Vorvancos wrote: » Players - it's bad Kabam - we'll adjust it Players - again it's bad Kabam - we'll adjust it Players - again it's bad Kabam - we're still adjusting ourselves, we are not interested in the players P.S. the stronger the node = less 100% = less diversity
xtremegamer wrote: » Tier 1 wars and we lost
Raganator wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » I think this is a classic example of understanding the words, but not the spirit, of a complaint. This superficially addresses the problem of MD-everywhere, by handing the players a much more nasty alternative. @Kabam Miike basically told us what is going on here when he said that node 24 is working fine, you just have to bring the right attacker. They made AW into you pick the "right" defender and you win, unless the other side picks the "right" attacker and then you lose. Which is kind of a move-counter-move gameplay option but an extremely reductive one, and fundamentally no different from the thorns nodes they got rid of in AW for I can't imagine what reason now. And the hilarious part about this...remember about a year ago when Kabam claimed they wanted all champions to be on more of an even playing field? "We want people to be able to rank the people they like and for them to be useful." Well, node 24 is the new thorns with minimal ways to get around it. Very disingenuous IMO.
DNA3000 wrote: » I think this is a classic example of understanding the words, but not the spirit, of a complaint. This superficially addresses the problem of MD-everywhere, by handing the players a much more nasty alternative. @Kabam Miike basically told us what is going on here when he said that node 24 is working fine, you just have to bring the right attacker. They made AW into you pick the "right" defender and you win, unless the other side picks the "right" attacker and then you lose. Which is kind of a move-counter-move gameplay option but an extremely reductive one, and fundamentally no different from the thorns nodes they got rid of in AW for I can't imagine what reason now.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive.
chunkyb wrote: » This discussion will be as useless as the last, unfortunately. Thousands of replies with good content from players who want a good, fun, challenging, and competitive game were FULLY ignored. The only thing more ridiculous than aw2.0 is the iterative process of adding a few new buffs and constantly saying "we're getting closer". And as long as we're just getting closer but not there yet, we really can't possibly look at war rewards yet. That comes at the end. *wink, wink* If you can't see they don't care about your input now, you never will. This is the game parents play with children.. Child wants to go to the park, parent says we need to do this and this and then we'll see if we can go. This is the relationship we're all in now. Being placated to death while you watch your favorite game fall apart for moronic reasons while trolls and sad wannabe mods spam their unknowledgeable takes. So save your breath. The plan is already laid out and we're marching towards it. You honestly think it takes 2 weeks of monitoring war and meetings/discussions to come up with the idea of adding a few nodes? Pfft. That's ridiculous even for them. If you don't like this ridiculous **** we're having to deal with... Just reply with "defender kills". Forever. Because anything else is wasting your time. Hell, that's wasting time too but at least it'd be fun to see a thread full of those replies and it'd make it a little more difficult for the trolls to respond. Oh yeah. You want things to be done differently? Say so with your wallet.
DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. The great irony here is that Kabam is doing a better job of mooting your position than I ever could. 15.0 AW was in fact a diversity-fest because the difficulty was too low and defender kill points were eliminates causing the best strategy to be full diversity. But ever since then every change has been to crank up node difficulty to the point where 16.0 doesn't just surpass 14.0 in map strength, it almost certainly surpasses 11.0. Kabam is trying to fix diversity-fest with blockade-o-rama and it appears to be working: alliances are moving towards blockade strategies where they have the right defenders. And blockade defenses are about focusing entirely on kills. It is just that instead of getting points for them, the object is to make the defense impassable and cause the other side to give up playing against them altogether. Someone only reading the forums is going to see the complaints about 100% at the top tiers and people spending their way past blockades and defender rating points deciding wars, and think the problem is still the same as it was in 15.0. But it is not. Kabam is turning war into a binary kill-fest where kills are the only thing that matters, but the only measure of effectiveness is for the other side to completely surrender or run out of money. You're totally wrong about war. War will be shifting to blockades, and outside of the very top performers blockades are going to work very often. And blockades are a defense strategy that screams "you died more than us so we're better than you." And Kabam is deliberately making it so. @Kabam Miike's "right attacker" statement all but proves it.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. The great irony here is that Kabam is doing a better job of mooting your position than I ever could. 15.0 AW was in fact a diversity-fest because the difficulty was too low and defender kill points were eliminates causing the best strategy to be full diversity. But ever since then every change has been to crank up node difficulty to the point where 16.0 doesn't just surpass 14.0 in map strength, it almost certainly surpasses 11.0. Kabam is trying to fix diversity-fest with blockade-o-rama and it appears to be working: alliances are moving towards blockade strategies where they have the right defenders. And blockade defenses are about focusing entirely on kills. It is just that instead of getting points for them, the object is to make the defense impassable and cause the other side to give up playing against them altogether. Someone only reading the forums is going to see the complaints about 100% at the top tiers and people spending their way past blockades and defender rating points deciding wars, and think the problem is still the same as it was in 15.0. But it is not. Kabam is turning war into a binary kill-fest where kills are the only thing that matters, but the only measure of effectiveness is for the other side to completely surrender or run out of money. You're totally wrong about war. War will be shifting to blockades, and outside of the very top performers blockades are going to work very often. And blockades are a defense strategy that screams "you died more than us so we're better than you." And Kabam is deliberately making it so. @Kabam Miike's "right attacker" statement all but proves it. You're omitting the part about having a penalty for Kills and Reviving, which is exactly what I was saying. Defense will always be emphasized. That will remain that way, and was stated by them. What is not present is the metrics that allow said attempts to determine the Win. The avenue has changed.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » I'm about done debating whether it was a problem or not.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. The great irony here is that Kabam is doing a better job of mooting your position than I ever could. 15.0 AW was in fact a diversity-fest because the difficulty was too low and defender kill points were eliminates causing the best strategy to be full diversity. But ever since then every change has been to crank up node difficulty to the point where 16.0 doesn't just surpass 14.0 in map strength, it almost certainly surpasses 11.0. Kabam is trying to fix diversity-fest with blockade-o-rama and it appears to be working: alliances are moving towards blockade strategies where they have the right defenders. And blockade defenses are about focusing entirely on kills. It is just that instead of getting points for them, the object is to make the defense impassable and cause the other side to give up playing against them altogether. Someone only reading the forums is going to see the complaints about 100% at the top tiers and people spending their way past blockades and defender rating points deciding wars, and think the problem is still the same as it was in 15.0. But it is not. Kabam is turning war into a binary kill-fest where kills are the only thing that matters, but the only measure of effectiveness is for the other side to completely surrender or run out of money. You're totally wrong about war. War will be shifting to blockades, and outside of the very top performers blockades are going to work very often. And blockades are a defense strategy that screams "you died more than us so we're better than you." And Kabam is deliberately making it so. @Kabam Miike's "right attacker" statement all but proves it. You're omitting the part about having a penalty for Kills and Reviving, which is exactly what I was saying. Defense will always be emphasized. That will remain that way, and was stated by them. What is not present is the metrics that allow said attempts to determine the Win. The avenue has changed. I'm also omitting the part where the dinosaurs ruled the Earth, and then a big meteor killed them all. In the current 16.0 iteration defender kill points are irrelevant to blockades because a successful blockade almost always wins due to the intrinsic loss of points past the blockade and the likelihood of the bosses being to expensive to bring down while the links are still up. It doesn't matter if a blockade wins because it generates points, or a blockade wins because the other side cannot progress. It is still a win generated by placing a defender capable of generating a lot of kills. It is just the extreme end of the scale. Why this is considered reasonable by Kabam when defender kill points are considered unreasonable is inexplicable to (almost) everyone. I'm not debating it endlessly. There is a difference because the issues caused by Defender Kills that were the reason they were removed still stand. Regardless of what the majority thinks, the problems existed. Enough for them to remove them and keep them out. Spending is no more an issue than it was previously. People have always been spending. Difference is people can't penalize the other team with a Loss for doing so. I'm about done debating whether it was a problem or not.
DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. The great irony here is that Kabam is doing a better job of mooting your position than I ever could. 15.0 AW was in fact a diversity-fest because the difficulty was too low and defender kill points were eliminates causing the best strategy to be full diversity. But ever since then every change has been to crank up node difficulty to the point where 16.0 doesn't just surpass 14.0 in map strength, it almost certainly surpasses 11.0. Kabam is trying to fix diversity-fest with blockade-o-rama and it appears to be working: alliances are moving towards blockade strategies where they have the right defenders. And blockade defenses are about focusing entirely on kills. It is just that instead of getting points for them, the object is to make the defense impassable and cause the other side to give up playing against them altogether. Someone only reading the forums is going to see the complaints about 100% at the top tiers and people spending their way past blockades and defender rating points deciding wars, and think the problem is still the same as it was in 15.0. But it is not. Kabam is turning war into a binary kill-fest where kills are the only thing that matters, but the only measure of effectiveness is for the other side to completely surrender or run out of money. You're totally wrong about war. War will be shifting to blockades, and outside of the very top performers blockades are going to work very often. And blockades are a defense strategy that screams "you died more than us so we're better than you." And Kabam is deliberately making it so. @Kabam Miike's "right attacker" statement all but proves it. You're omitting the part about having a penalty for Kills and Reviving, which is exactly what I was saying. Defense will always be emphasized. That will remain that way, and was stated by them. What is not present is the metrics that allow said attempts to determine the Win. The avenue has changed. I'm also omitting the part where the dinosaurs ruled the Earth, and then a big meteor killed them all. In the current 16.0 iteration defender kill points are irrelevant to blockades because a successful blockade almost always wins due to the intrinsic loss of points past the blockade and the likelihood of the bosses being to expensive to bring down while the links are still up. It doesn't matter if a blockade wins because it generates points, or a blockade wins because the other side cannot progress. It is still a win generated by placing a defender capable of generating a lot of kills. It is just the extreme end of the scale. Why this is considered reasonable by Kabam when defender kill points are considered unreasonable is inexplicable to (almost) everyone.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » DNA3000 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. The great irony here is that Kabam is doing a better job of mooting your position than I ever could. 15.0 AW was in fact a diversity-fest because the difficulty was too low and defender kill points were eliminates causing the best strategy to be full diversity. But ever since then every change has been to crank up node difficulty to the point where 16.0 doesn't just surpass 14.0 in map strength, it almost certainly surpasses 11.0. Kabam is trying to fix diversity-fest with blockade-o-rama and it appears to be working: alliances are moving towards blockade strategies where they have the right defenders. And blockade defenses are about focusing entirely on kills. It is just that instead of getting points for them, the object is to make the defense impassable and cause the other side to give up playing against them altogether. Someone only reading the forums is going to see the complaints about 100% at the top tiers and people spending their way past blockades and defender rating points deciding wars, and think the problem is still the same as it was in 15.0. But it is not. Kabam is turning war into a binary kill-fest where kills are the only thing that matters, but the only measure of effectiveness is for the other side to completely surrender or run out of money. You're totally wrong about war. War will be shifting to blockades, and outside of the very top performers blockades are going to work very often. And blockades are a defense strategy that screams "you died more than us so we're better than you." And Kabam is deliberately making it so. @Kabam Miike's "right attacker" statement all but proves it. You're omitting the part about having a penalty for Kills and Reviving, which is exactly what I was saying. Defense will always be emphasized. That will remain that way, and was stated by them. What is not present is the metrics that allow said attempts to determine the Win. The avenue has changed. I'm also omitting the part where the dinosaurs ruled the Earth, and then a big meteor killed them all. In the current 16.0 iteration defender kill points are irrelevant to blockades because a successful blockade almost always wins due to the intrinsic loss of points past the blockade and the likelihood of the bosses being to expensive to bring down while the links are still up. It doesn't matter if a blockade wins because it generates points, or a blockade wins because the other side cannot progress. It is still a win generated by placing a defender capable of generating a lot of kills. It is just the extreme end of the scale. Why this is considered reasonable by Kabam when defender kill points are considered unreasonable is inexplicable to (almost) everyone. I'm not debating it endlessly.
