenders because they bought a significant number of Attack / Health boosts that you don't have the same luxery of exploiting.
0
