Nice , appreciate what you did and I have a question may be someone already asked this and may be there is an answer somewhere in the chat but did rolled all the chat so asking , my question is related to the attack bouns , do we see the stats in real time if we are KO the defender in first time or x times. Or it will just work behind the scenes, I really want to see this if all of the alliance members can see how we are going with the war attack strategy, watching these points and attempt numbers will help us to make any changes to our attack strategy.
Kabam Mike! Love the changes. It’s clear it has now moved to more of a skill and strategy platform. Which war should be. 2 questions and 1 concern.
1. How will the MVP’s be determined?
2. If someone backs out of a fight will it count as an attempt, therefore rescuing points?
Concern: taking an empty node is as many points as a one shot kill. That’s seems a bit jaded as there are always more nodes than we had ability to place defenders.
Over all it’s aweome. Thank you for listening to the players.
All you did is bring back defender kills and hide it in another stat and make the whole scoring system overly complicated.
If we receive fewer points for defeating a node that takes multiple attempts (we lose an attacker or attackers), then your opponent is essentially scoring points from... you guessed it DEFENDER KILLS. You've merely limited the number of defender kills per defender.
Nice , appreciate what you did and I have a question may be someone already asked this and may be there is an answer somewhere in the chat but did rolled all the chat so asking , my question is related to the attack bouns , do we see the stats in real time if we are KO the defender in first time or x times. Or it will just work behind the scenes, I really want to see this if all of the alliance members can see how we are going with the war attack strategy, watching these points and attempt numbers will help us to make any changes to our attack strategy.
They said in the announcement they are working on something for this, but it sounds like it won't be in the next iteration of AW:
Note: We are currently working on some UI improvements that will make monitoring and accounting for the Attack Bonus easier to do. This will come in a future update.
Nice , appreciate what you did and I have a question may be someone already asked this and may be there is an answer somewhere in the chat but did rolled all the chat so asking , my question is related to the attack bouns , do we see the stats in real time if we are KO the defender in first time or x times. Or it will just work behind the scenes, I really want to see this if all of the alliance members can see how we are going with the war attack strategy, watching these points and attempt numbers will help us to make any changes to our attack strategy.
They said in the announcement they are working on something for this, but it sounds like it won't be in the next iteration of AW:
Note: We are currently working on some UI improvements that will make monitoring and accounting for the Attack Bonus easier to do. This will come in a future update.
Changes are great Kabam, community apparently wanted to spend more for wars so now we will all be spending more for wars. Question though, are any updates to the rewards coming soon to make them more in line with other events? Throwing in some 6* shards or increasing the 5* / 4* shards seems appropriate with all these changes now.
Concern: taking an empty node is as many points as a one shot kill. That’s seems a bit jaded as there are always more nodes than we had ability to place defenders.
That's sort of a wash because if both sides place the same number of defenders, both sides will have the same number of "bonus nodes" that are empty and easy to capture.
But there is now a new element of strategic thought to placing defenders. If you place defenders in such a way that every "path" has some defenders, then no path will be totally empty and easy to grab. You will always have to kill something to get them. But spreading out your defenders in that way means you will have several paths "half empty" that are weaker than others and could be easier to traverse rather than some paths completely empty and some paths full.
Figuring out the best *configuration* of defenders separate from specific defender placement on certain nodes is now potentially a new strategic concern for placement officers. More ways to think about more options to place defenders is always a good thing.
In other words, where we place the "holes" can potentially be as important as where we place the defenders, at least in many tiers of AW where 100% doesn't happen all the time. Where AW usually ends in 100%/100%, it will be a wash and not harm the war either way.
Bringing back defender kill ratings is a good thing.
I share the concerns about the scoring when you loose connection or back out of a fight on purpose.
Also I am not sure if the scoring sheet on the end of your info thread is actually accurate.
You count full exoration on 3 maps as 300 instances wirh 150 points per explored node. Underneath that you are counting attacker rating as 450 instances with 240 points per node in best case.
Either it is 150 points per explored percent or the amount of nodes is off...
All you did is bring back defender kills and hide it in another stat and make the whole scoring system overly complicated.
