**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
Kidding… a little. I wish I had taken a pic of our defenses before anyone started moving on either side - they’re champs were so much more OP than ours…loaded with at least nine r2 6*s to our one (we only have 2 in the alliance and we didn’t even use the other in our attack) and at least twice as many r5 5*s. We have no idea who we are going to face when we place to begin with, so to your point, why do we bother now? When we made the complaint about how lopsided our kills were against a better defense, Kabam’s response was that sometimes you will get placed against a much stronger alliance as part of the matchmaking process. Knowing that why do we place at all? Because we have beaten much stronger alliances before - mainly because they pretty much duped the hell out of the strongest defenders. If they hadn’t done that tho, even being that we were better skilled at the game, they would have won. Our placement was better and/or they weren’t as skilled as us, but it doesn’t matter because they simply had more players.
Now, there are many various ways to help you beat champs in this game and all things being even, even coming from their point of view, I don’t see how they won. I don’t want stronger defenses to mean less, I want better skill (and possibly resources if you use boosts) to mean the same and not less. A handicap would do that and is the reason you make them…to even the playing field, not make it easier to exploit.
Anddd it just occurred to me, Diversity in itself IS a handicap…?
War is about skill. But it's about strategy too. And rosters. And in this case army size (ie number of participants). All of that should and does factor into war.
I do understand that from your point of view you needlessly suffer disadvantages that you consider unfair. But in the end, how you choose to play, can and does have consequences. In this case, due to your ally size you lost a close war. Consider, that adding just 1 more player may have tipped the balance in your favor.
You can do more, you choose not to and that is fine but you have to accept the consequences of those actions as a result
Nope, it means how many times the opponents lost a fight to one of your defenders.
So they didn’t have 10 extra tries.
And you get Attack Bonus whether or not you actually fight anyone on a node.
Overall I agree with what you say though. We will prob just stop doing War for a while after this season or until they change the way Diversity is scored (IF).
When I talk about 10 extra times to kill, that's simply looking at it from the op's point of view, not from how it actually works. I was simply operating under the op's logic. I should have been clearer in that regard
Handicap - But that’s my point, I thought….there’s an absence of a working handicap for outnumbered alliances - small or big (whether 6 against 8 or 27 against 30). I don’t know if you have ever had to try recruiting for an alliance, but sometimes there just aren’t players for the moment. Sometimes real life happens to people and they can’t play for a War or two or a few (technically you only have to place in 5 Wars to get season rewards anyways, right?). There are plenty of reasons for an Ally to be outnumbered at any given time and I think Diversity rewards too many points in cases where placement is uneven. Which is why it would also be important to have a point system that discourages low placement and more attackers. Right now tho, if we see we are outnumbered after we already committed champs to War ( that could possibly be used for other parts of the game ), there really is no incentive for us to even want to “fight” knowing we will prob lose, even in a case where neither team loses a fight and they have a ton of dupes. MAYBE if season rewards were better overall, but they aren’t - not for the resources we put in to win. I get your point now I think, so not playing War really is the best way not to get disappointed if we are going to stand pat with our number of players…as I said in the beginning of this thread hahahaha
Diversity strengthens alliances by encouraging a range of rankups / sig-ups that can be used in other content. It also alleviates the burden of feeling obligated to do certain specific ones that are already “spoken for.”
It also preserves some of the difficulty of the defenders by limiting the times attackers get to fight them and makes war less repetitive.
8 diversity or 3 kills. If you think your champ (on an available placement) is good enough to have a 37.5% chance at a kill, it’s possibly worth a dupe.
Also, many champs that would’ve been defensive rankups only are now starting for me in battlegrounds. I could retire if I had a dollar for every time Pun 2099 was banned.
What you're asking for is if you bring 6 guys to play 11 on 11 football. You want special concessions because you can't/won't bring a full team. That's not how it works.
If you screenshot, you only lost by 10 points which is astonishing because they have 8. So either they decided to double on lanes and not use 2 others to explore empty nodes or they just don't care enough.
They can explore more of the map because they have more attackers than you. Empty nodes equal full attack bonus. You can't expect Kabam to give you an advantage because you choose to play short.
I died less and killed more than they did overall. Simple. But because they had more people I lost…because of how Diversity is scored. That is my problem and in my opinion they could fix the scoring while keeping Diversity.
It’s a waste of time and resources to us in our opinion, so we probably won’t play another season unless the scoring changes…even if we get more people, make dummy accounts, merge with another alliance, etc.
AGAIN, I LIKE the idea behind Diversity and the system itself - I don’t like the scoring and am definitely not alone in that. AGAIN, I have run bigger/full alliances for months at a time and this STILL would have been (and was) an issue for me. When you play better and are more “Diverse”, you shouldn’t lose.
6 is more than half and we ALL place, there’s only six of us to begin with.
My alliance kicked a$$ and still lost. This is only the closest most recent loss, where being outnumbered cost us. The losses to kill differences were more staggering in the other Wars. But I do appreciate you trying to help, as many times as you have. 🙏🏾👍🏾
You describe winning even if the opponent killed more champs by a small margin and refer to that as an exploit. That's not an exploit. That's intentional. Diversity is intended to provide a small to moderate net benefit to players placing diverse defenders. This small to moderate net benefit is *explicitly* intended to overcome a commensurate small advantage in attacker kills. That's what it is there for: to act in those close matches.
You also focus on duplicated defenders. But defender diversity rewards diverse defenders. It is not intended to penalize duplicated defenders. If you place 30 defenders with one dup and the opponent places 50 defenders with three dups, they are not "less diverse." You have 29 unique defenders and they have 47. They have more, period. Defender diversity points are not defender non-diversity penalties.
A lot of people don't like how diversity scoring works. But a lot of people do. When war was iterated initially, I wasn't a fan of it, but I also recognized that *none* of the war scoring mechanisms attempted, and for that matter none of the war scoring mechanisms even possible at all could achieve unanimity. Defender diversity scoring solves many problems, creates few, and was the most reasonable compromise among the different sides in scoring at the time.
If you think you have a better idea, propose it. You will probably discover that as much as you think a lot of people don't like diversity scoring, even more people are probably not going to like your idea either. War scoring is a compromise, and defender diversity points are a compromise among many different scoring perspectives. It isn't here because it is perfect, it is here because every other option gets set on fire faster.
None of what you said is accurate.
Losing on merit (exploration etc) due to having less active attackers is valid but losing to a "participation award" merely because they placed more defenders is why we created alts too.
If you are not running a full 10 (and opponents didn’t either), neither side has a right to claim that something was unfair and that they should have won the war.
It is what it is, when running short-staffed.
If you win, Great.
If you lose, Oh Well.
Take what rewards come (keep in mind any ancillary rewards like Solo Objectives, Solo War Points Event, etc), and be satisfied.
If you are really that bent up about a certain war's outcome, then you need to be in a fuller alliance.
If you aren’t wanting to be in a fuller alliance, then be glad for whatever rewards happed to come your way.