Two separate issues, but if it's allowed, then I see no issue with it. It's about Points. Anyone can use Boosts. It's not some exclusive action. You're comparing two different aspects. Placement and Attack. Champs are placed in Defense and locked there. There is team work in that the Ally organizes and plans together, but the team work I was referring to has to do with Attack Phase and clearing the Map.
"For that matter, using Boosts only goes so far. The PI can only be inflated so much. If Allies are making it a common practice, then it will still boil down to their Rating because you can only Boost so far. At 0.002 Points per PI, it's really not going to accumulate what I would call an unfair advantage".
Understood. So if its allowed, there's no problem with it. And the teamwork you're referring to was ATK.
I can now somewhat understand your view of a team working together to place their strongest champs on defense while bringing their best champs to clear paths and giving up as few D kills as possible in ATK, as not the same kind of teamwork as those that work together to use boosts for defense placement while reviving numerous times to advance in order to clear paths in ATK.
The prior shouldnt be rewarded with points and the latter shouldn't be penalized for points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
As far as boosts are concerned, if your correct regarding the .002 points per PI, the following is an example of what
"it's really not going to accumulate what I would call an unfair advantage". Type numbers are associated with them.
One of my defense lineups with just a 20%champion boost gains approx. 2500 PI, at .002 points per, would net approx. 5pts. Every teammate in AW using the same would be 150 pts total. Now lets say we add a 15% lesser hp boost and a 10%lesser atk boost(avail. In the store For 30 units ea.) I havent used that many boosts together since I've been playing, so I dont know what the numbers could be, but confident that they probably add up to much more PI to points than the small amounts displayed recently that have decided the winner with all other scoring criteria tied(curious why they chose to display # of D kills per ally when it plays no role whatsoever)
As we all know, there are 20% and 30%champion boosts along with 25%hp etc etc..... Available only through rewards or Alliance questing bundles avail for 1400 and 750units. Both bundles contain just enough of an avg weeks worth of AW participation. Pretty pricey IMO, but besides that, can it be considered fair to those who cannot afford or choose not to spend so much? What about younger players in their teens that barely scrape an allowance or partime wages? But then again, it is allowed so can't see any problems with it.
All this on top of what appears to be another couple months of "iterations" to come followed by who knows how much more time, changes and uncertainty?
I'd rather spend the time grinding......... Not arena God no! Rather spend time grinding my teeth, because it sure as hell couldn't be more agonizing. LOL
At the moment, it is entirely allowed to point out the fact that the current AW design is nonsensical because the changes run contrary to what the players want and much of what Kabam has actually stated that they want.
Some players liked 15.0, the rest mostly didn't. Of the ones that didn't, I don't think many now like 16.0. But I cannot imagine anyone liking 15.0 and also liking 16.0. 16.0 is almost the exact opposite of 15.0. So the odds of a significant fraction of players thinking 16.0 is an improvement over 14.0 is probably extremely small.
To put it bluntly, only a lunatic would think 15.0 was a step in the right direction and 16.0 was another step in the right direction, because those two are heading in opposite directions.
Two separate issues, but if it's allowed, then I see no issue with it. It's about Points. Anyone can use Boosts. It's not some exclusive action. You're comparing two different aspects. Placement and Attack. Champs are placed in Defense and locked there. There is team work in that the Ally organizes and plans together, but the team work I was referring to has to do with Attack Phase and clearing the Map.
"For that matter, using Boosts only goes so far. The PI can only be inflated so much. If Allies are making it a common practice, then it will still boil down to their Rating because you can only Boost so far. At 0.002 Points per PI, it's really not going to accumulate what I would call an unfair advantage".
Understood. So if its allowed, there's no problem with it. And the teamwork you're referring to was ATK.
I can now somewhat understand your view of a team working together to place their strongest champs on defense while bringing their best champs to clear paths and giving up as few D kills as possible in ATK, as not the same kind of teamwork as those that work together to use boosts for defense placement while reviving numerous times to advance in order to clear paths in ATK.
