**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.

Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.

What happens if you don't place any defense?

Just looking at some war results that have come in recently, it looks like if our opponents don't place a defense at all, and 100% our defense, we couldn't possibly get enough points to win, no matter how strong our defense is, because of attacker kills. If anybody wants to do the math and double check, please feel free, but this is highly concerning.

Comments

  • Dave_the_destroyerDave_the_destroyer Posts: 981 ★★
    edited September 2017
    Mate been discussed many times already and AW have been won this way already as well

    Plus, just a small point, not posting a defence means you have no defence. You haven't "not" posted one, you just dont have one, see my point
  • Dave_the_destroyerDave_the_destroyer Posts: 981 ★★
    edited September 2017
    DNA3000

    You are a genius

    Thanks mate
  • SighsohardSighsohard Posts: 666 ★★★
    I can tell you this. In my alliance all 6 BGs our 3 and their 3 finished the map 100%. We won. But I did the math. Had the alliance we face plav d 0 defenders they would have won.

    We're in t2. This is broken. But what isn't?
  • SighsohardSighsohard Posts: 666 ★★★
    To piggy back on this. DNA3000s theory is why this game is broken. Kabam are data collectors. Not game players. Data is awesome. However no matter how many times you simulate a scenario you cannot account for the man behind the controls. This is why kabam sucks. They don't play their game. The few that do are bad at their game. They have no idea how to change/modify/progress their game.

    Play the game.

    Take advice from those that are good at this game.

    Stop. Being. Arrogant.
  • KingCrooksKingCrooks Posts: 176
    Yeah that response didn't really tackle the subject... That's a HUGE miscalculation...
  • Sighsohard wrote: »
    To piggy back on this. DNA3000s theory is why this game is broken. Kabam are data collectors. Not game players. Data is awesome. However no matter how many times you simulate a scenario you cannot account for the man behind the controls. This is why kabam sucks. They don't play their game. The few that do are bad at their game. They have no idea how to change/modify/progress their game.

    Play the game.

    Take advice from those that are good at this game.

    Stop. Being. Arrogant.

    I didn't specifically mention anything about war being broken in my post; that was just about strategy. But I did hint at something that I think is broken. I think most people would agree that when it comes to placing defenders, we should expect that the best possible option should be to place a strong, unique defender. In second place should be to place a strong non-unique defender. The third best option should be to place a weaker non-unique defender. And the worst option should be to place no defender. Something should always be better than nothing. But the way the war points work, that's not true. Placing nothing is actually the second best thing you can do. The best thing is to place a strong unique defender. But the second best thing you can do tactically is to place no defender. Close behind is to place a strong non-unique defender. And dead last is to place a weak non-unique defender. Weak non-unique defenders are literally handing your opponent points. Strong non-unique defenders also hand your opponent points but they have to work for them, and a strong enough defender could derail an opponent and cost them exploration points. But placing no defender at all guarantees that your opponent cannot get any points for kills. You can't get points for placement either, but that means neither side gets an advantage. You cost yourself nothing, you gain nothing. Every other option has the distinct possibility of costing you points.

    To put it simply, when ranking the options for defense placement, strong unique defenders are a Plus, nothing at all is a Zero, strong non-unique defenders are possibly a Minus, and weak non-unique defenders are almost guaranteed to be a Minus.

    It is more complex than that, in the sense that you cannot know how strong your opponent is, you cannot know how likely they are to kill any particular defender, so you cannot perfectly judge what a "strong" defender is. But to a first order approximation, I think the above is basically true. And while I will play by the rules handed to me, personally I feel this is horribly broken design.
  • SighsohardSighsohard Posts: 666 ★★★
    edited September 2017
    DNA. I hear what you're saying but I question what level you play this game at. Guess what. There is no defender. In the game. That will derail a player in t2 the way war is currently constructed. It could be a r4 NC on stun immune. He might get a kill. But a good player is gonna kill him anyway with the next champ. While your analytics are correct youre forgetting there is 3000 people that play this game that won't die to any champ placed on a standard node in this current structure. And if they do? So what they have 2 more champs. There is no negative to KOing at this level. Cuz guess what. They can revive without defender kill points. They aren't reviving in AQ. Cuz they're, yep. That good. So they can simply revive in war. I smoked a stun immune 5/50 NC today with a SL that started the fight with 90 health lol.

    Migh work for tiers 4-15 tho...

    But who cares about the top 10% ehh?
  • I'm just disappointed that our job as officers has gone from making sure everyone places their best defense for the nodes to now making sure they all place unique defenders, regardless of the node. There's little strategy involved other than no repeat champions on defense.
  • JamezBongJamezBong Posts: 97
    I still dont get it,
    Your ally place defender
    Enemy did not place defender

    If both 100% the map,
    Your ally had def diversity point, but dont have attacker kills & maybe dont have boss kill point ?
    And vice versa for the enemy ally ..

    ?
  • @JamezBong the math is in another post. I found it after I started this thread
  • KpatrixKpatrix Posts: 1,055 ★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Sighsohard wrote: »
    To piggy back on this. DNA3000s theory is why this game is broken. Kabam are data collectors. Not game players. Data is awesome. However no matter how many times you simulate a scenario you cannot account for the man behind the controls. This is why kabam sucks. They don't play their game. The few that do are bad at their game. They have no idea how to change/modify/progress their game.

    Play the game.

    Take advice from those that are good at this game.

    Stop. Being. Arrogant.

