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

DNA3000

ChiSox_2005 wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

ChiSox_2005 wrote: »

Let's face the truth. This is all about MONEY! Until they bring back Defender Kills, any Alliance can bring max diversity and BUY THE WIN.

I don't think this is necessarily generating revenue. The higher diversity defense placements are also easier to kill. Combined with the easier nodes, I'm mostly just walking through my paths. I'm one of the stronger attackers in my alliance so that's not a universal thing, but my experience is that in making the attack phase easier, it is likely that less players are spending less units on less potions in Alliance War. Yes, you can buy victories. But I don't think as many alliances have to buy completions now.

Win or lose, I'm spending measurably less on war now. I don't think I'm a wide outlier.

I think you make a great point, but what you are missing is that this has opened the door for weaker alliance to beat stronger alliances (7M vs 10M). That is why we continue to see alliances losing when they dominate the defender kills colum (120 vs 100). These alliance are not walking through like you. They are buying their way through and winning on diversity rather than skill.

I'm not specifically missing that point: it has been discussed in the thread more than once. But that doesn't change the fact that while it is possible to "buy a win" as you put it, that doesn't mean Kabam did this to make money, or that they are even making any money. If you change the game in a way that causes some people to spend more, and everyone else to spend less, you still net less. And Kabam had to know that this was a major possibility because they deliberately made the nodes weaker, and specifically said they made them weaker to make it more likely for attackers to be able to progress through the map.

Whatever else you might think about Kabam, if they deliberately make a change designed to make it easier for attackers to progress and actually say so, you can't really think they were trying to make money with that change directly. That's obviously counterproductive.

It does make AW less competitive in terms of having wars decided by the skill of the opponents, and I've acknowledged that as a central problem with 15.0, but that's about Kabam devaluing competition, not being greedy.

DJSergy

Another AW series without kabam making any comments on their progress to fix this broken, boring AW system. We don’t even suffle defenders anymore in AW, its so lame....

What more data collection, feedback and iteration is needed? Do you guys even have a beta out there with new ideas that are testing with players???? Thats how you want to reestablish your trust amougn the community? This is getting ridiculous!

Yet kabam find time to release new content like this new 6* boss quest. Bring back fun and competition to AW before it is too late and you continue to lose players.

Raganator

DJSergy wrote: »

Another AW series without kabam making any comments on their progress to fix this broken, boring AW system.

You could view this as a positive in that maybe they are working on serious fix to AW and its just taking longer.

Just kidding. They suck.

Zhorla

Sorry for my english , i m a french player since 3 years ... i wrote here cause on french forum nobody answers ! Your new alliance war strategy is a joke ! That is ont a war but just a mathematic strategy to find our best diversitate team ... what a Pity ! If we are looking for strategy there is a lot of betterave games for that .
Another point , i rank my **** 5* juggernaut to rank 4 a few months ago for AW. He is always doing lot of kills and give a lot of points for my team . Now is ridiculous cause kills doesn't count anymore . So i Want to derank it because he is really bad now !!
You choose to change rules !!

Kabam ( mike or anyone else) will you take your responsabilities ?? Now when we find a war , We know who will ne victorious whitout fighting ... we just look for points to win or loose ...
Thank you for that a lot of good player stop thé game and some big french teams stops due to new AW ... do something or die !!!!!

nuggz

I'm in an 11 mill alliance. Every war we have had has been decided by defender rating....
Every alliance has maxed out defender diveristy and 100% the maps.

It doesn't feel great eight way in aw (win/lose)
The wars we win feel like is wasn't fair. The wars we lose feel even worse since rating seals the win/lose.

There hasn't been one war that's been enjoyable at all. No fun!

We play this game for the rush (adrenaline)
The challenge makes it fun. That's gone now. I'm trying to stalk all the bosses in aq now just for some fun. Doing multiple m6 a week just to have a reason to use some items

nuggz

We need REAL answers!!! What is kabam trying to do to fix this. What do they have in mind? They already how we feel and we know kabam recognized a problem. Now tell us what the future goals are? Specifics!!!!

R4GE

Hey Miike, its been 6 days now since our last update. Any info to share or at the least a rough idea of when we can expect to see some changes?

