This War score makes absolutely no sense to me. This needs to be fixed immediately.

JaaonArmfieldJaaonArmfield Member Posts: 63 ★
in General Discussion
This doesn’t make any sense. These numbers don’t add up. I don’t understand. And this is some of the biggest bull I’ve ever seen before in this game . These guys only had 13 people on defense. I thought that you get full attack bonus for an empty node? If that was so, and they were missing 35 defenders, wouldn’t that mean that we would have to die 35 x 3 for them to even have a chance if they had zero deaths? We out scored them on attack bonus but we only won by 1,690 points. That 1,690 is the difference in score between our Defender Diversity and our Attack Bonus combined. So what I’m realizing right now, is that since they didn’t place 35 defenders, we lose out on those 35 full attack bonuses? Are you serious that if our Attack Bonus and Defender Diversity was 1,690 points higher than them, that we could have lost with 20 defenders vs 13? This is the some of the biggest bull I’ve ever seen in this game before. Is what I’m saying correct or am I not seeing something? Does anyone else agree that this is complete and total bull that not placing defenders can actually help lower your opponent’s score? I thought I read someone complaining about something like this before on forums. Is this true? Basically rewarding alliances for being inactive and actually giving them a chance to win with 10 vs 20 if the alliance with 20 was very, very bad on attack phase, they can lose because not getting attack bonuses on blank nodes. Do you get full attack bonus for blank node or you get zero points from attack bonus on blank nodes? This makes me sense to me.

Comments

  • JaaonArmfieldJaaonArmfield Member Posts: 63 ★
    Pics don’t show bonus 50K points from winning.
  • zuffyzuffy Member Posts: 2,256 ★★★★★
    edited December 2019
    You get a maximum of 165 attack bonus per bg (55 nodes x 3) so 330 total for 2BGs. It’s 80 points per attack bonus. You have attack bonus of 315, that mean you gave up 15 deaths. So you did get full attack bonus for the empty nodes.

    The other team wasn’t too far off in attack bonus, that is why the score is close.
  • JaaonArmfieldJaaonArmfield Member Posts: 63 ★
    Thanks. Got explanation from other before posted this. But if makes no sense that if we had lower defender diversity than them, that they could have won if they out scored us on attack bonus even though they only placed 13 on defense. I understand now all of the scoring, but how this is this even possible that we might have ended up losing with 20 vs 13/15? Seems like needs to be fixed. I know might be asking too much, but it still is hard to comprehend that we “almost” lost.
  • zuffyzuffy Member Posts: 2,256 ★★★★★
    Even though you have more defenders, they put up a good fight and got an attack bonus close to your alliance that had less defenders to attack.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 19,893 Guardian
    JaaonArmfield said:

    Thanks. Got explanation from other before posted this. But if makes no sense that if we had lower defender diversity than them, that they could have won if they out scored us on attack bonus even though they only placed 13 on defense. I understand now all of the scoring, but how this is this even possible that we might have ended up losing with 20 vs 13/15? Seems like needs to be fixed. I know might be asking too much, but it still is hard to comprehend that we “almost” lost.

    I don't understand why you think just because you placed more defenders you should automatically win by a mile. Not placing a defender is already giving you an advantage, because obviously you're very unlikely to die to an empty node. So they are handing you diversity points (because they can't score diversity on an empty node) and really easy attack bonuses. However, you still have to fight and win.

    If I just place one defender on the boss node and the entire rest of the map is empty, if I clear your map and you get stuck on the boss you're going to lose. That's intentional.
  • SummonerNRSummonerNR Member, Guardian Posts: 13,234 Guardian
    Glad you understand the calculations now... not sure where you were pulling that 35x3 death assumption from in original post.

    Opponent leaving a node empty gives you exactly the same points as if they placed a defender there but you (as probably) just beat it in a single fight (full attack bonus either way). Only difference is that by not placing a defender they will have surrendered a “potential” extra count towards their Diversity score.

    Basically you can figure relative Attack Bonus difference from the Defender Kills count (adjusting for any cases where a hard node took more than 3 attempts before killing).

