Defender Diversity one of the best thing kabam has made

All blaming kabam for defender diversity! But, with diversity u can use more champ. We use unnecessary champ just in arena. Now, we can use different champ in aw too. Also for this aw fight seems like easy. Now, aw not fill up with spiderman, jugg, nc, iceman, magic. It's a great move by kabam I think.

Comments

Rotmgmoddy

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

Cassy

I am too with the new diversity rating.
In the Old war System,
In upper class Tier you could only make aus stand with the right Champs in off und def.
Thats boring and unfair because crystals are random.
When you got no one who Bypasses thorns, all skill in the World wont help You against a 5* 4/55

Imran

Rotmgmoddy wrote: »

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

When kabam made hard defender, complain. When kabam made weak defender, complain. WTF!! looks like complain in our dna.

chunkyb

I too hate to be challenged. Difficult things make me have the sads. I don't want to spend time getting good at the game. And if I can't have the same champs that people have worked their butts off for over years of playing, I'm glad that kabam has made it where they can't use them without getting a penalty. Maybe soon, I'll be able to have the uncollected perks without having to face the collector too. Can we just skip act 4 now and get the rewards if we tried really hard?

DNA3000

Imran wrote: »

All blaming kabam for defender diversity! But, with diversity u can use more champ. We use unnecessary champ just in arena. Now, we can use different champ in aw too. Also for this aw fight seems like easy. Now, aw not fill up with spiderman, jugg, nc, iceman, magic. It's a great move by kabam I think.

I can appreciate that. But let's ignore completely the segment of the player base that sees the current system as neutralizing direct competition. Let's only look at the segment of the playerbase that enjoys placing different champions other than the ones considered the most powerful. The current AW pressure is to place the most diverse defense possible, because there are huge penalties for duplicating defense champions.

It might currently look like you are now free to place whatever champion you want, but that's not true in the general case. In the general case players are being pressured to place different champs. Instead of being told which champs to place they are now being told which champs not to place, to avoid collisions with other players. And as players adjust to the new meta, even with diversity limited to a single battle group, the pressure will move to attempting to place the fifty best defense champions rather than repeatedly placing the top ten or so. To the extent that you were pressured to place the best champions you will still be pressured to place the best champions, it is just that the set of "best champs" will be different per player to reach the diversity quota.

To put it in oversimplified terms, if you think you couldn't place certain champs in 14.0 because you were pressured to place the best, you will now be asked to place these five champs, and only these five champs, because that is your place in the defensive spreadsheet. You are going to be just as forced to place the same champs over and over again.

Sure, that won't happen to everyone, but the players it won't happen to are likely in alliances that were not forcing them to place top defensive champs in the first place. The only players that were being pressured to place in a certain way in 14.0 are still going to be pressured to place in a certain way in 15.0. And in the long run, I don't think they will enjoy that any more than they did 14.0.

I can appreciate that you like the current system, but in my opinion you are currently living in a honeymoon of flux, where alliances haven't yet fully adapted to the new system. That will eventually change for the worse. If you really like being able to place different champs, you should advocate for a system that encourages people to place what they want to place and not what someone else dictates to them is optimal. And 15.0 doesn't do that. Only a system designed to encourage defender capability differences rather than just unique names will do that.

ralmada

It's simple: Kabam should not force us to use heroes that they doesn't put in AQ maps. Just because many heroes are extremely easy to beat.

Phantom

You could place different champs in the old system, too. Now you just can't place the good ones.

chunkyb

Stop saying bad things about diversity. The whole game should be like act 1 and they should add a part where I can dress my champs up in different outfits. More diversity! T4cc should be for everyone in a weekly calendar and I should be able to trade good selfies for battle chips. And whoever can take the most diverse selfies gets a blue title.

Rotmgmoddy

Imran wrote: »

Rotmgmoddy wrote: »

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

When kabam made hard defender, complain. When kabam made weak defender, complain. WTF!! looks like complain in our dna.

I didn't say I hate diversity as a whole, I said that I didn't like how it was executed. It IS a good idea, I already mentioned at least I don't have to fight the same defenders again and again.

