There definitely are prime defenders but that would actually work out. If you go diverse you know you may not get many kills until it counts, then your minis and boss can put in work. On the flip side, going against a diverse defense means you can't slip up or you give them extra points. Save those deaths for when it's necessary.
Same for going strong. Dying doesn't hurt as much, so people won't quit like is believed. They aren't giving that many points away as an individual, but if everyone on your side is doing poorly it will add up and you probably weren't getting to 100% anyway.
Even though people are getting 100% regularly, they still die some.. and the tiebreaker is combination of diversity and kills. Remove the rating factor entirely.
Diversity should be a multiplier for defense kills. More diverse defense gets a higher multiplier, thus more points for kills. It adds a little strategy back, at least. Do we go for a strong defense and get more, less valuable, kills, or a diverse one which will get fewer kills, but more points for each. That took me 30 seconds to come up with, so I'm sure it could be improved but damn does it sound better than the current system and it gets that diversity metric included?
Sounds good, until you try to put real numbers on such a suggestion and meta-game it out in your head. I can't think of a way to do that which works. Most of the time, I come up with a system that encourages racking up the maximum number of kills and screw the multiplier, or a multipler so low you might as well place the maximum diversity defense and hope for a lucky kill or just count on the miniboss kills.
If I may present a not quite accurate but illustrative mathematical analogy. Using linear scoring and proportional multipliers means the tradeoff between kills and multipliers looks like a line - a linear graph. Lines can only slope one way, to the left or to the right. And that means the best ("highest") point on the tradeoff curve is either absolute far right or absolute far left. Which means you'll be driven to either maximum diversity or completely ignoring diversity. To design the tradeoff so that it is perfectly level and all points are equally high is virtually impossible, and worse if all points are equally good then nothing stops players from going back to 14.0 placement and putting ten Magik's everywhere.
If you want players to move towards some happy middle ground, the extreme left and the extreme right must be worse than the middle. The tradeoff "math" has to look like an upside down horseshoe. Linear scoring can't really do that. You always end up with a flat, straight line.
Youd probably want a balance. Strong champs on good nodes, and diverse filler on the steamroll easy nodes. Perhaps the multiplier scales higher on the diverse end, giving those that go fully diverse the most potential, knowing that a skilled alliance may negate much of it through not dying.
I know math isn't Kabams strong suit, lol, but you could devise a formula that couldn't be set in stone.. especially considering the other alliance has the opportunity to set your potential score as well.
I know my reply will be not popular. Well, maybe it will be not read neither, like I've not read the almost 70 pages here. Anyway here I go.
After all, I think this change was made in the right way.
Kabam wanted diversity and Everyone was begging for diversity.
Now we have Diversity. AND Defenders Kills should be out. Yep, it should be removed.
Why? if people could score points with Defenders Kills, then people will pass of Defenders Diversity and stay with their Kill-makers Defenders.
It's pretty evident. And you can know it just reading people here, everyone is pissed out because they now should use different champs, rank up new champs and their champs already ranked up for the only purpose AWD are a waste. If they could choose between DDiversity points and DKills points they will stay with DK because they are already have the champs and they are points factories.
About people complaining because some Wars are lose just because DD points, well it will happen no matter the system. In the former system we lost Wars despite we had more kills just because the other team had High Rated Defenders. I.e. maybe it was the exact same thing because they had maybe some "specials" high pi champs and we were screwed. Even, if they had just normal champs but ultra maxed then the fair we should won anyway because we were skillest beating stronger enemies and it was easier for them; but we lost and nobody cried because it was already the system.
No matter the system, if you can find a guilty for the lose you will do it, but people is prone to do it just when a new "unfair" system is released.
You are completely incorrect. The only and I mean only difference between scores when both teams max everything is defender rating. This means the higher ranked team ALWAYS wins. Not sometimes. Not usually. Not 99 percent. 100 percent. Because they have a higher defender rating. The skill shown by the lower rated team is irrelevant. Oh great there’s diversity. Now have zero chance to win against a higher rated alliance.
Youd probably want a balance. Strong champs on good nodes, and diverse filler on the steamroll easy nodes. Perhaps the multiplier scales higher on the diverse end, giving those that go fully diverse the most potential, knowing that a skilled alliance may negate much of it through not dying.
I know math isn't Kabams strong suit, lol, but you could devise a formula that couldn't be set in stone.. especially considering the other alliance has the opportunity to set your potential score as well.