    I didn't specifically mention anything about war being broken in my post; that was just about strategy. But I did hint at something that I think is broken. I think most people would agree that when it comes to placing defenders, we should expect that the best possible option should be to place a strong, unique defender. In second place should be to place a strong non-unique defender. The third best option should be to place a weaker non-unique defender. And the worst option should be to place no defender. Something should always be better than nothing. But the way the war points work, that's not true. Placing nothing is actually the second best thing you can do. The best thing is to place a strong unique defender. But the second best thing you can do tactically is to place no defender. Close behind is to place a strong non-unique defender. And dead last is to place a weak non-unique defender. Weak non-unique defenders are literally handing your opponent points. Strong non-unique defenders also hand your opponent points but they have to work for them, and a strong enough defender could derail an opponent and cost them exploration points. But placing no defender at all guarantees that your opponent cannot get any points for kills. You can't get points for placement either, but that means neither side gets an advantage. You cost yourself nothing, you gain nothing. Every other option has the distinct possibility of costing you points.

    To put it simply, when ranking the options for defense placement, strong unique defenders are a Plus, nothing at all is a Zero, strong non-unique defenders are possibly a Minus, and weak non-unique defenders are almost guaranteed to be a Minus.

    It is more complex than that, in the sense that you cannot know how strong your opponent is, you cannot know how likely they are to kill any particular defender, so you cannot perfectly judge what a "strong" defender is. But to a first order approximation, I think the above is basically true. And while I will play by the rules handed to me, personally I feel this is horribly broken design.

    Where does putting a weak unique champ stand ? Obviously it is better than a non unique weak champ, but is it better than placing no champ ? Also it appears the system is counting champs per bg as unique, not per alliance. There's so many things wrong with this game we will soon be seeing it in ads for terminix
  • Weak unique champs are better than no champs because they net you 25 points even if they get ran over
  • Sighsohard wrote: »
    DNA. I hear what you're saying but I question what level you play this game at. Guess what. There is no defender. In the game. That will derail a player in t2 the way war is currently constructed. It could be a r4 NC on stun immune. He might get a kill. But a good player is gonna kill him anyway with the next champ. While your analytics are correct youre forgetting there is 3000 people that play this game that won't die to any champ placed on a standard node in this current structure. And if they do? So what they have 2 more champs. There is no negative to KOing at this level. Cuz guess what. They can revive without defender kill points. They aren't reviving in AQ. Cuz they're, yep. That good. So they can simply revive in war. I smoked a stun immune 5/50 NC today with a SL that started the fight with 90 health lol.

    Even in tier 2, people still place strong defenders. There is still a chance, however small, that a strong defender will derail a path. Even if that chance is based on getting a bad match up and being matched against a weaker alliance. It is still mathematically true that a strong non-unique defender is better than a weak non-unique defender and both are worse than an empty node. So I don't see how acknowledging the strength of tier 2 attackers materially changes the situation.
  • Weak unique champs are better than no champs because they net you 25 points even if they get ran over

    Yes, I should have said that unique champs are better than everything else period. Strong unique champs are better than weak unique champs unless you assume all defenders are equally easy to kill. Either way, a unique champ always generates more points than an empty node whether it is killed or not. Non-unique champs generate less points than an empty node when they are killed, which is most of the time across all alliance wars.
  • biggestnoobbiggestnoob Posts: 56
    So now the real questions comes into play...

    What is the true definition of a unique defender?
    How can you distinguish a unique defender from a non unique defender?

    Will someone knowledgeable on the subject of unique and non unique defenders make a list of unique and non unique defenders and make it public to the MCOC community?
  • Uni = one
    One hulk is unique, 2 are not
    Ignore stars
  • Just looking at some war results that have come in recently, it looks like if our opponents don't place a defense at all, and 100% our defense, we couldn't possibly get enough points to win, no matter how strong our defense is, because of attacker kills. If anybody wants to do the math and double check, please feel free, but this is highly concerning.

    That is correct, almost 3x points for attacker kills opposed to defenders placed. So if you fight with zero defense, get 100% the opposing team cannot win.
  • Is everyone getting 100% in war? Even in tier 1? Curious since we struggled at the end with the 5 mini bosses.
  • Fpaez87Fpaez87 Posts: 24
    Just looking at some war results that have come in recently, it looks like if our opponents don't place a defense at all, and 100% our defense, we couldn't possibly get enough points to win, no matter how strong our defense is, because of attacker kills. If anybody wants to do the math and double check, please feel free, but this is highly concerning.

    Haven't read every post in here, but if you don't place a defense, even if your opponent doesn't get "attacker kill" points", they will still get "exploration" points and the "boss kill" points (20k points for reaching final tile, doesn't matter if there was no boss to kill, 20k free points)

    In addition, if you don't place any defense, you won't get the defense rating points, the uniqueness or diversity points... in other words, you'll most likely lose the war.

  • project314project314 Posts: 67
    We're in a scenario where both alliances get the full 100% exploration and boss kill points. With that established attacker kills from the bg with 0 defenders kills will get that alliance more points than defender placement and diversity and rating points for the other alliance.

    Basically, you have the confidence/resources to 100% any map, your 0 defenders will win to 150 defenders.

    At this point, aw turns into a guessing game. Put 0 defenders, just hope the other ally will place 150 and not 1 (you'll lose to 1).
  • cradlemancradleman Posts: 86
    We lost our war in tier 2. We completed 100% to their 99.3%. They had one more diverse defender and a much better defensive rating since we are 9 mil and they were 10 mil. We had 10 more defender kills and lost by less than 35 points.

    Had we placed 0 defenders so they couldn't get attacker kills we win by 5700 points. That is a really poor construct on kabams part. We couldn't have played or placed better except to be more "unique."

    It kills the ability of the smaller alliance to win a war. It's gonna be 2* wars all over again. People won't place to give less attacker kills and hope the other alliance doesn't try the same strategy better.
Sign In or Register to comment.