Warfare, smdh.

Way to go guys, way to go. Lose because I had nothing to kill. Smmfh. Boycotting til fixed.

3j4t0cq10tfv.png
«1

Comments

  • DL864DL864 Posts: 781 ★★★
    Wow this is ****
  • Dakine86Dakine86 Posts: 240
    Completely, I don't blame the other alliance. I blame the design team and useless beta testers. How about this, if you don't place a 5 man squad, you can't attack. Simple as that. Problem solved.
  • Darkstar4387Darkstar4387 Posts: 2,145 ★★★
    Damn that sucks, it just shows you how horrible this iteration of war is and further proves that it wasn't beta tested.

    I don't know what kabams intent was when desgning this version of war but whatever it was they clearly failed.

    They took out the defender kills, made the nodes easier, took away some or all hidden information which takes away all strangey in placing, also they created a whole new stratgey to win by placing no defenders without a penalty.

    So you can't kill them but they can kill you, it takes all of the fun and strategy out of war and makes it a boring slog even more so than it already is.

    I hope this listen to us and either reverse or revise everything about this war system and the map.
  • AxeCopFireAxeCopFire Posts: 1,115 ★★★
    Wow 77? You guys need to work on your diversity.
  • Dakine86 wrote: »
    Completely, I don't blame the other alliance. I blame the design team and useless beta testers. How about this, if you don't place a 5 man squad, you can't attack. Simple as that. Problem solved.

    For sure, something as simple as that could prevent people from cheesing, this is ludicrous.
  • BOO8sBOO8s Posts: 52
    Wow, I thought losing cause our opponent only placed 145 and we placed 150 was rough, this is a major issue, don't worry once we all stop placing defenders and no one is buying pots and revives it'll be fixed real quick
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 428 ★★★
    Dakine86 wrote: »
    Completely, I don't blame the other alliance. I blame the design team and useless beta testers. How about this, if you don't place a 5 man squad, you can't attack. Simple as that. Problem solved.

    Better yet, if you don't place defenders, it automatically pulls your lowest 5 prestige champs in and randomly places them.
  • MSRDLDMSRDLD Posts: 733 ★★★
    They really screwed the pooch on this one
  • And wait for Kabam mods to close this thread
  • Dakine86Dakine86 Posts: 240
    The loss in kabams precious revenue stream alone, i imagine this would be addressed quickly.
  • MSRDLDMSRDLD Posts: 733 ★★★
    Well, the fact that War is a complete mess right now does not erase the fact that they spent considerae time and resources in making it. They'll fix it. I expect Wars to be disabled soon.
  • Dakine86Dakine86 Posts: 240
    MSRDLD wrote: »
    Well, the fact that War is a complete mess right now does not erase the fact that they spent considerae time and resources in making it. They'll fix it. I expect Wars to be disabled soon.

    I'm surprised it already isn't. I like the revamp overall, its something new... its the attacker kills rather than defender kills that tipped the boat.
  • How on earth was this not picked up kabam? Was this new change to AW even tested for any flaws? Even if you do make changes, it's not fair that alliances have missed out on 500-1000 5* shards because they have come across alliances that are making the most of the massive flaw in this new AW design... something needs to be done ASAP....
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    This happened to us as well. We lost cause the other alliance placed very little defense to shut down our attacker kills. @GroundedWisdom Now do you see the issue?
  • AndyB1985AndyB1985 Posts: 29
    In my opinion, every single person playing this game needs to boycott Kabam until most or all issues, that they have known about for a considerable amount of time (CM and MM L2 bug), gets fixed.

    The only way quick change comes is if all players band together once again to stick it to them.
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Looks like all you need is a bosses and mini bosses only, and aim for diversity. Risky, but seems to be the best way for a win.

    Skill not required. Good job Kabam
  • QwertyQwerty Posts: 636 ★★★
    R4GE wrote: »
    Looks like all you need is a bosses and mini bosses only, and aim for diversity. Risky, but seems to be the best way for a win.