We have been dealing with this dreadful system for a while now and have no clue what changes are coming or when. Not only is war just unenjoyable but its getting highly frustrating going this long not knowing if we should or shouldn't rank up since any new changes to come could effect many choices we make while we wait.

Don't mean to pour the pressure on for answers, but we are feeling the struggle on our end.

unknown

This content has been removed.

winterthur

Kabam Miike wrote: »

This is exactly what I talked about with Sctty2hotty33_, we don't need "pressure" to make changes. We already agree that there is work that needs to be done with Alliance Wars, especially from where it started with this iteration. We're getting closer to where we want to be with Alliance Wars, and we'll know more after this series of wars finish.

We are committed to making sure we make this mode the best that it can be! We're not giving up, and we want to work with you guys to make it happen. We understand that it's frustrating that it's taking a while, but this might take a few more iterations. Hopefully not many, but we're going to have to wait and see where we're at soon!

Where there a thread some where Q&A was exchanged?

hurricant

winterthur wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

This is exactly what I talked about with Sctty2hotty33_, we don't need "pressure" to make changes. We already agree that there is work that needs to be done with Alliance Wars, especially from where it started with this iteration. We're getting closer to where we want to be with Alliance Wars, and we'll know more after this series of wars finish.

We are committed to making sure we make this mode the best that it can be! We're not giving up, and we want to work with you guys to make it happen. We understand that it's frustrating that it's taking a while, but this might take a few more iterations. Hopefully not many, but we're going to have to wait and see where we're at soon!

Where there a thread some where Q&A was exchanged?

They read all our feedback, disregard it, and do whatever they want to do.

Just bring back defender kills please. That's all we want. Is that so much to ask?

NinjaWarrior99

alliance war is broken and needs to be fixed. thank you. add points for defender kills. seems like an easy fix. only difficulty should be determining the right point value for defender kills. diversity points can stay.

if both teams 100% their map and have 150 diversity, my alliance should not lose by 150 points when the other alliance had 63 defender kills and we had 131. that is ****.

Greywarden

I think it's easy enough of a calculation.

Leave diversity as is, 50 points per.
Bring back defender kills at either the same points or less (probably less to accomplish what they wanted originally).
As an example, at 25 points per defender kill you have the ability to choose between diversity or a defender you think will get you more than 2 kills.

My group has had situation where we had 95 more defender kills than the other group and lost...

WOK

I'd like to reiterate what many have expressed, that the AW nodes are without a doubt, near meaningless. We recently had a war against a group a bit stronger than us by roughly 2mil alliance rating. I joined atk with my "3rd string" ATK champs because it was just short of a guarantee we were going to lose knowing what we know about the scoring system post 15.0.

I walked through linked noded champs and the mini with 1 champ KO'd by the miniboss mainly due to my own misstep. Those same opponent champs in the 1st gen. AW? I never would have considered taking them on with links up and definitely wouldnt have been able to beat them with my 3rd string champs without risking a team KO long before the miniboss even if I had played perfectly.

In the previous version it would have been a tough match indeed, but definitely within our reach to pull out a close victory if we played well. I can imagine that it could have been a very exciting fight for all of us instead of the current snoozefest where we haven't even bothered to talk about strategy with lane assignments, how many kills we have compared to theirs(because they no longer matter), which team member we're going to "carry" to the boss etc........

I truly cannot seem to find anything about the new format that resonates any excitment for me and my teammates. I'm nearly in shock to realize and admit that AQ is actually more engaging than AW now. That is in no way a "good thing" in my book.

Voluntaris

NinjaWarrior99 wrote: »

alliance war is broken and needs to be fixed. thank you. add points for defender kills. seems like an easy fix. only difficulty should be determining the right point value for defender kills. diversity points can stay.

if both teams 100% their map and have 150 diversity, my alliance should not lose by 150 points when the other alliance had 63 defender kills and we had 131. that is ****.

think that's bad? we're about to lose a war, both 100% and both 150 diversity ... we died 53 times ... opponents have died 200+ times.

