Alliance Wars Discussion Thread

Hey Summoners!

We've just dropped some information on our next iteration of Alliance Wars, and this one includes some big changes to the Scoring method! Take a look at the announcement Thread and let us know if you have any questions or feedback!

http://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/36645/alliance-wars-scoring-update-coming-december-13th

We've closed the last discussion thread, because it references older information that is no longer relevant. You can find that archived thread here: http://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/31767/alliance-wars-discussion-2-0/

Comments

LeNoirFaineant

WOK wrote: »

IMO, all the details of pros/cons of the changes can come afterwards.
First and foremost, I'd like to be included among those of us that would like to give a BIG THANK YOU and thumbs up to Kabam for implementing the new changes that address a large portion of the playerbase complaints and also for including some of the actual suggestions to scoring made by some of our own who have been vigilante in striving for a better game experience. I'm very excited to play the updated AW and giving positive feedback!

Agree completely. This update is far better than anything I expected.

GroundedWisdom

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I still feel indifferent about Rating playing a part, but I will respect that's the direction they've chosen to take.

If you feel indifferent about it that means you don't care...

Indifferent towards the change. I suppose a better way to say it is I'm not completely for it. I'm not vehemently agaisnt it either. Just indifferent. There were certain purposes I saw to having it as a metric, but they have their reasons as well. So I'll reconsider my feelings on it.

ESF

ObiDon wrote: »

Looks good, but at some point we need to discuss the elephant in the room, Mystic Dispersion. Mystic Wars, here. We. Go.

Mmx1991 wrote: »

Great improvement...but then again..we're back where we started. Mystics Wars all over again. Maybe it's time they change the interaction between dexterity and MD.

I know the elite players and alliances play that style, and it sounds really effective, but I can honestly say this: If you have a Blade, I think you have a chance. I have one at 4/40 and I swear that guy cuts through Mystics and dimensional beings like nobody's business, especially if they bleed

Not saying I know for sure that it would work because, again, I haven't seen one of these "Mystic Walls," but I sure would like to observe something like a 5-star 4/55 awakened Blade take that on. I assume a chunk of these elite players will have one and it would be fun to watch

Slux83

Top alliances already clear the map 100% every time. Having a remaining defender mechanics won't change anything. The only important thing as you said, is skill, but you are missing the concept.

SKILL = KILL THE OPPONENT WITHOUT BEING KILLED

So please bring back defense kills

DNA3000

Slux83 wrote: »

Top alliances already clear the map 100% every time. Having a remaining defender mechanics won't change anything. The only important thing as you said, is skill, but you are missing the concept.

SKILL = KILL THE OPPONENT WITHOUT BEING KILLED

So please bring back defense kills

I don't think you read the announcement or any of the discussion following it. In the announced system, if you kill a placed defender without being killed once, you will earn 240 bonus points for your alliance. If you die once, you will only earn 160 points if you defeat the defender. You will only earn 80 bonus points if you die twice before defeating the defender. And if you die three or more times before you defeat the defender, you will earn zero bonus points. If you don't defeat the defender at all the other side will get 250 points for the placed defender remaining alive. That is definitely a system that rewards skillful play on attack.

Under the announced system there's no specific reason to bring back defender kill points, and in fact that would be a step backward.

GroundedWisdom

DNA3000 wrote: »

Slux83 wrote: »

Top alliances already clear the map 100% every time. Having a remaining defender mechanics won't change anything. The only important thing as you said, is skill, but you are missing the concept.

SKILL = KILL THE OPPONENT WITHOUT BEING KILLED

So please bring back defense kills

I don't think you read the announcement or any of the discussion following it. In the announced system, if you kill a placed defender without being killed once, you will earn 240 bonus points for your alliance. If you die once, you will only earn 160 points if you defeat the defender. You will only earn 80 bonus points if you die twice before defeating the defender. And if you die three or more times before you defeat the defender, you will earn zero bonus points. If you don't defeat the defender at all the other side will get 250 points for the placed defender remaining alive. That is definitely a system that rewards skillful play on attack.

Under the announced system there's no specific reason to bring back defender kill points, and in fact that would be a step backward.

Correct. They've also removed Attack Kills metrics.

GroundedWisdom

Adding Defender Kills at this point would be moot because that's the purpose of the new metrics.

Kpatrix

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

Slux83 wrote: »

Top alliances already clear the map 100% every time. Having a remaining defender mechanics won't change anything. The only important thing as you said, is skill, but you are missing the concept.

