15.0 Alliance Wars Update Discussion Thread

Summoners!

Our 15.0 Update is just about a week away, and with it, it's bringing a huge change to Alliance Wars! Check out everything you need to know about the Brand New Map, Scoring Changes, and new boosts in the Loyalty Store here: http://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/17902/15-0-alliance-wars-update/

Comments

Hosemania

Too much cheating in aw now. I have seen people force quit the app several times on one fight since they knew they would not lose health on a fight. What's the point of aw when you can simply cheat in every fight. What's the point when the scoring doesn't really mean anything. You can have an alliance dominate another alliance but the scoring is not determined by dominance or skill.

Greywarden

Acanthus wrote: »

Greywarden wrote: »

TBJ1118 wrote: »

BT1984 wrote: »

I think we're well entitled for compensation for this aw map. It's just unfair that an alliance would place 0 or 5 defenders while another works hard to maximise diversity yet, the lesser defenders alliance wins.

Not true, diversified enough (>121) defenders win vs 0 defenders

What about if you can't reach that 121+ total in diversity? Some groups just don't have deep enough of a roster, unless you start throwing 3*'s into defense....

Then place literally any number of diverse champs (yes, even 1) without placing any dupes and you'll win against an alliance that places nothing. Seriously, this is basic maths people

You still have to reach that 121+ number in order to beat the zero defense team. If say my group can only get to 115 or some arbitrary number less than 121 then every time you go up against a zero defense team, you lose....

Acanthus

Greywarden wrote: »

Acanthus wrote: »

Greywarden wrote: »

TBJ1118 wrote: »

BT1984 wrote: »

I think we're well entitled for compensation for this aw map. It's just unfair that an alliance would place 0 or 5 defenders while another works hard to maximise diversity yet, the lesser defenders alliance wins.

Not true, diversified enough (>121) defenders win vs 0 defenders

What about if you can't reach that 121+ total in diversity? Some groups just don't have deep enough of a roster, unless you start throwing 3*'s into defense....

Then place literally any number of diverse champs (yes, even 1) without placing any dupes and you'll win against an alliance that places nothing. Seriously, this is basic maths people

You still have to reach that 121+ number in order to beat the zero defense team. If say my group can only get to 115 or some arbitrary number less than 121 then every time you go up against a zero defense team, you lose....

I really hope you're joking. No, you don't need to reach 121. 175 points for a unique defender > 150 points for an attacker kill (I hope this part is understandable), so with a single unique defender placed (and nothing else) you will win against a zero defense team. You only need to reach 121 unique defenders if you place 150 champions

Wafflesallday

Lol our defender diversity was 0 this war

JRock808

Acanthus wrote: »

Greywarden wrote: »

Acanthus wrote: »

Greywarden wrote: »

TBJ1118 wrote: »

BT1984 wrote: »

I think we're well entitled for compensation for this aw map. It's just unfair that an alliance would place 0 or 5 defenders while another works hard to maximise diversity yet, the lesser defenders alliance wins.

Not true, diversified enough (>121) defenders win vs 0 defenders

What about if you can't reach that 121+ total in diversity? Some groups just don't have deep enough of a roster, unless you start throwing 3*'s into defense....

Then place literally any number of diverse champs (yes, even 1) without placing any dupes and you'll win against an alliance that places nothing. Seriously, this is basic maths people

You still have to reach that 121+ number in order to beat the zero defense team. If say my group can only get to 115 or some arbitrary number less than 121 then every time you go up against a zero defense team, you lose....

I really hope you're joking. No, you don't need to reach 121. 175 points for a unique defender > 150 points for an attacker kill (I hope this part is understandable), so with a single unique defender placed (and nothing else) you will win against a zero defense team. You only need to reach 121 unique defenders if you place 150 champions

If you place 1 and they place 2 then you lose. And so on and so on until everyone is at 150 and the only difference is defender rating.

Having to play that much of a meta game is not fun for anyone, especially the officers and leaders trying to herd these caffeinated cats.

All to avoid having to fix MD...

Amonthir

Miike, do you have any information for us about what the team is leaning towards doing? Just lost our war due to them simply reviving over and over. 130 Defender kills vs 73. We lost slightly in Diversity and Exploration, but would have won easily if kills simply counted. My Alliance does not have the resources to throw a bunch of gold/ISO/Cats at random champs to increase Diversity (The exploration part was a portal error on our part, but that we can fix).