It's disgusting.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Madman_marvin

Bring back defender kills at half the value of attacker kills. Focus stays on attack kills but will reward attackers for dying less. For the love of all things that are good, this war format is complete garbage.

Gamer

Can we Pliz get defener kils back

DNA3000

WOK wrote: »

I'd like to reiterate what many have expressed, that the AW nodes are without a doubt, near meaningless. We recently had a war against a group a bit stronger than us by roughly 2mil alliance rating. I joined atk with my "3rd string" ATK champs because it was just short of a guarantee we were going to lose knowing what we know about the scoring system post 15.0.

I walked through linked noded champs and the mini with 1 champ KO'd by the miniboss mainly due to my own misstep. Those same opponent champs in the 1st gen. AW? I never would have considered taking them on with links up and definitely wouldnt have been able to beat them with my 3rd string champs without risking a team KO long before the miniboss even if I had played perfectly.

In the previous version it would have been a tough match indeed, but definitely within our reach to pull out a close victory if we played well. I can imagine that it could have been a very exciting fight for all of us instead of the current snoozefest where we haven't even bothered to talk about strategy with lane assignments, how many kills we have compared to theirs(because they no longer matter), which team member we're going to "carry" to the boss etc........

I truly cannot seem to find anything about the new format that resonates any excitment for me and my teammates. I'm nearly in shock to realize and admit that AQ is actually more engaging than AW now. That is in no way a "good thing" in my book.

This is an example of a problem I mentioned early on with the current system. It "devolves" to an undesirable state that is very difficult to get out of. Basically, alliances are placing the most diverse defenses possible to get the best diversity points possible, and those defenses are necessarily a lot weaker than you'd expect. This means everyone else must try to match them by also placing highly diverse defenses to try to equalize those diversity points, and then everyone is facing easier defenses. And then the chances of both sides easily completing the map rise substantially.

This is a vicious cycle. If everyone is completing the maps most of the time, diversity points become the most important determiner for who wins. Which forces everyone to maximize those points. Which causes defenses to be weaker. Which causes everyone to complete maps. Which causes everyone to prioritize diversity points even more.

It is easy to say, and I'm guessing the devs themselves might be thinking, that the obvious counter-move is to not place easy defenses. If you place a hard defense you can stop your opponent from completing the map 100% - at least in some tiers of AW - and that would overcome the loss of diversity points. In that way, diversity points are the "tie breaker" they keep mentioning.

The problem is that this ignores game psychology. Any alliance that attempts to use this strategy is taking a huge risk if everyone else doesn't. While you can try to force your opponent to complete less than 100%, in most tiers you can't do that all the time: probably less than half the time at best. In some tiers the odds of forcing an incomplete might be less than 10%. Any strategy that works less than half the time is in effect a losing strategy. Any strategy that works less than 10% of the time is suicide. It is better to place a weak defense and assume your odds of beating your opponent on diversity and rating points is about 50/50. Trying to go against the herd and place non-diverse will generally cause you to lose more wars. This *forces* alliances to shoot for high diversity as the only viable strategy.

This was an early obvious problem I was worried about a few thousand pages ago. It only looks like there are two options for placement, but in fact the current system forces everyone to either conform to one and only one defense strategy or pay the price for trying to be different.

Which is an ironic problem for a diversity system to have.

Greywarden

DNA3000 wrote: »

WOK wrote: »

I'd like to reiterate what many have expressed, that the AW nodes are without a doubt, near meaningless. We recently had a war against a group a bit stronger than us by roughly 2mil alliance rating. I joined atk with my "3rd string" ATK champs because it was just short of a guarantee we were going to lose knowing what we know about the scoring system post 15.0.

I walked through linked noded champs and the mini with 1 champ KO'd by the miniboss mainly due to my own misstep. Those same opponent champs in the 1st gen. AW? I never would have considered taking them on with links up and definitely wouldnt have been able to beat them with my 3rd string champs without risking a team KO long before the miniboss even if I had played perfectly.

In the previous version it would have been a tough match indeed, but definitely within our reach to pull out a close victory if we played well. I can imagine that it could have been a very exciting fight for all of us instead of the current snoozefest where we haven't even bothered to talk about strategy with lane assignments, how many kills we have compared to theirs(because they no longer matter), which team member we're going to "carry" to the boss etc........

