AW placement day pointless, please remove

EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
The placement day waiting period is completely pointless, alliances should be able to have there defences already placed and mapped. When you have filled up all you slots and placed to you liking then enter the matchmaker and immediatly be put into attack phase. Also the previous war champ placements should be saved so if your choose you can immediatly re enter the matchmaker after your previous war is complete. A surrender option would also be appreciated but I can understand why there would be hesitation to allow that. More war is more units spent so I don't see why that isn't win win for everyone.
«1

Comments

  • cjs8000cjs8000 Posts: 44
    Placement place is really helpful for alliances with members in different time zones. I'd rather keep the placement phase.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    The 24-hour period allows people to place and make adjustments, Leaders and Officers to rearrange, time to see who is coming, and time to prepare in general. Not every Ally knows who they want where. There are different Time Zones, and making sure people are in is a part of it. Can't really stand behind this one. Everyone is at different points in the game, and not all Allies are ready to go immediately.
  • Yelin547Yelin547 Posts: 238
    As an officer I couldn't disagree with you more. I think any other officer would agree with me...
  • RaganatorRaganator Posts: 1,620 ★★★★
    How does placement phase affect you at all? Just place, you champs are otherwise free to use once you do.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    Raganator wrote: »
    How does placement phase affect you at all? Just place, you champs are otherwise free to use once you do.

    I believe the issue is waiting. So, patience. Lol.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    Yes all I'm saying is I would like more playing and less waiting. If you do all the placement phase stuff on your own time then when you choose to go into matchmaking your immediatly in a war. The leaders and officers are free to choose when they start if cordination is a concern.
  • Feeney234Feeney234 Posts: 575 ★★★
    If you have a life and play this game, placement phase is essential.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    No, placement phase is pointless alliance leadership could take as many minutes hours days as they need to place champs and whenever they are ready they can choose to immediatly be in a war. Not sure what part of my original explanation is confusing but basically get your map or base set up on your own time and then you can begin whenever you want. If the option to save your set up is made, you can just make minor tweaks as required and always have a defence set to start whenever you want. Since officers don't have to set every war the amount of work for leadership would become less and not more.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    The players base wants more shards, it's gives players across the board more opportunity to earn and spend. Not to mention lessening the workload on the leadership as I explanined above.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    I feel like this is a "30-Minute Timer" conversation. The Placement Phase is there for many reasons. They're not likely to remove it completely to the detriment of many people just for more Shards.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    No, placement phase is pointless alliance leadership could take as many minutes hours days as they need to place champs and whenever they are ready they can choose to immediatly be in a war. Not sure what part of my original explanation is confusing but basically get your map or base set up on your own time and then you can begin whenever you want. If the option to save your set up is made, you can just make minor tweaks as required and always have a defence set to start whenever you want. Since officers don't have to set every war the amount of work for leadership would become less and not more.

    Except for the fact that not all Allies are prepared, and are still learning. Not all Players are on at the same time of day to place their Champs. Once it's locked, it's locked, which is why we have time to readjust. It's also designed so that a limited number of Wars a week are possible. I can't see any logical reason to take away Placement Phase simply because we have to wait. It's patience.

    As I explained throughout the thread, alliances would have as much or little time as needed to set the map. If you are happy with your layout and no one has left your alliance then the subsequent war you can just re submit the same map. As for my lack of patience I would prefer to play the game and not wait and the company is free to manipulate the amount of rewards you can potentially win per war or per week but I can't see the downside from the Kabam perspective having more players playing and spending than waiting and doing nothing. If you really wanted to see people go bananas spending you would include awakening gem shards in high tier also.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    You're not seeing how other Allies operate, or the necessity of the process as it is. It's not an arbitrary period. It's there for a reason. Not every Ally starts out knowing exactly who is in and what to do. The change would only benefit those that are established and ready to double their Wars per week.
  • VandalSavageVandalSavage Posts: 267 ★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    No, placement phase is pointless alliance leadership could take as many minutes hours days as they need to place champs and whenever they are ready they can choose to immediatly be in a war. Not sure what part of my original explanation is confusing but basically get your map or base set up on your own time and then you can begin whenever you want. If the option to save your set up is made, you can just make minor tweaks as required and always have a defence set to start whenever you want. Since officers don't have to set every war the amount of work for leadership would become less and not more.