And the current nodes do NOTHING to encourage diversity either. They are boring, blah nodes. Make sure they know to make more UNIQUE and DIFFERENT nodes for War. More health is not a unique buff playing to a champ's strength.

Da2Vero33Man

I have a suggestion to fix this. The point calculation needs to be corrected. This I will leave to Kabam to figure what solution is best. However, I would like to suggest a further enhancement to improve game play - the ability to place node boosts as the defender chooses. Only one boost per node except mini boss nodes can have up to two and the boss node up to four (or something like that). Each tier will have a different amount of boosts to place. Easy tier can have 10, adavanced tier can have 20 and expert tier can have 30 - for example. The more boosts placed the more points given and a boost can only be placed where a defender is placed and all boosts must be used or suffer a penalty of 2000, 10000, 20000 (respectively for each tier) for each boost not used. No need to bring back thorns but other boosts are ok. This, I would hope, will encourage alliances to fill the map with defenders and it will also give more freedom to alliances with the boost placement option. This means that the map will change depending on defender placement of the boosts and not make each node so darn predictable. Also, hidding what boosts (traps) are on the node is also a good idea. On the easy tier, do not hide the boost information - display the number of boosts and what they are. In the advanced tier display the number of boosts only and the expert tier can see that boosts exist on a node. Not how many or what boosts. Introduce a "hide me" boost. This boost would hide all the defender specifics even after the node was attacked (not available in the easy tier).

Kpatrix

@Kabam Miike , can we get clarification on the diversity scoring confusion between your original post and the way it is actually scored in game ?

We need this info prior to the start of the next round of wars, as well as if anything will be changed with scoring. If you do change the current diversity scoring system without changing the overall scoring system, then there will be a huge mess during the next round of wars.

We also need this info to do rank ups, I have a few champs to r5, but if diversity is the name of the game I want to make sure whoever I do rank isn't a duplicate defender in my bg or alliance.

We have less than 24 hours before the next round of wars start and have gotten zero feedback from the game team as usual.

Qwerty

the sad thing is that i'm expecting the change to be a lazy bandaid fix for kabam that hurts the players overall.

DD2

Stop pushing defender diversity. It doesn't mean anything! It's meaningless!

Can you imagine going to a basketball game and your team gets free points for the following:

wearing blue socks
having a pony tail
having a pet turtle
having crooked teeth

?

Ridiculous right? Those have nothing to do with basketball and neither does "diversity" have anything to do with how effective a champion is on defense.

Get rid of it, it's stupid. It's war. Bring the best! I don't like fighting 5 mystics in a row, but that's the way it is. If you don't bring your best you deserve to lose. And people work hard to find and rank up the best defenders. No sense punishing them to bring up useless champ for the sake of "diversity".

Vegas110

My suggestion to help fix the scoring system...
There should be a greater penalty for not playing every defender.
So currently. If running 3 battle groups.
150 defenders placed = 7500 points
50 defenders = 2500 points
My suggestion would be to increase the penalty for 3 battle groups as such...
Placing 150 champs would result in the standard +7500 points no loss.
Placing 50 champs would result in a -2500 points instead of +2500.
Placing 0 champs would result in a -7500 points instead of 0.

Jaffacaked

Am sure everyone would be happier if you took war AW down for a few extra days to actually make some proper changes so it's enjoyable for us again. Take the time to get some feed back from the community an actually get some alliances to do proper beta testing of it so we don't end up with this debacle again

vikky89

Biggest problem is removal of defender kills coupled with Map being too easy now. Almost every alliance can 100% with new nodes and winner is decided by either diversity or lowest defender count. There is no fair balance between skill and spending. And Diversity is pretty lame concept. Why would we have to place useless champs in defense when you know they offer nothing. Instead of fixing MD or upgrading existing champs, they came with this lazy concept.

BeerDragoon

Honestly they you institute attacker diversity instead of defender diversity. Make people use crappier champs on attack to get extra points.

vikky89

BeerDragoon wrote: »

Honestly they you institute attacker diversity instead of defender diversity. Make people use crappier champs on attack to get extra points.

Lol this would instantly trigger #Boycott .

GroundedWisdom

Edit.

GroundedWisdom

The whole point of Diversity is to encourage the use of a variety of Champs, rather than "Magik Wars". It also gives an opportunity for people who don't have a Roster full of Voodoos and Hyperions. Naturally, people don't want that because they want to keep playing with the same Champs everytime because they prefer some over others. There may be certain numerical and Node adjustments being made, but I don't think that the focus should go back to Defenfer Kills. At least not in the capacity it was. Allies end up waiting 24 hours for a Match they can't win because they will KO themselves into submission. The idea is to allow a balancing of the system to occur so that Allies have an equal opportunity to win. Not to place your Opponent into death.