I truly cannot seem to find anything about the new format that resonates any excitment for me and my teammates. I'm nearly in shock to realize and admit that AQ is actually more engaging than AW now. That is in no way a "good thing" in my book.

This is an example of a problem I mentioned early on with the current system. It "devolves" to an undesirable state that is very difficult to get out of. Basically, alliances are placing the most diverse defenses possible to get the best diversity points possible, and those defenses are necessarily a lot weaker than you'd expect. This means everyone else must try to match them by also placing highly diverse defenses to try to equalize those diversity points, and then everyone is facing easier defenses. And then the chances of both sides easily completing the map rise substantially.

This is a vicious cycle. If everyone is completing the maps most of the time, diversity points become the most important determiner for who wins. Which forces everyone to maximize those points. Which causes defenses to be weaker. Which causes everyone to complete maps. Which causes everyone to prioritize diversity points even more.

It is easy to say, and I'm guessing the devs themselves might be thinking, that the obvious counter-move is to not place easy defenses. If you place a hard defense you can stop your opponent from completing the map 100% - at least in some tiers of AW - and that would overcome the loss of diversity points. In that way, diversity points are the "tie breaker" they keep mentioning.

The problem is that this ignores game psychology. Any alliance that attempts to use this strategy is taking a huge risk if everyone else doesn't. While you can try to force your opponent to complete less than 100%, in most tiers you can't do that all the time: probably less than half the time at best. In some tiers the odds of forcing an incomplete might be less than 10%. Any strategy that works less than half the time is in effect a losing strategy. Any strategy that works less than 10% of the time is suicide. It is better to place a weak defense and assume your odds of beating your opponent on diversity and rating points is about 50/50. Trying to go against the herd and place non-diverse will generally cause you to lose more wars. This *forces* alliances to shoot for high diversity as the only viable strategy.

This was an early obvious problem I was worried about a few thousand pages ago. It only looks like there are two options for placement, but in fact the current system forces everyone to either conform to one and only one defense strategy or pay the price for trying to be different.

Which is an ironic problem for a diversity system to have.

Exactly! I love your posts, so well thought out. This vicious cycle makes it tough to really do anything but max diversity. On LINE last night we were talking about how ridiculous AW has gotten. People placing Vision and IP solely for diversity and just crossing fingers the group we go against doesn't have a higher rating is ridiculous.

I've said it before and i'll say it again, defender kills are the answer.

nuggz

This is why aw is pointless.
Everything is tied except defender rating. Win/lose this isn't fun. Defender rating is the ONLY tie breaker in our tier.

Make it stop. There's nothing kabam can do with the nodes to make this any different. There's nothing that kabam could do with diversity to make this any different.

The only thing that separates the winners from the loser in a competitive war is defender kills. In which we would have lost that war. I don't feel good about that win.

nuggz

@Kabam Miike

Look at what I'm showing you

nuggz

If they bring back defender kills it needs to be a very small amount like 10 points per death. So diversity will still be the trump but rating won't determine the winner

nuggz

Why can't we get any answers??? Why is this feedback seem like a one way conversation????

nuggz

Answer us!!!!!
What are the plans moving forward?
TELL US EXACTALY WHAT KABAM PLANS ON CHANGING AMD WHAT THEY WILL NOT!!!!!

nuggz

All kabam has to do is tell us specifically what changes they are working on!!! DO NOT GIVE US A GENERAL, VAGUE, SCRIPTED RESPONSE.

The tiny feedback we do get is all just beating around the bush responses and frankly just angers us more. This isn't a government operation where we have classified information. This is general knowledge that needs to spread to the player base.

nuggz

@Kabam Miike
Look at what we are showing you
@Kabam Miike

Huluhula

nuggz wrote: »

@Kabam Miike
Look at what we are showing you
@Kabam Miike

Dude, relax you sound like a wife

nuggz

Huluhula wrote: »

nuggz wrote: »

@Kabam Miike
Look at what we are showing you
@Kabam Miike

Dude, relax you sound like a wife

I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable

nuggz

They've been ignoring all of us!