I think if I tried to provide a rigorous proof of the simple analogy I presented, I would be burned at the stake.
Well I'm sure we could hash out a system that works and incorporates elements desired by both players and Kabam, but I get paid for that at work. I only offer what I can muster here in the slim hope the game becomes exciting again.
Well I'm sure we could hash out a system that works and incorporates elements desired by both players and Kabam, but I get paid for that at work. I only offer what I can muster here in the slim hope the game becomes exciting again.
A system is of course possible. I just said that one that only makes linear changes to scoring can't address all of the problems the current system contains.
I probably would build one if they asked. I have a pretty good idea what it would look like now, depending on the parameters it would have to operate under. But the devs have no way to distinguish me from the million other players that think they can design game systems on a folded napkin in a couple minutes.
Honestly, there's such an easy fix for Wars, diversity, and MYstic issues.
1 battlegroup, 50 defenders, 6 classes available:
a)50/6=8
Limit the defenders to 8 per class as mandatory. Once 8 of a kind has been deployed in a single battlegroup, you can no longer place any other champs of that class.
b)Of the 2 spots remaning, make them act as "Jollies". Give em a special node pheraps (50% bane?), and apply a DIVERSITY bonus if there's 6 different jollies among the 3 groups not being a double of any other placed champ.
c) mini-bosses and boss MUST be different classes.
What you can fix with it?
1) Mystic Wars. Yes, we'll still fight Magiks, Dormis, and Hoods, but 8 x Group aren't that bad.
2)DIversity. Diversity will still be achieved, just not being the only scoring point anymore. You'll be forced to diversity by having to balance out the number of champs x class to deploy.
3)Mystic bottleneck on minis-boss section: having to need 6 diff classes for these 6 diff nodes makes it perfect.
4)Jollies: there's lots of new things you can make out with them!
5)Defenders kills: as mystic wars would be solved, defenders kills can indeed count again.
If Kabam chose not to go the harder route of properly balancing nodes and champions, then the solution would indeed be along these principles:
1. Victory would be determined by attacker and defender kills.
2. Diversity would be ensured through some mechanism at placement phase, NOT through points given at the end.
The mechanism for diversity would have to be balanced carefully for lower level players as they typically don't have a broad roster.
I think kabam went to this extreme with war so that we as a player base will accept some sort of middle ground. Think about it, in 12.0, they went extreme on nerfing the top champs, then brought up sw and thor to be a little better. They'll probably do the same with war, they'll add defender kills but it won't be the same competitiveness and skill required as before. Just my prediction based on past experience.
The real ,problem is that Kabam will take the fastest, easiest, cheapest way out. Sorry to bring it up again, but look at MD and dexterity. It takes more than a few minutes to fix this obviously broken mechanic so they just rebuild war to try and lessen the impact? A bit like killing the patient to cure the disease.
Expecting complicated scoring systems that really don't help their content creation isn't in the cards. Even returning defensive kills isn't going to solve the awful map design, time commitment and truly uninspired nodes.
The biggest problem I am seeing with diversity at the moment (moving away from the scoring issue) is players are now being told who to rank up. Do it, or get out. Don't think this is something avoidable if you want to stay in a competitive alliance.
This goes against what Kabam wanted for players in the past and why certain events were removed from the game.
The real ,problem is that Kabam will take the fastest, easiest, cheapest way out. Sorry to bring it up again, but look at MD and dexterity. It takes more than a few minutes to fix this obviously broken mechanic so they just rebuild war to try and lessen the impact? A bit like killing the patient to cure the disease.
Expecting complicated scoring systems that really don't help their content creation isn't in the cards. Even returning defensive kills isn't going to solve the awful map design, time commitment and truly uninspired nodes.
Makes me sad that they deleted your post because you spoke your mind
The biggest problem I am seeing with diversity at the moment (moving away from the scoring issue) is players are now being told who to rank up. Do it, or get out. Don't think this is something avoidable if you want to stay in a competitive alliance.
This goes against what Kabam wanted for players in the past and why certain events were removed from the game.
That's going to really suck if/when they fix the system. I know you're against them but the demand for RDTs will be high.
The biggest problem I am seeing with diversity at the moment (moving away from the scoring issue) is players are now being told who to rank up. Do it, or get out. Don't think this is something avoidable if you want to stay in a competitive alliance.
This goes against what Kabam wanted for players in the past and why certain events were removed from the game.
That's going to really suck if/when they fix the system. I know you're against them but the demand for RDTs will be high.