RazorEdge49

I like the new map and strategy except for a few things. The portals are confusing most of my alliance but that will get better with familiarity. The diversity is good. I was sick of fighting Nightcrawler, Mordo and Hyperion so much. The 1 hour timer is better. I don't like energy points being used to jump to and from the portals. The fights are easier and that's a good thing for newer players. I do think rank down tickets should be given because a lot of us ranked certain champs for AW. If an alliance is winning without placing defenders that's not good.

xdethsquadx

ANY OF YOU THAT ARE DEFENDING the new system of diversity need to stop it. This is WAR!! Its about skill vs champ quality, masteries, strategy, and item use. Now, NONE OF THAT MATTERS, and the only thing that matters is who you place. That is bullcrap.

xdethsquadx

We just lost. We both had 100% exploration. Our defender rating was 170k more! We lost by 67/76 diversity points. 1000 points we lost by ONLY BECAUSE OF WHO WE PLACED

GroundedWisdom

It's always been about who you place. That's the point. Diversity gives Points for using different Champs. The old system meant overpowering the Opponent into certain death because we had similar War Rating, but a huge gap between Ally Ratings and Rosters. It's not about skill for the Ally that is twice, or 3 times, the size and strength of the Opponent. The losing Ally has few choices.
1. Try and give up.
2. Try and KO into a Loss.
3. Try for Exploration, and inevitably go for number 2.

That's not skill. That's overpowering the enemy before they even get to Attack.

GroundedWisdom

Yes. Flag every comment we don't agree with. That's totally how a discussion takes place and what the Function is for. Lmao.

vikky89

I just dont get this statement "The whole point of Diversity is to encourage the use of a variety of Champs,". Why should we use wide variety of champs when those champs are useless. Some champs are best suitable in offense and some are in defense. Rest of them are useless in both. We have spent all our resources(time and money) around champs that have some worth either in attack or defense. If you want diversity them urge kabam to upgrade them and make them useful again. I dont see you complaining about ppl always bring Vodoo or SL in attack. Magik itself is not the issue , MD is the culprit. You can easily take down magik with no MD in few tries.

nuggz

One more thing on diversity.

Alliances aren't just refusing to place defenders due to the point system flaws. It's also because we are not going to place crappy champs on defense just so we can be "diverse". War is supposed to be hard. Not watered down with sissy nodes and even worse defenders....
That's not how we want to play. We want to make it hard for the opponent to 100% explore and defeat boss. We expect the same in return as well

xdethsquadx

IndridCold wrote: »

Flush wrote: »

IndridCold wrote: »

Kabam.

Flush wrote: »

So what yous gona do about members that ranked up useless champions for diversity points system seen as aw is about to change again think few rank downs should be issued yous clearly didn't test it properly before going live with it how could yous not know by not placen defence will win you the war your point system is total disaster

If the AS that placed defenders. Had chosen to place more diverse defenders, they would win. And have an easy win at that. Maybe instead of placing 10 mordo's & 10 NC's, they could of had 80% of their defenders being unique/diverse.

You get 150 pts/Attacker kill

You get 50 pts/defender placed
You get 125 pts/unique defender/diversity.

You have a max amount of defenders/Attacker kills (150).

22.5K Attacker Kills.
- 7.5K defenders placed.
= 15K/125 (diversity) = 120 unique defenders.

That means, if 40 out of 50 defenders/BG are unique, you'd have 22.5K for defenders placed & diversity. Leaving the defender rating pts for a tie breaker. The point system isn't flawed, ppl just aren't taking advantage of the 18.75K possible pts from diversity.

So what about screen shot of war that's goin around of alliance that didn't place any defence but won war cuz they screwed other alliance out of kills

I'm assuming you mean this one. Here. The AS only placed 77 unique defenders (51%). Had they placed 107 unique defenders which is only 71% of the possible diversity points. They'd of won & has an easy win. 50/50 gets crazy & you'll have a lot of bad defenders, but it's not hard to have 35-36 unique defenders/BG. That still leaves around 14-15 spots for duplicates of great defenders, for important nodes.

They needed 35, 36, 36 unique defenders/BG.

Not to mention. They didn't get 100% exp on the map that didn't have any defenders. Had they gotten that, they wouldn't of won (as is), but it'd given a few more duplicate defenders.