If we receive fewer points for defeating a node that takes multiple attempts (we lose an attacker or attackers), then your opponent is essentially scoring points from... you guessed it DEFENDER KILLS. You've merely limited the number of defender kills per defender.
Why does it have to be so complicated though?
There is a fundamental difference which was addressed in the previous thread (and the one before that). Kabam claimed that defender kill points discouraged players from attacking under certain conditions because it could be strategically better to stop attacking than continue to attack and continue to give the other side points.
Attacker bonus points doesn't have that problem. It is always better to attack than not attack because you do not give the other side points when you die. You reduce the points you could get for defeating the node. But if you stop attacking, you in effect give up all those points anyway, so attacking is always better than not attacking.
That's what makes it more than just hiding defender kill points.
In fact, the scoring system overall is different in a very important way from previous iterations. Except for diversity points all of the points you can score come from gameplay and none of them "start" by giving either side any points. Defender placed points gave both sides points before the war starts. Defender remaining points give both sides points only after the war is over and they are counted. Almost all of the points are the *result* of the war, not the initial *starting point* of the war.
Diversity points are now the odd man out, but the rest of it is an important shift in the scoring system in my opinion. We earn points almost exclusively based on our actions while attacking. That's what I think most competitive players want.
Also I am not sure if the scoring sheet on the end of your info thread is actually accurate.
You count full exoration on 3 maps as 300 instances wirh 150 points per explored node. Underneath that you are counting attacker rating as 450 instances with 240 points per node in best case.
Either it is 150 points per explored percent or the amount of nodes is off...
That does sound wrong. I don't know what the correct numbers are off the top of my head, but logically speaking the attack bonus maximum count must be between the maximum number of defenders (150) and the total number of nodes (stated to be 300 in the spreadsheet). Obviously, the number of possible places you can place a defender must be more than the number of defenders we place (because there are always empty placement points) and less than the total number of nodes altogether.
Good changes but are there any chance you remove the 5 extra nodes so that there are only 50 usable nodes since in essence everyone will be giving away free points for 5 nodes with no defenders placed which you can’t help or at least randomly select 5 defenders for each alliance to fill those nodes.
Knowing that every alliance will be short 5 defenders placed you probably won’t mess with the changes but just looking at free points given for not placing defenders on nodes which you can’t help due to the layout of the alliances
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
I like it. It seems it will prevent people "spending" their way into victory with potions. It also doesn't give a weaker alliance a disadvantage right from the get go with the defender rating. Still think that rank down tickets and increased rewards need to be in the discussion, but overall I think this is going to work out. Well done!
i think the changes are great! But what a better way to make up for the lack of skillbased alliance war then to buff the rewards, after all they havent been touched in a very long time and with the coming of 6*s and this month alone 5* shards and champions becoming more readily available i think its defenitly time for a alliance war rewards update and refresh especially on the 5* shards the war victor crystals and maybe even the addition of 6* shards in tiers 1 and 2.
While I’m glad that alliance wars are going back to being skill-based, I am a little upset that I ranked some ok-to-poor characters, such as Antman and Moonknight to name a few, solely for defender diversity. It does not make sense anymore with this new system to max out defender diversity, which now deems the characters I ranked useless.
Rank down tickets may be problematic since many would rank down their lower prestige 4/55 characters and rank up newer, higher prestige characters. It would really stir things up. However I think that it would be a great idea to give out 5-Star rank 3-2 gems and 4-Star rank 5-4 gems. Basically the opposite of the rankup gems that are already in the game. It will give us a chance to recoup our resources that many of us used to rank characters for defender diversity that we will never use again. And there would not be much of a problem with people exploiting them to raise their prestige.
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
3 months later and we have a new map that basically mandates 98-100% , 5 mini bosses and Act5 nodes. Color me not impressed. Goal was met on diversity though, so you get a small cookie, I guess.
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
If you understood the reasons I presented agaisnt Defender Kills to begin with, you would see why this actually answers my concerns. When the suggestion was presented some time ago, I briefly considered it, and specifically said I would need more information to gauge my views.