And what exactly is wrong with complaining? People who blindly complain without giving justified reasoning are the ones you should be disliking. These are the forums, there will always be disagreements and criticism because nothing is perfect. At least I gave my own reason as to why diversity isn't perfect now, don't try and derail this thread and make it personal.

Phantom

chunkyb wrote: »

Stop saying bad things about diversity. The whole game should be like act 1 and they should add a part where I can dress my champs up in different outfits. More diversity! T4cc should be for everyone in a weekly calendar and I should be able to trade good selfies for battle chips. And whoever can take the most diverse selfies gets a blue title.

Dude. Kabam needs to hire you.

DNA3000

chunkyb wrote: »

Stop saying bad things about diversity. The whole game should be like act 1 and they should add a part where I can dress my champs up in different outfits. More diversity! T4cc should be for everyone in a weekly calendar and I should be able to trade good selfies for battle chips. And whoever can take the most diverse selfies gets a blue title.

Unfortunately, this is the second snarky post you placed in this thread. That will cost you 125 forum points.

unknown

This content has been removed.

chunkyb

I'll make up for it with MORE diversity and better selfies.

And you just wait until the Halls of Diversity special quest comes up this month. I'm going for the legend title. I hear each digit of your final time must be unique to qualify.

KhanMedina

Rotmgmoddy wrote: »

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

Put a high sig karnak on an s2 preferred node and he isn't bad at all. He shrugs off stuns almost instantly.
You have a point but wrong example.

Sirnoob

chunkyb wrote: »

I too hate to be challenged. Difficult things make me have the sads. I don't want to spend time getting good at the game. And if I can't have the same champs that people have worked their butts off for over years of playing, I'm glad that kabam has made it where they can't use them without getting a penalty. Maybe soon, I'll be able to have the uncollected perks without having to face the collector too. Can we just skip act 4 now and get the rewards if we tried really hard?

Waiting for the update where when someone looses in a quest they get the same rewards as someone who beat it can't have people upset about loosing in a contest also new loosing animation where ur opponent pats u on the head and says u did great for trying here's a thanks for participating trophy

TKal

I like the diversity alone.
But we need defender kills points back in some way
And some challenge... new GA is soooo easy... at least hide the class of the champs...

Cassy

JazzyJeff1981 wrote: »

Not everyone wants wars to be easy... Some of us like the difficult fights. I hate wars now... boring...

Yeah, cause fighting 5 elektro in middle path 14 war is absolutly not boring. Got it.

I would like dress up Options. Even streetfigter got that Feature.

DNA3000

Sirnoob wrote: »

chunkyb wrote: »

I too hate to be challenged. Difficult things make me have the sads. I don't want to spend time getting good at the game. And if I can't have the same champs that people have worked their butts off for over years of playing, I'm glad that kabam has made it where they can't use them without getting a penalty. Maybe soon, I'll be able to have the uncollected perks without having to face the collector too. Can we just skip act 4 now and get the rewards if we tried really hard?

Waiting for the update where when someone looses in a quest they get the same rewards as someone who beat it can't have people upset about loosing in a contest also new loosing animation where ur opponent pats u on the head and says u did great for trying here's a thanks for participating trophy

This should be Deadpool's special three animation.

Rotmgmoddy

KhanMedina wrote: »

Rotmgmoddy wrote: »

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

Put a high sig karnak on an s2 preferred node and he isn't bad at all. He shrugs off stuns almost instantly.
You have a point but wrong example.

That's really just view wise. Some people will find some champs hard, while those same champs may be seen as easier by most other players.

Karnak is just one example. For me, his L2 is extremely easy to avoid, and none of his abilities are really life threatening and can easily be countered. He just won't do good in defense against most players.

As for the stun shrug off, that's really just ok at best. It's just like stun immune. Since stun immune is best paired with passive evade but he has none, there really isn't much of an impact with that stun shrug off. So yea, that's why I used him as an example, he is just not good for defense

Millybear

Imran wrote: »

All blaming kabam for defender diversity! But, with diversity u can use more champ. We use unnecessary champ just in arena. Now, we can use different champ in aw too. Also for this aw fight seems like easy. Now, aw not fill up with spiderman, jugg, nc, iceman, magic. It's a great move by kabam I think.