    Except for the fact that not all Allies are prepared, and are still learning. Not all Players are on at the same time of day to place their Champs. Once it's locked, it's locked, which is why we have time to readjust. It's also designed so that a limited number of Wars a week are possible. I can't see any logical reason to take away Placement Phase simply because we have to wait. It's patience.

    The OP isn't explaining it right.

    He wants to change the ORDER that things happen.

    The current order is find match up then set heroes then finally go to war. The set heroes step is 24 hours every time even if it takes the group only 5 minutes to set it up.

    He wants the order to be set heroes, find match up then go to war.

    By placing the set heroes as the first step in the process, this gives the alliance more flexibility at the expense of having a less predictable schedule.

    For alliance that sets their line up quickly, they do not have to wait the current mandatory 24 hours. They can go to battle right away.

    For those that are a bit slow, they can take as long as they want before they click the button to find a match up. Otherwise, once the 24 hours has run down in the current scheme, it would be too late for the slow alliances to place defenders.

    Changing the order gives alliance more flexibility in setting their lineups BUT, the schedule is less predictable as there is no way anyone can predict how fast a group can fill the lineup. It can be like rounding up cats.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    You're not seeing how other Allies operate, or the necessity of the process as it is. It's not an arbitrary period. It's there for a reason. Not every Ally starts out knowing exactly who is in and what to do. The change would only benefit those that are established and ready to double their Wars per week.

    Yes it would be to the benefit of groups who are organized and active.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    No, placement phase is pointless alliance leadership could take as many minutes hours days as they need to place champs and whenever they are ready they can choose to immediatly be in a war. Not sure what part of my original explanation is confusing but basically get your map or base set up on your own time and then you can begin whenever you want. If the option to save your set up is made, you can just make minor tweaks as required and always have a defence set to start whenever you want. Since officers don't have to set every war the amount of work for leadership would become less and not more.

    Except for the fact that not all Allies are prepared, and are still learning. Not all Players are on at the same time of day to place their Champs. Once it's locked, it's locked, which is why we have time to readjust. It's also designed so that a limited number of Wars a week are possible. I can't see any logical reason to take away Placement Phase simply because we have to wait. It's patience.

    The OP isn't explaining it right.

    He wants to change the ORDER that things happen.

    The current order is find match up then set heroes then finally go to war. The set heroes step is 24 hours every time even if it takes the group only 5 minutes to set it up.

    He wants the order to be set heroes, find match up then go to war.

    By placing the set heroes as the first step in the process, this gives the alliance more flexibility at the expense of having a less predictable schedule.

    For alliance that sets their line up quickly, they do not have to wait the current mandatory 24 hours. They can go to battle right away.

    For those that are a bit slow, they can take as long as they want before they click the button to find a match up. Otherwise, once the 24 hours has run down in the current scheme, it would be too late for the slow alliances to place defenders.

    Changing the order gives alliance more flexibility in setting their lineups BUT, the schedule is less predictable as there is no way anyone can predict how fast a group can fill the lineup. It can be like rounding up cats.
    No, I believe the OP wants to remove the 24-hour requirement for Placement so they can place and go to Attack, thereby benefitting those who are ready on a dime, and putting the ones who benefit from Placement at a loss.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    It wouldn't be detrimental to anyone you have whatever time you need to make your map, the super active alliances can run 7 wars per week and everyone else can take the time they need. If anything the less active groups would benefit more because they wouldn't have to chase players down every placement period. They commit champs to the map and unless they manually change something they should be available for your next war whenever leaderships opts to start again.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 5,388 ★★★★★
    I like the idea. The many responses that speak of the importance of the placement phase seem to miss the point. With @EvilEmpire's idea you can take the same amount of time or more for placement if you want. It just gives you the option of taking less time. If you need to recruit before starting a war you could also take one extra day instead of either playing short handed or waiting a full two days for the next war. More options and more flexibility are good for everyone.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    We will have to agree to disagree. These things are in place for reasons. The same argument comes up with Timers. People want to change the entire design for faster Rewards, but they don't see the whole picture. Just because some would like it doesn't mean it's best for everyone. I'm out.
  • Jh_DezJh_Dez Posts: 1,087 ★★★
    But what hes saying isnt afffected by peoples timezones
    If members of an ally have placed their defenders with no plans for adjustment then they can get on with the war
    If not they can wait
    So people and timezones doesnt factor in
    The only moment it becomes a factor is if other members have placed their champs and are ready when a select few havent placed due to timezones
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 5,388 ★★★★★
    We will have to agree to disagree. These things are in place for reasons. The same argument comes up with Timers. People want to change the entire design for faster Rewards, but they don't see the whole picture. Just because some would like it doesn't mean it's best for everyone. I'm out.