Yes, I am against them. But I'm not closed minded. When this all went down I stayed against them until reading peoples thoughts and opened up to the idea and supported them, very briefly. I reverted back to being against them after simply seeing the number of people using this as a means to abuse them.
Who knows what side I'll support after the final changes of AW are upon us. I simply argue that with changes still happening that its to soon to demand them since what we are currently suffering isn't what they were intended for. We are hitting that hellacious point of frustration though while we continue to have to play blind and avoid rank ups until Kabam pulls us out of the dark. But others are currently being forced into rank ups that could eventually hold no value with the next changes......I hate the thought of that.
i have really enjoyed playing this game but it has lost the most interesting part in the aw changes. i’m close to hanging it up. i know the standard response to that is “leave then, nobody is forcing you to stay.” whoever wants to say that, you are correct.
I am getting close to that point as well. But its many other factors other than just this AW. In general its the creativity that I am not seeing.
Anymore I am just here in hopes that Kabam will find away to make this game enjoyable again. AW 2.0 was just a hard kick in the ass.
i have really enjoyed playing this game but it has lost the most interesting part in the aw changes. i’m close to hanging it up. i know the standard response to that is “leave then, nobody is forcing you to stay.” whoever wants to say that, you are correct.
I am getting close to that point as well. But its many other factors other than just this AW. In general its the creativity that I am not seeing.
Anymore I am just here in hopes that Kabam will find away to make this game enjoyable again. AW 2.0 was just a hard kick in the ass.
I'm right there as well. If war stays at a place where we are ranking up horrendous defenders just for the sake of diversity, I'm done playing. My alliance did fairly well for our size in the previous war setup, not we keep having to fight against alliances ranked millions ahead of us and we just can't compete with their defender rating.
Losing sucks and winning isn't really much better... I don't want to win or lose like this.
I'm trying to be patient about it... but as I posted before, Kabam fixed the 0 defender placement exploit very quickly by adjusting the points for attacker kills. It should have taken them the same amount of time to realize the need defender kills back.
While the new system is continuing much frustration it seems the lack of feedback given to players is causing more damage and frustration.
Cant help but feel Kabam is failing us right now. Currently 81 pages of debates and feedback and much of it being a majority of players wanting the same thing. Why are we still in the dark? How long does it really take for a full development team to sit around and decide what changes are needed when many answers are sitting on this thread? By now I feel we should have gotten an announcement to inform us of what changes are coming so we know what to expect. For them saying their goal is to give us enough heads up on upcoming changes or new content they seem to truly be letting us down right now. We have no clue what we should be doing as we wait while others are assuming this is how it is and currently attempting to make changes or being forced to by others. I can easily see many players get the shaft when this is all said and done.
While the new system is continuing much frustration it seems the lack of feedback given to players is causing more damage and frustration.
Cant help but feel Kabam is failing us right now. Currently 81 pages of debates and feedback and much of it being a majority of players wanting the same thing. Why are we still in the dark? How long does it really take for a full development team to sit around and decide what changes are needed when many answers are sitting on this thread? By now I feel we should have gotten an announcement to inform us of what changes are coming so we know what to expect. For them saying their goal is to give us enough heads up on upcoming changes or new content they seem to truly be letting us down right now. We have no clue what we should be doing as we wait while others are assuming this is how it is and currently attempting to make changes or being forced to by others. I can easily see many players get the shaft when this is all said and done.
Meanwhile we are losing war after war even hitting 100% in all BG with less deaths than the opponent with 150 diversity. What a wonderful system.
Comments
Same for going strong. Dying doesn't hurt as much, so people won't quit like is believed. They aren't giving that many points away as an individual, but if everyone on your side is doing poorly it will add up and you probably weren't getting to 100% anyway.
Even though people are getting 100% regularly, they still die some.. and the tiebreaker is combination of diversity and kills. Remove the rating factor entirely.
Sounds good, until you try to put real numbers on such a suggestion and meta-game it out in your head. I can't think of a way to do that which works. Most of the time, I come up with a system that encourages racking up the maximum number of kills and screw the multiplier, or a multipler so low you might as well place the maximum diversity defense and hope for a lucky kill or just count on the miniboss kills.
If I may present a not quite accurate but illustrative mathematical analogy. Using linear scoring and proportional multipliers means the tradeoff between kills and multipliers looks like a line - a linear graph. Lines can only slope one way, to the left or to the right. And that means the best ("highest") point on the tradeoff curve is either absolute far right or absolute far left. Which means you'll be driven to either maximum diversity or completely ignoring diversity. To design the tradeoff so that it is perfectly level and all points are equally high is virtually impossible, and worse if all points are equally good then nothing stops players from going back to 14.0 placement and putting ten Magik's everywhere.