    As to last point of yours...
    Even if you had full 20 ppl (assume this was a 2BG war) and opponent only had 5 people place defense, you could technically lose if your team ends up dying all over the place against their relatively sparse defense and the other team (with added attackers) marches thru your full defense with very few deaths.
  • FrostyFrosty Member Posts: 485 ★★★
    JaaonArmfield said:

    This doesn’t make any sense. These numbers don’t add up. I don’t understand. And this is some of the biggest bull I’ve ever seen before in this game . These guys only had 13 people on defense. I thought that you get full attack bonus for an empty node? If that was so, and they were missing 35 defenders, wouldn’t that mean that we would have to die 35 x 3 for them to even have a chance if they had zero deaths? We out scored them on attack bonus but we only won by 1,690 points. That 1,690 is the difference in score between our Defender Diversity and our Attack Bonus combined. So what I’m realizing right now, is that since they didn’t place 35 defenders, we lose out on those 35 full attack bonuses? Are you serious that if our Attack Bonus and Defender Diversity was 1,690 points higher than them, that we could have lost with 20 defenders vs 13? This is the some of the biggest bull I’ve ever seen in this game before. Is what I’m saying correct or am I not seeing something? Does anyone else agree that this is complete and total bull that not placing defenders can actually help lower your opponent’s score? I thought I read someone complaining about something like this before on forums. Is this true? Basically rewarding alliances for being inactive and actually giving them a chance to win with 10 vs 20 if the alliance with 20 was very, very bad on attack phase, they can lose because not getting attack bonuses on blank nodes. Do you get full attack bonus for blank node or you get zero points from attack bonus on blank nodes? This makes me sense to me.

    These guys clearly had 65 defenders on defense just from attacker kills
  • MadSweeneyMadSweeney Member Posts: 11 ★
    edited December 2019
    Heres the thing, I agree with Jaaon with one. If you look at my alliance's stats on the last war we should won on points alone. The other alliance won on just diversity alone. So your saying that if you score more on diversity then you automatically win. That is straight up BS. A win should based on three criteria, not just by one stat. That like winning by just participating in an alliance war. My alliance has lost 4 wars just on diversity alone. That is straight up cheating the alliance who should won the war straight up.





  • OrdalcaOrdalca Member Posts: 543 ★★★
    edited December 2019
    MadSweeney said:

    Heres the thing, I agree with Jaaon with one. If you look at my alliance's stats on the last war we should won on points alone. The other alliance won on just diversity alone. So your saying that if you score more on diversity then you automatically win. That is straight up BS. A win should based on three criteria, not just by one stat. That like winning by just participating in an alliance war. My alliance has lost 4 wars just on diversity alone. That is straight up cheating the alliance who should won the war straight up.

    The problem with your position is that you got 5 extra attacker bonus, but 20 fewer diversity. That's what the ratio is meant to deal with. Each of your 5 extra bonus gave 80 points, for 400 points total. However, you had 20 more duplicate defenders, at 30 points each, for 600 points total.

    Which team deserves to win, the one that dies 5 fewer times, or the team that kills 20 more Doom, Medusa, Havok, and Annihilus while only dying 5 more times?

    While at your level, duplicates might just be what champs are ranked, the scoring needs to keep in mind that at the top, alliances could stack massive numbers of the hardest defenders to make the opponent die as many times as possible. You just didn't manage to kill them enough to overcome the penalty for using multiple high end defenders at once.

    Getting 3 more counted deaths out of those duplicates would have overcome the diversity deficit. You didn't, so you lost.
  • RoninManRoninMan Member Posts: 747 ★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    JaaonArmfield said:

    Thanks. Got explanation from other before posted this. But if makes no sense that if we had lower defender diversity than them, that they could have won if they out scored us on attack bonus even though they only placed 13 on defense. I understand now all of the scoring, but how this is this even possible that we might have ended up losing with 20 vs 13/15? Seems like needs to be fixed. I know might be asking too much, but it still is hard to comprehend that we “almost” lost.

    Not placing a defender is already giving you an advantage, because obviously you're very unlikely to die to an empty node.
    Umm, so there is a way to die to an empty node? I had no idea 😂
Sign In or Register to comment.