    LOL, we agree to disagree a lot. And I do agree that it's like the 1/2 timers inasmuch as it's the same nebulous "reasons" which are used to justify the longer timers. No doubt the entire War system was also designed around the placement phase. Also some finding themselves with more options would place undue pressure on international alliance players and it would be Very Detrimental lmao.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,532 ★★★★★
    edited July 2017
    No. I'm removing myself because it's a never-ending argument. I said it was similar to the Timer Debate, but I'm not getting into that here. As I said, we will have to agree to disagree. The Placement Phase is thus for reasons that include:
    -The design limits the amount of Wars per cycle, which regulates an even progression for all Players. Not just withholds Rewards. If those learning could only do half that those ready immediately, the top would stay the top, and no one else would progress
    -It allows Players to join in ample time to participate
    -It allows Leaders and Officers to make changes to the placements
    -It assists in preparation for organizing
    -It gives people time to study the Nodes and learn how to place in order to optimize before Attack begins
    -It allows Players to finish whatever they were doing with the Champs they've placed before they're locked in because not all Allies have an ample enough Roster to run everything

    I'm sure people could dispute every reason that I provide because they don't want to wait 24 hours for Attack. Which is why I said I'm out. My view is that I can't support the idea of changing the design because some people want more Rewards at a faster pace. Other people depend on the system as it is now. Feel free to share your views but I've stated mine and I'm not debating an endless argument. Not being rude in saying that. I've just had these discussions before and it is one side stating against the other.
    That's just my view.
  • Timone147Timone147 Posts: 931 ★★★
    Placement day is good as is. People need some of there guys to accomplish questing and other items in game outside of AW. I like not having to have my guys locked into AW all the time.

    And yes if you can do it everyday we will have to do it every day. That's how this always goes with events and high level alliances. The game is already busy enough for most people.

    Also like others have said with international alliances need the time for placement.
  • Remember when they were going to give us a "ready button" to skip the rest of placement day? That was going to be awesome. They were also going to give us a forfeit button but oh well
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 631 ★★★
    I like the idea. The many responses that speak of the importance of the placement phase seem to miss the point. With @EvilEmpire's idea you can take the same amount of time or more for placement if you want. It just gives you the option of taking less time. If you need to recruit before starting a war you could also take one extra day instead of either playing short handed or waiting a full two days for the next war. More options and more flexibility are good for everyone.

    Im glad someone seems to understand, basically the idea allows you to move at your alliances own pace and alleviate some of the repetitive war placement duties. The argument could always be made that some people need a break or don't want to war every day but I think the better alternative would be for these players to find alliances that better suit their goals. The full time players dont mind logging in for a few fight daily for war, they want as much rewarding content as they can get. Hoping this concept gains some steam as players are clamouring for more 5* shards and war is beneficial to the players and the company as it encourages spending.
  • HulksmasshhHulksmasshh Posts: 742 ★★★
    I think this would be a welcomed change for most, but would be best to limit the number of wars to 4 per week(currently 3 max per week). It would make Kabam more money with increased potion purchases and stream more 5* shards in to balance future content with the dependency on 5*s. Making more than 4 wars per week would get a bit chaotic.
  • BZ_BZ_ Posts: 26
    I have to play enough each week already with map 6 and minimums in all 3 day events except item use, placement day is chill day.
  • SnizzbarSnizzbar Posts: 1,428 ★★★★
    Why not a compromise, and have a shortened placement phase but limit alliances to two wars per week? That would benefit those who have no patience, and still limit the rewards they get
Sign In or Register to comment.