**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.
15.0 Alliance Wars Update Discussion Thread
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Oh, we're not? Fighting a dozen symbiods and champs that repeat again in the next section along with the same 3 minbosses every week isn't repetition?
Really? In what situation is Kamala useful over Magik?
There is no "old system", a term that you just made up to justify these changes. The reason they're garbage is because they're flat out garbage. People are at a disadvantage when they take weaker than those that don't. You don't seem to realize what value is.
2. That illustrates the problem I just outlined.
3. The old system refers to the way Wars were before said changes which are clearly the new system currently.
4. I'm not debating this. You don't like the changes. I get it. I have my own views.
There are so many statements that dont make sense.
1) "We're not going up against 4, 5, or 6 of the same Champs in AQ "-- Yes we are going up against same set of ~10 champs every AQ. Its repetitive and boring, why not add diversity there.
2) "There is more to the game than AW, and a Champ's usefulness is not limited to AW alone" --> There is more to the game yes, but AW is the most fun/skilled mode in MCOC. And defensive champs that were ranked have no use anywhere except for arena fodder. Adding diversity + removing defender kills completely eliminated fun and skill from AW.
3)"The reason they consider them garbage is based on the application in the old system "-- Nope they were considered garbage coz they literally offer nothing in terms of defensive ability or even offense. Lets say if kabam were forced to add diversity just for sake of it in their team (people of various nationals or genders etc), will they hire if they dont have anything to offer ? No they wont right
4) and best one out of all "Whether the populous considers them garbage or not, they're meant to be used" --- So going by your statement, I haven't seen you advocating for same diversity in offense ? By your lame logic all champs should be used or atleast forced (under new setup). Lets have same diversity in offense across alliance too. Just adding defender diversity wont even out playing field
Offense 90 Diverse champs X 150pts = 13,500 : Defense 150 diverse champs (50/BG) X 90pts = 13,500 ---- This is what i would call even playing field.
So going up against 10 Mordo minibosses or 10 Rhinos or 10 Cables a week isn't repetitive in Map 5?
They're identical except for their specials which barely makes a difference anyway. Class differences also doesn't make it any less boring.
Repetitive minibosses, repetitive Dormammu bosses, and dozen boring symbs and other repeating champs. You have no case.
And in what situation does Kamala have an advantage over Magik? Can you think of one?
There is no system on earth that promotes the use of less effective tools to get something done. It doesn't exist.
You can artificially manipulate a system to make things appear equal, but they will NEVER be equal. It goes against human nature and basic logic to use a weaker tool over a stronger one.
I'll accept your view once you give me all my catalysts back for ranking up Nightcrawler, Hyperion, and Dormammu.
In what area of the game, if you analyzed their abilities and performances does Kamala Khan have an advantage over Magik?
Dont waste your time bud. His final reply is always " Well we have to agree to disagree".
1. Bye Bye Flip/Flop map, Hello Warfield
Currently You play on your side of the fence, I play on mine. Sometimes I peek over to see what you are doing, but most of the time there is a literal partition between our two sides of the "War".
How about this, a map designed a little more like a Chinese Checkers board, or chess or something where there are You are on your side and I am on my side, and we are both trying to get to the middle, king-of-the-mountain style.
I can watch my team advance, as I already do, but I could also watch your team advance, in real time, without flipping between screens (which **never** breaks and makes you restart the app
2. More Paths, Not Tiles (but maybe more tiles)
Let's go with my Warfield concept for a few minutes...
Suppose on a map with 2x teams of 10 people there were 30 routes to the top instead of 20. We would have to choose how we spend our moves. A unified Warfield would have at least 100 tiles just for mobs, and probably another 50 for blanks, portals and unused defense placement.
You could leave portals, but maybe 3/4 of the way through my branch I have the option to go to another branch entirely and start over. This would cost me moves, but maybe I could pick up more exploration tiles - now important since no one team can 100% the map. The rest of my team can make it to the boss fight, but I can scratch up some more tiles!
How about this - If I move over a tile that occupies My Alliance defender - No energy cost. If I move into an empty tile or an opposing tile, energy must be burned. Now I have to choose in Placement whether to allocate my resources to prohibit movement by the opposition or facilitate movement by my offense.