If they had used their worse defenders for diversity, their defenfer rating would have been much much lower. Right?

GroundedWisdom

vikky89 wrote: »

I just dont get this statement "The whole point of Diversity is to encourage the use of a variety of Champs,". Why should we use wide variety of champs when those champs are useless. Some champs are best suitable in offense and some are in defense. Rest of them are useless in both. We have spent all our resources(time and money) around champs that have some worth either in attack or defense. If you want diversity them urge kabam to upgrade them and make them useful again. I dont see you complaining about ppl always bring Vodoo or SL in attack. Magik itself is not the issue , MD is the culprit. You can easily take down magik with no MD in few tries.

The statement that they're useless is based on opinion. That opinion is partly rooted in the old system where the best Defense Kills determine usefulness. MD is not the issue. If it were, they would address that instead of reworking the entire War System.

xdethsquadx

The overall point is that this new system is awful and now the only thing that lets you win is ranking up a ton of otherwise useless 4* and 5* champs that cant be used for anything else. Should we really use the VERY HARD to obtain resources just to place them in AW for no kills or questing ability? Hortible.

vikky89

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

It's always been about who you place. That's the point. Diversity gives Points for using different Champs. The old system meant overpowering the Opponent into certain death because we had similar War Rating, but a huge gap between Ally Ratings and Rosters. It's not about skill for the Ally that is twice, or 3 times, the size and strength of the Opponent. The losing Ally has few choices.
1. Try and give up.
2. Try and KO into a Loss.
3. Try for Exploration, and inevitably go for number 2.

That's not skill. That's overpowering the enemy before they even get to Attack.

Well thats how wars work. When you win a war, your war rating goes up and eventually u will get matched up with a ally twice your rating. You cant keep winning all the wars unless you are in the top ally ,that's how matchmaking is designed. Granted it doesnt work all the time, they can still fine tune it.

GroundedWisdom

vikky89 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

It's always been about who you place. That's the point. Diversity gives Points for using different Champs. The old system meant overpowering the Opponent into certain death because we had similar War Rating, but a huge gap between Ally Ratings and Rosters. It's not about skill for the Ally that is twice, or 3 times, the size and strength of the Opponent. The losing Ally has few choices.
1. Try and give up.
2. Try and KO into a Loss.
3. Try for Exploration, and inevitably go for number 2.

That's not skill. That's overpowering the enemy before they even get to Attack.

Well thats how wars work. When you win a war, your war rating goes up and eventually u will get matched up with a ally twice your rating. You cant keep winning all the wars unless you are in the top ally ,that's how matchmaking is designed. Granted it doesnt work all the time, they can still fine tune it.

What I'm saying is that is one of the issues the system is intended to address. Not to mention the fact that there is a monopoly on Tiers because certain overpowered Matches keep popping up allowing some Allies to peck off others comfortably. There are a number of issues that have been looked at in making the changes. Some things may need to be rethought, but the need is still real nonetheless. There was little to no movement for much of anyone for a while. Same Champs, same Wars, same Allies in the same Tiers.

Sighsohard

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

vikky89 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

It's always been about who you place. That's the point. Diversity gives Points for using different Champs. The old system meant overpowering the Opponent into certain death because we had similar War Rating, but a huge gap between Ally Ratings and Rosters. It's not about skill for the Ally that is twice, or 3 times, the size and strength of the Opponent. The losing Ally has few choices.
1. Try and give up.
2. Try and KO into a Loss.
3. Try for Exploration, and inevitably go for number 2.

That's not skill. That's overpowering the enemy before they even get to Attack.

Well thats how wars work. When you win a war, your war rating goes up and eventually u will get matched up with a ally twice your rating. You cant keep winning all the wars unless you are in the top ally ,that's how matchmaking is designed. Granted it doesnt work all the time, they can still fine tune it.

What I'm saying is that is one of the issues the system is intended to address. Not to mention the fact that there is a monopoly on Tiers because certain overpowered Matches keep popping up allowing some Allies to peck off others comfortably. There are a number of issues that have been looked at in making the changes. Some things may need to be rethought, but the need is still real nonetheless. There was little to no movement for much of anyone for a while. Same Champs, same Wars, same Allies in the same Tiers.

Monopoly on tiers? If you stopped growing you:
Don't play enough to grow as quickly as others
Don't have enough skilled individuals in your alliance

It's that simple. My alliance went from t10 to t1 in the last 6 months. We don't spend. Stop making excuses for people that no matter how many times they try they can't help but getting smashed by a NC or spidey.....