SKILL = KILL THE OPPONENT WITHOUT BEING KILLED

So please bring back defense kills

I don't think you read the announcement or any of the discussion following it. In the announced system, if you kill a placed defender without being killed once, you will earn 240 bonus points for your alliance. If you die once, you will only earn 160 points if you defeat the defender. You will only earn 80 bonus points if you die twice before defeating the defender. And if you die three or more times before you defeat the defender, you will earn zero bonus points. If you don't defeat the defender at all the other side will get 250 points for the placed defender remaining alive. That is definitely a system that rewards skillful play on attack.

Under the announced system there's no specific reason to bring back defender kill points, and in fact that would be a step backward.

Correct. They've also removed Attack Kills metrics.

Attack kill metrics are still there, you get points for taking down defenders in a skillful way. There is actually an emphasis on attacker kills metrics with the bonus points for playing well.

MEKA5

@Kabam Miike this is great news! Glad you've been listening to the players suggestions.
Definitely a move in the right direction!!! Can't wait to test it.

BaironDH

So were still ignoring the fact that matching using war rating as opposed to alliance rating or really ANYTHING else is absolute trash? You guys are just never gonna fix that huh?

The changes look like BS to me, will have to see what happens when they go live because as usual, it looks fine on paper (although, im really using the term fine very loosley).

I assume rewards will be looked at as well because weve basically been receiving the same **** for 2 years of AW tiers now...

TonytheSlayer

The new update to war scoring looks great on paper. im excited to get into this game mode. There is one thing that was not addressed that stood out to me. There is no mention of the classes being detected with or with the detect and scouter lens masteries. In the current mode we can see all classes in all tiers. (I know we can see all champs too but that is another issue, im only talking about the classes being viewable in this post) This was a change made by kabam that NONE of the community asked for. i would like to know if this stays and we can see all classes in all tiers if you kabam are going to compensate those of us that spent resources on the detect and scouter lens masteries. the players who purchased these did so to gain a strategic advantage in war and you as kabam made said masteries obsolete. i think it not only fair but deserving that we be compensated for said masteries.
If any player agrees with this and wants our voice to be heard on this matter please like and leave your comment on here to make kabam aware of this issue. I think if we voice this enough kabam will do the right thing by us on this issue.
TonyDola

ChefSkallywag

So all the **** champs I ranked up for diversity was a waste of resources. Will we be receiving compensation for wasted time and effort because you guys screwed up war and are now tucking your tail between your legs.

NinjaiX

Apologies if this has already been mentioned but many people have ranked up undesirable champs like Jane Foster, Luke Cage, Hulkbuster etc to maximise defender diversity and defender rating. Now with this change in strategy which no longer relies on rating and/or diversity, are you planning on offering any down tickets?

A lot of time, effort and selflessness went into ranking up undesirable champs which now have zero use as people will now go back to placing the most difficult defenders as it's all about getting defender kills to minimise the points that the opponent gets. It's very unlikely that you will do that with the likes of Jane Foster and Luke Cage..

Please advise on this @Kabam Miike @Kabam Vydious

chunkyb

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I mean, if it were to be a definitive tie breaker, it would only have to account for something in the event of a tie. I agree with that. In this case, I believe it's intended to tip the scale in the event of a close scoring scenario. They could lower it, but it would still serve that purpose.

The fact that they seem reluctant to call it a "close war scale tipper" suggests that's not what they want it to appear to be psychologically. If they came straight out and said they want diversity points to decide close wars, I think they'd be face-palmed.

Correct. However, I'm sure they're aware of what an actual tie-breaker is. I suppose we could argue that the metrics serve that purpose when there is a tie in scoring. Difference being they still account for something when there is no tie present. It's clear they want Diversity to account for something at least.

I'm taking a shot every time you say metrics.
2 for meta.
3 for "managing a win"

And I'm really excited to try out the new war. They need to bump the time scale on rewards forward now.

TonytheSlayer

Lagacy69 wrote: »

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.

I agree with lags here. In my opinion, we have had the same rewards for along time now. The rewards DO NOT reflect the skill or dedication required for the day to day grind of war. As is the incentive these rewards gives us is to do war if we are close to forming a 5* or 4* crystal. The arena can not have better rewards then war, that is just unbalanced. "I think on paper this new iteration looks great. i can not wait to get into this war." That is what i first said when I read this. By the time i got to the end of the post I realized there was no mention of rewards and my level of interest and haste to play war diminished. This is a great opportunity for KABAM to add more tier 1 alphas to the game. If not as a flat out reward for a win or loss, then at least the chance in one of, if not both, of the war crystals. The rewards over all for war i think need to be buffed to reflect the skill hard work and time committed to war. I hope more people get behind lagacy69 on this issue.