3. But now there's Two Bosses on the map?
So what? How about this - if My Alliance defeats Their Boss first, then we activate a buff, making their boss fight more difficult. Vice versa, if they beat our boss first, our fight gets harder. Ooh now I have to choose between getting to the boss fast (so maybe allocate additional defenders to facilitate movement, and forgo extra exploration) or anticipate a more difficult boss fight and hope that I can scrape together an exploration advantage and still maybe knock down the boss.
4. Dynamic Boost Activation
Okay that boosted boss thing is kind of interesting. Maybe as I move up the map dropping links for my buddies, perhaps I am also ACTIVATING boosts against my foes. Another incentive to move quickly, or choose strategic paths that the enemy didn't boost on their side?
5. Warfield Exploration ==> Capture Enemy Tiles
So, now we are on the same map, and my enemy beat my boss, but we have more guys downrange and lots of moves left. How about we roll over some of the tiles that the Enemy captured on the run to the Boss, and STEAL THEIR EXPLORATION TILES!
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I'm sort of imagining almost a web of nodes, concentrating to the center where there would be the two boss fights going on, so close to each other that we could watch each other tackle our bosses at the same time.
Tell me what you guys think.
JJW
You never engage. When someone asks hard questions you go silent.
You can you be for equality when champs aren't created equal?
How can you assign equal value to Kamala Khan and Magik when Magik is quantifiably superior 99% of the time?
There's nothing subject or opinion-based about this.
The new system is BEYOND BROKEN and Kabam needs to know why.
I would say Kabam should hire you, but I get the impression that could be a step down. And that's not a diss on Kabam.
Awesome stuff, thanks again for contributing.
There are many things I don't do, but I engage. I'm not debating this. You are challenging everything I say because you don't agree with Diversity. I can respect that you don't. I'm just not partaking in a cyclical argument. I don't share the same opinions as you. I don't consider Champs as Superior/Inferior. They're different. The statement that they're not created equal doesn't even register with me. A Champ is a Champ. They have different Abilities and attributes. I've said many times I'm not debating this with you. Please respect that and accept that we have different opinions.
If they're different....
...and have different abilities and attributes (ie. SOME ARE MORE EFFECTIVE THAN OTHERS)....
...then why are they assigned EQUAL worth in AW?
We should probably stick to facts. They're much more helpful in situations like this.
Everything we've seen up to now doesn't encourage that. You know when you are beat and you cut your losses and move on. There isn't any point in spending when you'll get the same rewards for not spending. People play wars to develop their rosters. They want the resources, and by increasing them across the board while adding in milestones of some sort would encourage this.
What we have in this iteration is too predictable. You place the max number of diverse defenders and crunch numbers to see which teams of unique champs each player can bring to give you your maximum defender rating. Then you go through war and wait to see who has the higher pi. There is no feeling of accomplishment or victory there, you can lose while having lost fewer champs than your opponent. It's just boring and skilled play isn't rewarded. There has to be another variable besides diversity and rating to determine the winner, and increased rewards for everyone.
Fact: Those hard numbers and data are based on the effectiveness of Defender Kills in the old Map.
Fact: Maximizing the presence of those Champs based on said hard numbers and data led to the issue that brought about Diversity.
Fact: Those hard numbers and data are currently moot because Defender Kills and Nodes used no longer exist.
Fact: Using facts also involves considering present relevancy.
Fact: I'm over the conversation.
I've already gone thru each of your "reasons" in another post. Let's not repeat ourselves here bc spamming is against the TOS of the forum.
Good Defenders are good defenders. It's called programming, abilities, and stats. No amount of foot stomping is going to change that. As far as present relevancy goes... Have you even seen who is placed on the mini boss and boss nodes (the only rly decent nodes)? Have you not been able to discern why those particular champs are there?
100% correct.
What issue? Did the effective defenders suddenly stop being effective? Did the game break? Are there too many effective defenders that you can't handle it? Did you want them to place easier ones for you? What is this issue you speak of?
As for me, I have no issue with smart people placing more effective defenders on defense.