Did they brainwashed you??!!

Voluntaris

forum post with a positive view of unskilled Diversity Parade (previously known as "Wars") - of course it stays open and isn't told to take discussion to main thread.

GroundedWisdom

Whether executed properly or not, I agree with the OP. Diversity is a good thing.

Phantom

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Whether executed properly or not, I agree with the OP. Diversity is a good thing.

I still don't understand you.

1King_Jerry

KhanMedina wrote: »

Rotmgmoddy wrote: »

I appreciate the fact that I don't have to fight like, 5 Magiks in a row. But now, diversity is the game decider, and it's all thanks to the flawed scoring system now (mostly due to the removal of defender kills).

Diversity is supposed to encourage a variety of defenders to be used. Instead, it is forcing us to bring not just a variety of defenders, but a variety of **** defenders. Out of 50 defenders in your BG, pretty much half of them can't do good in defense. I mean, really, Karnak for defense? No one does that willingly, because they are now forced.

Diversity is a good idea but when put together with this new scoring system, it's pretty bad

Put a high sig karnak on an s2 preferred node and he isn't bad at all. He shrugs off stuns almost instantly.
You have a point but wrong example.

Okay then fight him like a stun immune other than the no stun thing hes **** on defence and specials are amongst the easiest in the game to avoid

Fraggy

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

GroundedWisdom

Fraggy wrote: »

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

The problem with that suggestion is it would create the same scenario of having a penalty for making an effort. Item Use, Defender Kills, all the same thing.

Fraggy

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Fraggy wrote: »

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

The problem with that suggestion is it would create the same scenario of having a penalty for making an effort. Item Use, Defender Kills, all the same thing.

Not necessarily. If I am low on health, with defender kills, I might not even want to try at all to save on the kill. But if we use item use, I can give it a try and do some damage without using any items. That way I atleast get to try once and after that whether to revive or not is upto the individual or alliance's strategy.

GroundedWisdom

Fraggy wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Fraggy wrote: »

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

The problem with that suggestion is it would create the same scenario of having a penalty for making an effort. Item Use, Defender Kills, all the same thing.

Not necessarily. If I am low on health, with defender kills, I might not even want to try at all to save on the kill. But if we use item use, I can give it a try and do some damage without using any items. That way I atleast get to try once and after that whether to revive or not is upto the individual or alliance's strategy.

That creates the same problem. People would stop trying because they're concerned about giving Points for Items. If they stop trying, things don't get done, and they lose regardless. It shouldn't be a scenario where you have to sacrifice effort for losing through penalty. It means a Loss/Loss situation.

Phantom

Fraggy wrote: »

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

It actually is the tiebreaker. Offense is too easy at this point. We all tie with Offense. It always comes down to Diversity and Rating. Most AW matchups are with similarly rated alliances, so the deciding factor is almost always Diversity.

DNA3000

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Fraggy wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Fraggy wrote: »

AW was becoming like AQ. You use the same champs for attack, fighting almost the same champs every time. I think defender diversity is good. This makes sure every war is slightly different based on other alliance's roster.
I guess the problem is that they have given too many points to defender diversity, so instead of being a tiebreaker, it is turning out to be the main factor in wins.
May be instead of expecting 50 different champs in every BG, they could do like 30-35. This gives some scope for using good champs but also forces to use some different champs. So we do get some good challenging fights but not like 10 magiks and 10 NC and 10 dormammus.
Also if they dont wanna count defender kills then add may be something like items used or damage taken numbers to final score?

The problem with that suggestion is it would create the same scenario of having a penalty for making an effort. Item Use, Defender Kills, all the same thing.

Not necessarily. If I am low on health, with defender kills, I might not even want to try at all to save on the kill. But if we use item use, I can give it a try and do some damage without using any items. That way I atleast get to try once and after that whether to revive or not is upto the individual or alliance's strategy.

That creates the same problem. People would stop trying because they're concerned about giving Points for Items. If they stop trying, things don't get done, and they lose regardless. It shouldn't be a scenario where you have to sacrifice effort for losing through penalty. It means a Loss/Loss situation.

Reduce the damage of defenders to zero. That solves the problem much more directly than the current system does.