If you want players to move towards some happy middle ground, the extreme left and the extreme right must be worse than the middle. The tradeoff "math" has to look like an upside down horseshoe. Linear scoring can't really do that. You always end up with a flat, straight line.
I know math isn't Kabams strong suit, lol, but you could devise a formula that couldn't be set in stone.. especially considering the other alliance has the opportunity to set your potential score as well.
You are completely incorrect. The only and I mean only difference between scores when both teams max everything is defender rating. This means the higher ranked team ALWAYS wins. Not sometimes. Not usually. Not 99 percent. 100 percent. Because they have a higher defender rating. The skill shown by the lower rated team is irrelevant. Oh great there’s diversity. Now have zero chance to win against a higher rated alliance.
I think if I tried to provide a rigorous proof of the simple analogy I presented, I would be burned at the stake.
A system is of course possible. I just said that one that only makes linear changes to scoring can't address all of the problems the current system contains.
I probably would build one if they asked. I have a pretty good idea what it would look like now, depending on the parameters it would have to operate under. But the devs have no way to distinguish me from the million other players that think they can design game systems on a folded napkin in a couple minutes.
If Kabam chose not to go the harder route of properly balancing nodes and champions, then the solution would indeed be along these principles:
1. Victory would be determined by attacker and defender kills.
2. Diversity would be ensured through some mechanism at placement phase, NOT through points given at the end.
The mechanism for diversity would have to be balanced carefully for lower level players as they typically don't have a broad roster.
Expecting complicated scoring systems that really don't help their content creation isn't in the cards. Even returning defensive kills isn't going to solve the awful map design, time commitment and truly uninspired nodes.
This goes against what Kabam wanted for players in the past and why certain events were removed from the game.
Makes me sad that they deleted your post because you spoke your mind
Diversity Parade "wars" make me sad
That's going to really suck if/when they fix the system. I know you're against them but the demand for RDTs will be high.
Yes, I am against them. But I'm not closed minded. When this all went down I stayed against them until reading peoples thoughts and opened up to the idea and supported them, very briefly. I reverted back to being against them after simply seeing the number of people using this as a means to abuse them.
Who knows what side I'll support after the final changes of AW are upon us. I simply argue that with changes still happening that its to soon to demand them since what we are currently suffering isn't what they were intended for. We are hitting that hellacious point of frustration though while we continue to have to play blind and avoid rank ups until Kabam pulls us out of the dark. But others are currently being forced into rank ups that could eventually hold no value with the next changes......I hate the thought of that.
Anymore I am just here in hopes that Kabam will find away to make this game enjoyable again. AW 2.0 was just a hard kick in the ass.
I'm right there as well. If war stays at a place where we are ranking up horrendous defenders just for the sake of diversity, I'm done playing. My alliance did fairly well for our size in the previous war setup, not we keep having to fight against alliances ranked millions ahead of us and we just can't compete with their defender rating.
Losing sucks and winning isn't really much better... I don't want to win or lose like this.
I'm trying to be patient about it... but as I posted before, Kabam fixed the 0 defender placement exploit very quickly by adjusting the points for attacker kills. It should have taken them the same amount of time to realize the need defender kills back.
Cant help but feel Kabam is failing us right now. Currently 81 pages of debates and feedback and much of it being a majority of players wanting the same thing. Why are we still in the dark? How long does it really take for a full development team to sit around and decide what changes are needed when many answers are sitting on this thread? By now I feel we should have gotten an announcement to inform us of what changes are coming so we know what to expect. For them saying their goal is to give us enough heads up on upcoming changes or new content they seem to truly be letting us down right now. We have no clue what we should be doing as we wait while others are assuming this is how it is and currently attempting to make changes or being forced to by others. I can easily see many players get the shaft when this is all said and done.
Meanwhile we are losing war after war even hitting 100% in all BG with less deaths than the opponent with 150 diversity. What a wonderful system.
edit: whoever flagged me can eat ****
Awesome. 1.5 mil higher rated alliance. We play better and will lose because they ranked up bad champs.
Fix the damn game.
Guess you don't remember when Adora told the community to "Adapt" when they made a change to the game.
Did not know. My bad if that was a reference to a kabam post..