When you complete the aw map 100% with fewer KOs...and it still doesn't matter
Symie5
Member Posts: 12
Nothing like losing a war by 17 points when we completed the map 100%, AND easily beat them on both defender kills and defender rating. But hey, they had 1 more in defender "diversity" than we did, right? So totally "deserved" this aw win. #sarcasm
This is insane, Kabam. The new aw scoring system takes the skill (and joy) completely out of this aspect of the game.
This is insane, Kabam. The new aw scoring system takes the skill (and joy) completely out of this aspect of the game.
14
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As an aside, what about all the resources we used to build up effective defenses only to have them negated by the new system? Assuming the new system remains in place, some rank down tickets would be nice at the very least.
Now, however, even of you don't place him on an enhanced poison node (which would be too obvious), now everyone can see that it's a science champ and bring someone like widow to negate his poison. Sure enough, abom has gotten zero kills since the new war format started.
I wouldn't have ranked him at all had I known.
You don't solve one problem by destroying the game. Let's hope we NEVER EVER see rank down tickets in the game again.
How did the defender kills look?
What are you blabbing about? OP didn't mention rank down tickets.
They have ptsd
He responded to the 3rd post
One of your guys died to my Civil Warrior.
CIVIL.
WARRIOR.
That would have won you the war, bud. Might want to talk to that guy.
The new scoring MUST get fixed, it is TERRIBLE.
Although, I have softened on defender kills.
Maybe make defender kills 50 points. Attacker kills 150 and Diversity a 0.001 x PI bonus ea.
This is all off the top of my head after reading the posts. So dont shoot me if the math doesn't add up.
Seeing screenshots with <100 diversity is pretty hilarious though - what did you expect going into that war, exactly?
I get your point aswell.. but more and more are quiting game over this.. AW sucks now. And sure less players arena gets easier..but if heavy spenders start quiting there wont be a game or arena to be play in future. If people stop posting about this it certainly wont be changed.
Point is to highlight the horrible scoring system and how it takes away from the fun of the game. Whining not included.
1. If you lose to defender RATING I would get the complaints. I think it's fair to say the majority of people in this forum agree that defender diversity is a dumb idea and the use of the buzz word "diversity" was used to try to use a pc phrase to paper over what is so clearly either a reward for big spenders of crystals/resources or a way to force 4*s to remain borderline relevant as r5 5*s and 6*s are on beir way (again, need people using resources and buying worthless 4* crystals).
2. Defender kill scores are meaningless under the new format--and I'm not talking about from a skill or points perspective. If I'm placing 4* r3 spider gwen and Luke cage on defense for "diverity" and you are still tripling 5* r4 magiks and 5* r4 juggs both with max md on defense, yes, you should get more defender kills than me. To then post on here aboutdestroying the opponents in defender kills but losing is a pointless exercise. You placed actual strong defenders and I placed jokes. If I then beat you in defensive kills, that says a ton about your skill. But if you beat me in defender kills, it doesn't really say much. ( I recognize original post was 148 to 149 in diversity; later poster was like 82-132 diversity).
Now, I'm not saying that either of the above scenarios happened here, but I have seen multiple posts at this point essentially with what I laid out above (see other screen shot in this thread for example). Long story short. Defender diversity is a terrible stat and a terrible idea. Kabam clearly created defensive/offensive/terrible champs--to force us to use attack and terrible champs on defense is mindbogglingly inappropriate. Also, the nodes in war are easy. Kabam has basically made it so the big spenders with below average skills can feel better about their war performance. But let's stop pretending when an alliance places 75 diverse defenders and the opponent places 150 diverse defenders, that the 75 diverse defender alliance should have "won" bc they got more defender kills (again, I see it was 148 to 149 in diversity in earlier post--but just making the point). That alliance got more defender kills bc it placed their best defenders who were more likely to get kills. In other words, the alliance didn't follow the scoring model but instead focused on a star that wouldn't win them the war. That would be like a golfer saying he should win bc he won in driving distance no matter how many times he hit the ball out of bounds.
Hope they fix something soon.
False. If you are in tier 2 and they got to 100% explore (or close to it) and your alliance refuses to go on a spending spree, you aren't beating the opponent just bc you got 175 kills.
Defender kills, outside of wars in tier 1 that were constantly around 100% explore, defender kills were rarely a tiebreaker. Maybe u guys always 100%. We definitely did not--but still won way more wars than we lost. The losses we tended to have were the ones I laid out above--massive kill numbers bc opponent would spend to almost 100% all maps