    Skill not required. Good job Kabam

    What's the point of placing only bosses if defender kills don't matter?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 26,724 ★★★★★
    R4GE wrote: »
    This happened to us as well. We lost cause the other alliance placed very little defense to shut down our attacker kills. @GroundedWisdom Now do you see the issue?

    I can see that some people are having an issue with it, yes. However, we won our last War and the opposing Ally placed less. What's happening is people are bypassing the system by placing no Defense. Unfortunately, it may not end the way most want. I'm not sure it could be considered an Exploit, but it's definitely creating an unfair advantage. I'm not the one calling the shots, but I could see Mandatory Placement coming before a total revert.
  • I don't understand the skill isn't required portion of your statement. They still cleared your map.
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    R4GE wrote: »
    This happened to us as well. We lost cause the other alliance placed very little defense to shut down our attacker kills. @GroundedWisdom Now do you see the issue?

    I can see that some people are having an issue with it, yes. However, we won our last War and the opposing Ally placed less. What's happening is people are bypassing the system by placing no Defense. Unfortunately, it may not end the way most want. I'm not sure it could be considered an Exploit, but it's definitely creating an unfair advantage. I'm not the one calling the shots, but I could see Mandatory Placement coming before a total revert.

    Right, like I said in another comment, its risky to try. But it shows the argument for defender kills. Other alliances are showing losses due to the other alliance placing 0 defense.....risky move. Completely kills AW.
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Qwerty wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    Looks like all you need is a bosses and mini bosses only, and aim for diversity. Risky, but seems to be the best way for a win.

    Skill not required. Good job Kabam

    What's the point of placing only bosses if defender kills don't matter?


    Just a hopeful attempt to stop them from clearing for 20k
  • I don't understand the skill isn't required portion of your statement. They still cleared your map.

    New nodes are too easy to clear . It doesnt take much to 100% after after 80 kills. Lets talk about skill when we have defender kill points back
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    I don't understand the skill isn't required portion of your statement. They still cleared your map.

    If your map is empty, you can't fight for attacker kills...points
  • Leiva_darkLeiva_dark Posts: 317 ★★
    edited September 2017
    That is the great system of wars they created !!! good job here the answers of what we all knew that would happen and they did not want to assume !!! some explanation kabam!
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    vikky89 wrote: »
    I don't understand the skill isn't required portion of your statement. They still cleared your map.

    New nodes are too easy to clear . It doesnt take much to 100% after after 80 kills. Lets talk about skill when we have defender kill points back

    And this on the other end. But its obvious we are gonna see wars where theres no defense on either end at times
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 26,724 ★★★★★
    R4GE wrote: »
    R4GE wrote: »
    This happened to us as well. We lost cause the other alliance placed very little defense to shut down our attacker kills. @GroundedWisdom Now do you see the issue?

    I can see that some people are having an issue with it, yes. However, we won our last War and the opposing Ally placed less. What's happening is people are bypassing the system by placing no Defense. Unfortunately, it may not end the way most want. I'm not sure it could be considered an Exploit, but it's definitely creating an unfair advantage. I'm not the one calling the shots, but I could see Mandatory Placement coming before a total revert.

    Right, like I said in another comment, its risky to try. But it shows the argument for defender kills. Other alliances are showing losses due to the other alliance placing 0 defense.....risky move. Completely kills AW.

    What I said was it allows for the opportunity for people to have a chance at a win for trying as opposed to locking in a Loss trying to kill the enemy. I'm still cool with the change. This is a separate issue. Is it against the rules? No. That's what makes it tricky. However, I could see some Rules of Engagement being implemented if it ends up stopping people from engaging in a fair fight.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 26,724 ★★★★★
    Of course, I'm speaking hypothetically. I don't even know if they will address it. It's possible if it continues to lock people into a Loss before the Attack Phase even begins.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 26,724 ★★★★★
    Qwerty wrote: »
    the thing is it's well within the rules of the game to place no defenders. i mean kabam said they wanted to stop the discouraged feeling of being stuck on a node, what better way to follow kabam's wishes than to give them a free map?

    A free Map that ends up being in a guaranteed Loss because there's nothing to kill? Lol. Not the intention of the changes.
Sign In or Register to comment.