The prior shouldnt be rewarded with points and the latter shouldn't be penalized for points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
As far as boosts are concerned, if your correct regarding the .002 points per PI, the following is an example of what
"it's really not going to accumulate what I would call an unfair advantage". Type numbers are associated with them.
One of my defense lineups with just a 20%champion boost gains approx. 2500 PI, at .002 points per, would net approx. 5pts. Every teammate in AW using the same would be 150 pts total. Now lets say we add a 15% lesser hp boost and a 10%lesser atk boost(avail. In the store For 30 units ea.) I havent used that many boosts together since I've been playing, so I dont know what the numbers could be, but confident that they probably add up to much more PI to points than the small amounts displayed recently that have decided the winner with all other scoring criteria tied(curious why they chose to display # of D kills per ally when it plays no role whatsoever)
As we all know, there are 20% and 30%champion boosts along with 25%hp etc etc..... Available only through rewards or Alliance questing bundles avail for 1400 and 750units. Both bundles contain just enough of an avg weeks worth of AW participation. Pretty pricey IMO, but besides that, can it be considered fair to those who cannot afford or choose not to spend so much? What about younger players in their teens that barely scrape an allowance or partime wages? But then again, it is allowed so can't see any problems with it.
All this on top of what appears to be another couple months of "iterations" to come followed by who knows how much more time, changes and uncertainty?
I'd rather spend the time grinding......... Not arena God no! Rather spend time grinding my teeth, because it sure as hell couldn't be more agonizing. LOL
All these terrible AW changes and yet the rewards are still awful.
If potions were literally banned from wars, the rewards wouldn't be bad. Someone wins, someone loses, no one spends. But when potions are allowed, the developers have to know that there is significant pressure to spend to not fail, if for no other reason than to not be the weak link in your alliance. If wars were solo wars rather than alliance wars, I know I would be far more inclined to simply give up and allow the other side to win if I was overmatched.
Combine that psychology with cranking up the difficulty of the maps, and the devs have to understand the rewards do not match the difficulty they are setting for war. And I'm not just someone always demanding rewards: I said the rewards in 14.0 were not necessarily bad because 50% of all alliances get the victory rewards no matter how poorly they perform and the rest get the consolation prize just for showing up at all.
I have defended Kabam at every turn when someone has claimed the AW changes were a money grab: that accusation makes no sense given what they first tried to do in 15.0. But 16.0 is clearly and obviously a more expensive version of war when taken as a whole across the spectrum of players. If they don't acknowledge that and attempt to rectify that, it doesn't matter if it was intentional or not: the accusation that 16.0 AW is a money grab - even if it is just an opportunistic one - would now stick.
We just had a war today, we lost by one percent of exploration and 1 diversity point. I had 24 kills all by myself, my Bg in particular never used items. There is no skill involved in the war, it is simply pay to pay. I do not know if this is intentional or not, but this game mode has been destroyed. now I need to make spreadsheets with 50 different heros in each BG...its ridiculous really...how many Mordos and Nightcrawlers are now arena fodder. Something has to be done, its frustrating.
Wow I can read thousands of these comments in all everybody wants is one single point for a Defender kill. All Kabam is doing is making people shut down the app if they're going to die and restart with half life at a cost of nothing. Especially if you bring a full Ironman team you'll just keep regaining health and you won't have to spend a single unit to buy potions. Answer if you're going to die restart the app because Defender kills are worth nothing so why not
Instead of just complaining about how dumb AW is becoming I would like to offer my opinion on a solution. So after the original map change AW was much to easy. I understand why the current changes were implemented to stop everyone from 100%ing the map without items. Now however it’s back to how it was before with us just stacking mystics, Spider-Man, Night crawler and the other usual AW defensive champs.
