**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
Comments
Perhaps we can name it something else. Maybe it's the name that's throwing me off. How about "Alliance Waltz"? We've certainly danced around this topic enough. LOL
But you can't argue who won more attack points. And in the event that the attack points match, then yes, break the tie by looking at diversity. Not totally fair, but many tie-break mechanisms come with their share of complaints. Look at the NFL. And the tennis US Open.
Clearly you die enough that diversity is catching up with you and biting you in the rear though. So that means the wars are close. It takes 3 diversity to supersede 1 missing Attack Bonus (Attack Bonuses = 80 points, Diversity = 30 points). Let me ask you this @Elohim16 , what war tier are you in? If it's Tier 6 or lower, I can understand why you don't like diversity.
Truth is, overall the majority are good with diversity being part of AW scoring. There was a massive outcry the last time they mentioned removing it (this was a LONGTIME ago mind you) from the community against removing it. They left it alone. As another said, they likely won't try to remove it ever again.
So, with that said, maybe try utilizing more diversity, or try to clear the grid without losing any ABs. Maybe both? Or don't and keep losing. It's typically better to adjust to what's there instead of ask for it to be changed when many disagree. You can disagree with the majority here all day, doesn't mean it's gonna help your case, yah know?
My Alliance is in tier 4. Diversity can be clutch for us as wars are VERY close sometimes. It was a tie breaker for us not but 2 wars ago (both Alliances hit 461 AB). The reason I stated I can understand why you dislike diversity if you're in tier 6 or lower is because that's when it wasn't as useful for my crew. It still helped, but wasn't as clutch as it is now. Reason being, and again someone else already stated this, lower tier nodes aren't that strong. So the strong defenders aren't as effective, and the weaker defenders are that much worse.
However, it's still guaranteed points, and it did win us wars. There was an adjustment period with diversity for us. It slowly became more relevant as we grew/climbed the ranks. We've been running max diversity since tier 6. Overall, it's been more useful than harmful. You're decreasing the opponent's ability to have a perfect counter for every fight on their lane as every fight is different. You're increasing your overall point output. If you can afford to throw points away during the Season, then by all means, don't utilize high to full diversity. If you can't afford to throw away points, maybe try it. Who knows, maybe you'll like the outcome.
I'd really like to see the final score of the war that made you want to create this post.
If you place "strong" defenders and your opponent places "weak" ones and they win, they didn't just win on diversity points. The score says they got more diversity points than you, but it was SKILL that earned them the win. Why? Because they killed your "strong" defenders while dying less often than you needed for them to lose. If you die six times and they die seven times you claim you're better, but they would argue that their seven deaths against your defense placement shows more skill than your six deaths against their diverse placement. And they would generally be correct.
When you say "just let alliances go at each other, however they want" fine. And how do you determine the winner? Who decides that normal node deaths are worth 80 points, but boss kills are worth 20,000 points? Who decides that just moving around the map is worth points, something that takes zero skill? Who decides what the score is going to be? There's nothing in "just let alliances go at each other" that says who wins. We need a scoring system for that. And that scoring system is mostly arbitrary: we decide what we want to value, and then we score that value. If you kill the boss but leave five nodes and we kill every node except the boss, why do you win? At some point you have to decide what is worth what, and there's no objective way to do that. The best you can do is make a scoring system that is acceptable to the majority of the competition. The current system is. Your implied one isn't (or at least it wasn't based on history).
In effect you're arguing against pass interference. Why is it legal for football players to hit each other, except receivers? And the answer is: because both the competition and the paying audience likes the forward pass, so the rules were changed to incentivize it. This is why the spitball is illegal, why kicking is not allowed in boxing, why only the goalie can use their hands in soccer, why there's a shot clock in basketball. In no competition are the competitors allowed to just "go at each other." We have rules, and the rules generally shape the competition into what we want for subjective value reasons. You might prefer the old system, but that's purely a subjective preference, and not one that it seems most others share. And that's ultimately why we don't do it anymore.