LeNoirFaineant wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. Maybe they shouldn't call it war if it's not about not dying lol. It's War! War is about conquest, not points. I feel like there are some things game related where you can be against the overwhelming opinion of the player base and still be right. I was against the complaining about the Boss Rush and said it would take ten minutes and I got mocked on the forum... turns out I was right. I was for the willpower nerf and the end of the perfect block team and got killed by the majority and it turns out that that was for the best. Kabam isn't always wrong. You seem to take the Kabam line wherever it goes, however, and in this case it's caused you to argue a point that really doesn't make sense. The bottom line for war is really about whether it's fun or not. For the overwhelming majority of the player base, this version of war isn't war and isn't fun. We've had enough iterations to see where it's going and we don't want to go there. We like the old version better. We like the first flawed change better then the current version and find that subsequent iterations have made it worse. We don't want a spend to win war, and say what you want, but in the old version we beat the hell out of some big spenders and laughed at their wasted potion spree. Because skill and defender kills. In what way is penalizing kills not sensible in war lmao. Read that sentence you wrote. It's war but dying shouldn't matter? Anyway, war should be for the players and the players have spoken. We want defender kills and we aren't going to stop wanting defender kills, and no iteration that allows alliances to use all their items to beat a better group is going to satisfy us. #defender kills
GroundedWisdom wrote: » LeNoirFaineant wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » I am not "taking Kabam's side". I happen to agree with the removal of them, and there are many reasons for that. There is a great deal I'd like to say on the matter, but I'm not interested in adding fuel to the fire. If the only enjoyment people got out of War was watching the opponent die more, that's a problem in and of itself. Since you speak about enjoyment, that's what you're saying. In actuality, it's not about enjoyment. It's about the Wins that Defender Kills gave. All the talk about skill and enjoyment is pretty one-sided to me. War has never been about Defender Kills. Not by design. It became that over time, as new Champs and Nodes allowed for greater Kills. Sorry that you feel I don't make sense, but I'm editing because my plain thoughts would no doubt get people going, and I'm ready to move on in the discussion. They're gone. It's time to move on. Ive got an idea how we could possibly datamine without a doubt whether the majority of players are for or against the current war setup and if we believe defender kills caused such a problem to warrant removal from scoring. Reintroduce the original AW system alongside the current one. Alliances can choose 1 or the other to participate in. IMO, I dont think it would take that long to get a definitive answer, but lets say we run it for about 2 months(which is similar to the time its taking for the "iterations"). The number of participants and contested wars in each should paint a clear picture on which the player base is more interested in wouldn't you say?
LeNoirFaineant wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » I am not "taking Kabam's side". I happen to agree with the removal of them, and there are many reasons for that. There is a great deal I'd like to say on the matter, but I'm not interested in adding fuel to the fire. If the only enjoyment people got out of War was watching the opponent die more, that's a problem in and of itself. Since you speak about enjoyment, that's what you're saying. In actuality, it's not about enjoyment. It's about the Wins that Defender Kills gave. All the talk about skill and enjoyment is pretty one-sided to me. War has never been about Defender Kills. Not by design. It became that over time, as new Champs and Nodes allowed for greater Kills. Sorry that you feel I don't make sense, but I'm editing because my plain thoughts would no doubt get people going, and I'm ready to move on in the discussion. They're gone. It's time to move on. Ive got an idea how we could possibly datamine without a doubt whether the majority of players are for or against the current war setup and if we believe defender kills caused such a problem to warrant removal from scoring. Reintroduce the original AW system alongside the current one. Alliances can choose 1 or the other to participate in. IMO, I dont think it would take that long to get a definitive answer, but lets say we run it for about 2 months(which is similar to the time its taking for the "iterations"). The number of participants and contested wars in each should paint a clear picture on which the player base is more interested in wouldn't you say?