My proposed solution is as follows:
Give each node a specific class sign. Then give bonus points for placing that specific class champ on that node.
Random example: say you put a mutant class bonus on node 12. If we put a mutant class champ there we get 100 bonus points or something like that for placing that class. This could be randomized each war or set for every node(minus the end boss). Not sure how you guys could work that. But this would put more diversity into placement and have equal amounts of each class without giving advantages to alliances with rare champs.
This would stop us from flooding the map with all he same champs and make things more fair.
At the moment, it is entirely allowed to point out the fact that the current AW design is nonsensical because the changes run contrary to what the players want and much of what Kabam has actually stated that they want.
Some players liked 15.0, the rest mostly didn't. Of the ones that didn't, I don't think many now like 16.0. But I cannot imagine anyone liking 15.0 and also liking 16.0. 16.0 is almost the exact opposite of 15.0. So the odds of a significant fraction of players thinking 16.0 is an improvement over 14.0 is probably extremely small.
To put it bluntly, only a lunatic would think 15.0 was a step in the right direction and 16.0 was another step in the right direction, because those two are heading in opposite directions.
As is the custom I've grown fond of and appreciate since participating in the forums, IMO you once again have hit the mark on this whole AW fiasco and I definitely could not have expressed it better.
I've been labled as a crazy lunatic in the past, but those incidents would pale in comparison if I was one of......the only one? to believe both 15.0 and 16.0 are headed in the right direction. LOL
If you guys are so keen on keeping diversity, please remove the defender rating, and instead when both alliance tie in everything defender kill will come in and act as tie breaker. I'm tired of facing alliance that use boost and suicide to inflated the defender rating.
If you guys are so keen on keeping diversity, please remove the defender rating, and instead when both alliance tie in everything defender kill will come in and act as tie breaker. I'm tired of facing alliance that use boost and suicide to inflated the defender rating.
while that may sound good in theory, such a change would result in countless more ties (resulting in both alliances losing), b/c at high AW tiers both alliances almost always 100% and go full diversity.
i still recommend kabam incorporating some form of point gain for attacker skill/performance (be it defender kill points, or the reduction of attacker kill points when said attacker dies trying to take down a defender).
I've noticed an odd occurrence happening a number of times since 15.0 that was pretty rare in the past.
That being, we've faced opponents that give an appearance of just "going through the motions" in both phases with more than a handful of members not even bothering to show up. Before it was pretty uncommon to consistently face opponents that came in with more than 2 or 3 members missing let alone 4 or more.
In my experience most allys went with 1 less BG if they were going to be down more than 3 in a group as did we if we had a day where a handful of members were going to be to busy to check in. But nearly 1 out of 2.5 wars so far, our opponents have been missing 3 4 even 5 players.
Am I reading too much into just a strange coincidence, or does anyone believe that more and more allys are choosing to go a path that was suggested earlier? Which is to just treat war as a means to collect some rewards without straining for a win. Whatever it may be, sure isn't making it more fun or less frustrating to see.
I must start with a compliment. This is one of the best mobile games I have had. Now the problem is that alliance war is the beast feature in it and now is just is too unfair. You see usually its the best and the there are the rest...
Here is a picture of the last war we had.
Plane and simple. We were better, we played better. We won. But still we didnt. It saa clear from the start that they have the diversity on their side. After a war like this you Kabam want to give the goods to the team that had to use all those revives to beat down our defenders. Why, because they had to use so many items (money for you)? I mean look at those defender kills. The only way we could have won this war was that we had 98-100 different defenders. There is 109 playable champions in this game and I can asure you, my alliance does not have all all of those. And since the war is all ready started, We have no way winning it any more.
So in conclusion, we could not have won this war no matter what we did.
The only way we could have won this war was that we had 98-100 different defenders. There is 109 playable champions in this game and I can asure you, my alliance does not have all all of those.