So here's one strategic overview of the upcoming iteration of AW. Every AW map will have three kinds of nodes: transit nodes (you just walk through them, including portals), defender nodes (nodes with a defender placed on them) and "defensive" nodes that could have had a defender but don't.
When you are attacking the map, here's what you get. 150 points for every transit node you walk through. 390 points (150+240) for every defensive node you walk through. And a maximum of 640 points you could earn for your side for every defender node.
Where does that 640 points come from? 150 for exploring that node. A maximum of 240 points if you one shot the defender sitting on that node. *And* you will deny the other side 250 points of "Defender remaining" points they would have gotten if that defender survived.
So every defender node you leave behind is 640 points you are giving up. Killing it at all swings the score 400 points in your favor: you will earn 150 for your side and take away 250 from them. And there's 240 bonus points for doing it with the fewest attacker deaths.
So the points system is now much more heavily weighted towards attacking well. A kill is worth 400 points. A good kill is worth 640 points.
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
The same high metrics? Most wars were won then by boss kills or exploration. Defender kills only factored into the equation when one group tried to overcome being beaten by reviving over and over again. This looks like it will function very much in the same way. Do you have some numbers that show how defender kills were a "high metric" as opposed to this system? Just curious.
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
Overall, I think I'm cool with it. I admit I have to have more coffee and consider it deeper. Lol. My main issues with metrics for Kills and penalizing Resources are respected, so I'm okay with this. Interesting angle. Actually, some ideas I remember shared here. On the surface, looks good.
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
The same high metrics? Most wars were won then by boss kills or exploration. Defender kills only factored into the equation when one group tried to overcome being beaten by reviving over and over again. This looks like it will function very much in the same way. Do you have some numbers that show how defender kills were a "high metric" as opposed to this system? Just curious.
When you had Wars won by 100-200+ Defender Kills metrics, yes.
Concern: taking an empty node is as many points as a one shot kill. That’s seems a bit jaded as there are always more nodes than we had ability to place defenders.
In other words, where we place the "holes" can potentially be as important as where we place the defenders, at least in many tiers of AW where 100% doesn't happen all the time. Where AW usually ends in 100%/100%, it will be a wash and not harm the war either way.
I cannot emphasize this enough. This is going to add a really cool level of strategy to placing Defenders. You can spread them out, or you can stack the end of a path with mostly empty and hope it's a roadblock... So many options!
Comments
1. How will the MVP’s be determined?
2. If someone backs out of a fight will it count as an attempt, therefore rescuing points?
Concern: taking an empty node is as many points as a one shot kill. That’s seems a bit jaded as there are always more nodes than we had ability to place defenders.
Over all it’s aweome. Thank you for listening to the players.
Definitely on a roll in December....
If we receive fewer points for defeating a node that takes multiple attempts (we lose an attacker or attackers), then your opponent is essentially scoring points from... you guessed it DEFENDER KILLS. You've merely limited the number of defender kills per defender.
Why does it have to be so complicated though?
They said in the announcement they are working on something for this, but it sounds like it won't be in the next iteration of AW:
Cool , thanks @DNA3000
Matchmaking has never been changed, as far as I can see in the notes.
That's sort of a wash because if both sides place the same number of defenders, both sides will have the same number of "bonus nodes" that are empty and easy to capture.
But there is now a new element of strategic thought to placing defenders. If you place defenders in such a way that every "path" has some defenders, then no path will be totally empty and easy to grab. You will always have to kill something to get them. But spreading out your defenders in that way means you will have several paths "half empty" that are weaker than others and could be easier to traverse rather than some paths completely empty and some paths full.
Figuring out the best *configuration* of defenders separate from specific defender placement on certain nodes is now potentially a new strategic concern for placement officers. More ways to think about more options to place defenders is always a good thing.
In other words, where we place the "holes" can potentially be as important as where we place the defenders, at least in many tiers of AW where 100% doesn't happen all the time. Where AW usually ends in 100%/100%, it will be a wash and not harm the war either way.
I share the concerns about the scoring when you loose connection or back out of a fight on purpose.
Also I am not sure if the scoring sheet on the end of your info thread is actually accurate.