GroundedWisdom wrote: » I am not "taking Kabam's side". I happen to agree with the removal of them, and there are many reasons for that. There is a great deal I'd like to say on the matter, but I'm not interested in adding fuel to the fire. If the only enjoyment people got out of War was watching the opponent die more, that's a problem in and of itself. Since you speak about enjoyment, that's what you're saying. In actuality, it's not about enjoyment. It's about the Wins that Defender Kills gave. All the talk about skill and enjoyment is pretty one-sided to me. War has never been about Defender Kills. Not by design. It became that over time, as new Champs and Nodes allowed for greater Kills. Sorry that you feel I don't make sense, but I'm editing because my plain thoughts would no doubt get people going, and I'm ready to move on in the discussion. They're gone. It's time to move on.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » LeNoirFaineant wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » War is about Points. Working together as a team to gain more Points. It's not about who dies less. "You died more than us so we're better than you.", is not the focus of Wars. The metrics used to include Defender Kills. Now they don't. Which means the issue is where the Points are coming from, and including a different element that accommodates interaction. The focus has been on Defender Kills so long that people have lost sight of the fact that the point is to make it as far as you can as a team, and have the best chance at a collective Win. People may take pride in those numbers, but the only thing that matters is the Points. Penalizing Kills and Item Use is not fair or sensible. Not in the extreme that it was. We need to have suggestions outside of Defender Kills. At the end of the day it's about working as a team for Points. Not shaming the opponent for having to Revive. Maybe they shouldn't call it war if it's not about not dying lol. It's War! War is about conquest, not points. I feel like there are some things game related where you can be against the overwhelming opinion of the player base and still be right. I was against the complaining about the Boss Rush and said it would take ten minutes and I got mocked on the forum... turns out I was right. I was for the willpower nerf and the end of the perfect block team and got killed by the majority and it turns out that that was for the best. Kabam isn't always wrong. You seem to take the Kabam line wherever it goes, however, and in this case it's caused you to argue a point that really doesn't make sense. The bottom line for war is really about whether it's fun or not. For the overwhelming majority of the player base, this version of war isn't war and isn't fun. We've had enough iterations to see where it's going and we don't want to go there. We like the old version better. We like the first flawed change better then the current version and find that subsequent iterations have made it worse. We don't want a spend to win war, and say what you want, but in the old version we beat the hell out of some big spenders and laughed at their wasted potion spree. Because skill and defender kills. In what way is penalizing kills not sensible in war lmao. Read that sentence you wrote. It's war but dying shouldn't matter? Anyway, war should be for the players and the players have spoken. We want defender kills and we aren't going to stop wanting defender kills, and no iteration that allows alliances to use all their items to beat a better group is going to satisfy us. #defender kills I am not "taking Kabam's side". I happen to agree with the removal of them, and there are many reasons for that. There is a great deal I'd like to say on the matter, but I'm not interested in adding fuel to the fire. If the only enjoyment people got out of War was watching the opponent die more, that's a problem in and of itself. Since you speak about enjoyment, that's what you're saying. In actuality, it's not about enjoyment. It's about the Wins that Defender Kills gave. All the talk about skill and enjoyment is pretty one-sided to me. War has never been about Defender Kills. Not by design. It became that over time, as new Champs and Nodes allowed for greater Kills. Sorry that you feel I don't make sense, but I'm editing because my plain thoughts would no doubt get people going, and I'm ready to move on in the discussion. They're gone. It's time to move on.