Well, not to quibble but you misunderstand how diversity is calculated. You just need each bg to have 50 unique defenders... which isn't any less stupid a metric for winning, it's just more achievable than you think. You just need a spreadsheet and a deep commitment to wasting a lot of time organizing your rosters.
Why or better question who made this node design it’s already annoying to get RNG on your side against NC but a node giving him full immunity as well really?
Comments
Understood. So if its allowed, there's no problem with it. And the teamwork you're referring to was ATK.
I can now somewhat understand your view of a team working together to place their strongest champs on defense while bringing their best champs to clear paths and giving up as few D kills as possible in ATK, as not the same kind of teamwork as those that work together to use boosts for defense placement while reviving numerous times to advance in order to clear paths in ATK.
The prior shouldnt be rewarded with points and the latter shouldn't be penalized for points. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
As far as boosts are concerned, if your correct regarding the .002 points per PI, the following is an example of what
"it's really not going to accumulate what I would call an unfair advantage". Type numbers are associated with them.
One of my defense lineups with just a 20%champion boost gains approx. 2500 PI, at .002 points per, would net approx. 5pts. Every teammate in AW using the same would be 150 pts total. Now lets say we add a 15% lesser hp boost and a 10%lesser atk boost(avail. In the store For 30 units ea.) I havent used that many boosts together since I've been playing, so I dont know what the numbers could be, but confident that they probably add up to much more PI to points than the small amounts displayed recently that have decided the winner with all other scoring criteria tied(curious why they chose to display # of D kills per ally when it plays no role whatsoever)
As we all know, there are 20% and 30%champion boosts along with 25%hp etc etc..... Available only through rewards or Alliance questing bundles avail for 1400 and 750units. Both bundles contain just enough of an avg weeks worth of AW participation. Pretty pricey IMO, but besides that, can it be considered fair to those who cannot afford or choose not to spend so much? What about younger players in their teens that barely scrape an allowance or partime wages? But then again, it is allowed so can't see any problems with it.
All this on top of what appears to be another couple months of "iterations" to come followed by who knows how much more time, changes and uncertainty?
I'd rather spend the time grinding......... Not arena God no! Rather spend time grinding my teeth, because it sure as hell couldn't be more agonizing. LOL
Insightful. I echo your sentiment.
Defender kills, y'all.
At the moment, it is entirely allowed to point out the fact that the current AW design is nonsensical because the changes run contrary to what the players want and much of what Kabam has actually stated that they want.
Some players liked 15.0, the rest mostly didn't. Of the ones that didn't, I don't think many now like 16.0. But I cannot imagine anyone liking 15.0 and also liking 16.0. 16.0 is almost the exact opposite of 15.0. So the odds of a significant fraction of players thinking 16.0 is an improvement over 14.0 is probably extremely small.
To put it bluntly, only a lunatic would think 15.0 was a step in the right direction and 16.0 was another step in the right direction, because those two are heading in opposite directions.
That's a twisted version of what I was saying.
Apparently at least one person thinks this is abusive. To sand, presumably.
The Flagging is excessive to begin with.
If potions were literally banned from wars, the rewards wouldn't be bad. Someone wins, someone loses, no one spends. But when potions are allowed, the developers have to know that there is significant pressure to spend to not fail, if for no other reason than to not be the weak link in your alliance. If wars were solo wars rather than alliance wars, I know I would be far more inclined to simply give up and allow the other side to win if I was overmatched.
Combine that psychology with cranking up the difficulty of the maps, and the devs have to understand the rewards do not match the difficulty they are setting for war. And I'm not just someone always demanding rewards: I said the rewards in 14.0 were not necessarily bad because 50% of all alliances get the victory rewards no matter how poorly they perform and the rest get the consolation prize just for showing up at all.