You count full exoration on 3 maps as 300 instances wirh 150 points per explored node. Underneath that you are counting attacker rating as 450 instances with 240 points per node in best case.
Either it is 150 points per explored percent or the amount of nodes is off...
I hate to even assume that is the case
There is a fundamental difference which was addressed in the previous thread (and the one before that). Kabam claimed that defender kill points discouraged players from attacking under certain conditions because it could be strategically better to stop attacking than continue to attack and continue to give the other side points.
Attacker bonus points doesn't have that problem. It is always better to attack than not attack because you do not give the other side points when you die. You reduce the points you could get for defeating the node. But if you stop attacking, you in effect give up all those points anyway, so attacking is always better than not attacking.
That's what makes it more than just hiding defender kill points.
In fact, the scoring system overall is different in a very important way from previous iterations. Except for diversity points all of the points you can score come from gameplay and none of them "start" by giving either side any points. Defender placed points gave both sides points before the war starts. Defender remaining points give both sides points only after the war is over and they are counted. Almost all of the points are the *result* of the war, not the initial *starting point* of the war.
Diversity points are now the odd man out, but the rest of it is an important shift in the scoring system in my opinion. We earn points almost exclusively based on our actions while attacking. That's what I think most competitive players want.
That does sound wrong. I don't know what the correct numbers are off the top of my head, but logically speaking the attack bonus maximum count must be between the maximum number of defenders (150) and the total number of nodes (stated to be 300 in the spreadsheet). Obviously, the number of possible places you can place a defender must be more than the number of defenders we place (because there are always empty placement points) and less than the total number of nodes altogether.
Knowing that every alliance will be short 5 defenders placed you probably won’t mess with the changes but just looking at free points given for not placing defenders on nodes which you can’t help due to the layout of the alliances
DEFENDER KILLS ARE BACK! (under another name)
I like the changed, but wouldn't it have been easier to just keep defender kills in the first place?
So since y’all are using my idea from two months ago, how bout a compensation package?
Rank down tickets may be problematic since many would rank down their lower prestige 4/55 characters and rank up newer, higher prestige characters. It would really stir things up. However I think that it would be a great idea to give out 5-Star rank 3-2 gems and 4-Star rank 5-4 gems. Basically the opposite of the rankup gems that are already in the game. It will give us a chance to recoup our resources that many of us used to rank characters for defender diversity that we will never use again. And there would not be much of a problem with people exploiting them to raise their prestige.
No. Not really. When the idea was presented before, I was iffy about it because it seemed to that effect, but there is a limited number with this system, and it doesn't actually penalize dying. There are Points given, then deducted for attempts. Now, the most you can lose are the Points allotted. I may have been a bit rigid originally, but I'm cool with this. It won't amount to the same high metrics Defender Kills did. There are limited Points and limited penalizations. After that, nothing is deducted, so it doesn't penalize Item Use.
I love this so much.
When you are attacking the map, here's what you get. 150 points for every transit node you walk through. 390 points (150+240) for every defensive node you walk through. And a maximum of 640 points you could earn for your side for every defender node.
Where does that 640 points come from? 150 for exploring that node. A maximum of 240 points if you one shot the defender sitting on that node. *And* you will deny the other side 250 points of "Defender remaining" points they would have gotten if that defender survived.
So every defender node you leave behind is 640 points you are giving up. Killing it at all swings the score 400 points in your favor: you will earn 150 for your side and take away 250 from them. And there's 240 bonus points for doing it with the fewest attacker deaths.
So the points system is now much more heavily weighted towards attacking well. A kill is worth 400 points. A good kill is worth 640 points.
The same high metrics? Most wars were won then by boss kills or exploration. Defender kills only factored into the equation when one group tried to overcome being beaten by reviving over and over again. This looks like it will function very much in the same way. Do you have some numbers that show how defender kills were a "high metric" as opposed to this system? Just curious.
It;s not defender kills it defender not lives!
When you had Wars won by 100-200+ Defender Kills metrics, yes.
I cannot emphasize this enough. This is going to add a really cool level of strategy to placing Defenders. You can spread them out, or you can stack the end of a path with mostly empty and hope it's a roadblock... So many options!