I have defended Kabam at every turn when someone has claimed the AW changes were a money grab: that accusation makes no sense given what they first tried to do in 15.0. But 16.0 is clearly and obviously a more expensive version of war when taken as a whole across the spectrum of players. If they don't acknowledge that and attempt to rectify that, it doesn't matter if it was intentional or not: the accusation that 16.0 AW is a money grab - even if it is just an opportunistic one - would now stick.
They died 126 times to our 50 times. Good game.
Thats my alliance, you guys didn't even bother on killing the 3rd boss. We beat you on everything except defender kills.
Yes, AW is broken but don't go crying injustice just because you didn't push for the victory.
As a paying player I can say whatever I want about it, apologies I don't accept everything that is spoon fed to me.
BURRNNNNNN!!!! Love it.
The truth has been spoken.
If you don't agree with the players complaining on the forums, why not just quit reading the forums.
Instead of just complaining about how dumb AW is becoming I would like to offer my opinion on a solution. So after the original map change AW was much to easy. I understand why the current changes were implemented to stop everyone from 100%ing the map without items. Now however it’s back to how it was before with us just stacking mystics, Spider-Man, Night crawler and the other usual AW defensive champs.
My proposed solution is as follows:
Give each node a specific class sign. Then give bonus points for placing that specific class champ on that node.
Random example: say you put a mutant class bonus on node 12. If we put a mutant class champ there we get 100 bonus points or something like that for placing that class. This could be randomized each war or set for every node(minus the end boss). Not sure how you guys could work that. But this would put more diversity into placement and have equal amounts of each class without giving advantages to alliances with rare champs.
This would stop us from flooding the map with all he same champs and make things more fair.
Let me know what you think Miike,
•Manchild•
As is the custom I've grown fond of and appreciate since participating in the forums, IMO you once again have hit the mark on this whole AW fiasco and I definitely could not have expressed it better.
I've been labled as a crazy lunatic in the past, but those incidents would pale in comparison if I was one of......the only one? to believe both 15.0 and 16.0 are headed in the right direction. LOL
while that may sound good in theory, such a change would result in countless more ties (resulting in both alliances losing), b/c at high AW tiers both alliances almost always 100% and go full diversity.
i still recommend kabam incorporating some form of point gain for attacker skill/performance (be it defender kill points, or the reduction of attacker kill points when said attacker dies trying to take down a defender).
We always fight against diversity teams... Sometimese not full but at least 146
That being, we've faced opponents that give an appearance of just "going through the motions" in both phases with more than a handful of members not even bothering to show up. Before it was pretty uncommon to consistently face opponents that came in with more than 2 or 3 members missing let alone 4 or more.
In my experience most allys went with 1 less BG if they were going to be down more than 3 in a group as did we if we had a day where a handful of members were going to be to busy to check in. But nearly 1 out of 2.5 wars so far, our opponents have been missing 3 4 even 5 players.
Am I reading too much into just a strange coincidence, or does anyone believe that more and more allys are choosing to go a path that was suggested earlier? Which is to just treat war as a means to collect some rewards without straining for a win. Whatever it may be, sure isn't making it more fun or less frustrating to see.
Oh and by the way, defender kills.
Here is a picture of the last war we had.
Plane and simple. We were better, we played better. We won. But still we didnt. It saa clear from the start that they have the diversity on their side. After a war like this you Kabam want to give the goods to the team that had to use all those revives to beat down our defenders. Why, because they had to use so many items (money for you)? I mean look at those defender kills. The only way we could have won this war was that we had 98-100 different defenders. There is 109 playable champions in this game and I can asure you, my alliance does not have all all of those. And since the war is all ready started, We have no way winning it any more.
So in conclusion, we could not have won this war no matter what we did.
Please, bring back the defender killpoints.
Well, not to quibble but you misunderstand how diversity is calculated. You just need each bg to have 50 unique defenders... which isn't any less stupid a metric for winning, it's just more achievable than you think. You just need a spreadsheet and a deep commitment to wasting a lot of time organizing your rosters.