LocoMotives

NinjaiX wrote: »

Apologies if this has already been mentioned but many people have ranked up undesirable champs like Jane Foster, Luke Cage, Hulkbuster etc to maximise defender diversity and defender rating. Now with this change in strategy which no longer relies on rating and/or diversity, are you planning on offering any down tickets?

A lot of time, effort and selflessness went into ranking up undesirable champs which now have zero use as people will now go back to placing the most difficult defenders as it's all about getting defender kills to minimise the points that the opponent gets. It's very unlikely that you will do that with the likes of Jane Foster and Luke Cage..

Please advise on this @Kabam Miike @Kabam Vydious

It would only be “selflessness” if the champs remained. RDTs would remove any sacrifice those players may have made.

GroundedWisdom

chunkyb wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I mean, if it were to be a definitive tie breaker, it would only have to account for something in the event of a tie. I agree with that. In this case, I believe it's intended to tip the scale in the event of a close scoring scenario. They could lower it, but it would still serve that purpose.

The fact that they seem reluctant to call it a "close war scale tipper" suggests that's not what they want it to appear to be psychologically. If they came straight out and said they want diversity points to decide close wars, I think they'd be face-palmed.

Correct. However, I'm sure they're aware of what an actual tie-breaker is. I suppose we could argue that the metrics serve that purpose when there is a tie in scoring. Difference being they still account for something when there is no tie present. It's clear they want Diversity to account for something at least.

I'm taking a shot every time you say metrics.
2 for meta.
3 for "managing a win"

And I'm really excited to try out the new war. They need to bump the time scale on rewards forward now.

You could also take a shot at commenting without making me a part of it everytime. Perhaps the conversation would continue the civil flow.

chunkyb

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

chunkyb wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

I mean, if it were to be a definitive tie breaker, it would only have to account for something in the event of a tie. I agree with that. In this case, I believe it's intended to tip the scale in the event of a close scoring scenario. They could lower it, but it would still serve that purpose.

The fact that they seem reluctant to call it a "close war scale tipper" suggests that's not what they want it to appear to be psychologically. If they came straight out and said they want diversity points to decide close wars, I think they'd be face-palmed.

Correct. However, I'm sure they're aware of what an actual tie-breaker is. I suppose we could argue that the metrics serve that purpose when there is a tie in scoring. Difference being they still account for something when there is no tie present. It's clear they want Diversity to account for something at least.

I'm taking a shot every time you say metrics.
2 for meta.
3 for "managing a win"

And I'm really excited to try out the new war. They need to bump the time scale on rewards forward now.

You could also take a shot at commenting without making me a part of it everytime. Perhaps the conversation would continue the civil flow.

Oh that was civil. Calm down. Gotta be able to laugh from time to time. Also, I made comments about my excitement for the new changes and my hopes that kabam could move on to rewards. Dragging out change after change (and admittedly upping the difficulty numerous times) with no changes to rewards is a bit silly, if not outright wrong. The excuse of "not addressing rewards until war is finalized" isn't a good one because no one can say when things will be finalized. It's time to bump em up a bit just as a gesture of good will towards the player base that has been dealing with the shitshow that war has been for so many months.

Not to mention the complete slap in the face to Summoners that came from the fundamental change to war from op defenders to diversity and now possibly back to op defenders again. Players take their cues from kabam. Kabam creates a loooong standing game mode that encourages ranking op defenders, once defenders are ranked, they move the goal posts... Months go by with many players adjusting to the new goal posts, in this case more diversity.. And now the goal posts are shifted again. I believe I'll like these new changes, but something should be done for the players because of the near erratic movement of said goalposts. And no, the December stuff doesn't count. I shouldn't have to use my in game resources to get compensation for the ridiculous **** we've dealt with. And since miiike has already mentioned that some champs will always be better than others, I don't expect a rehashing of old, tired, wrong arguments about there not being such a thing as op defenders. Tyvm

unknown

This content has been removed.

Darkness82

Good job kabam on the scoring method in Aw nice one but is diversity still gonna effect the wing alliance and no rewards if it’s a tie Breaker but overall good job Kabam love the changes

unknown

This content has been removed.

chunkyb

zero7 wrote: »

i think the argument for rank down tickets because people ranked up poor defenders for diversity is weaker now than the previous arguments for rank down tickets when diversity was introduced. before diversity was introduced, we didn’t know defenders would be de-valued. after it was introduced, miike emphasized that these were iterations. ranking up for aw during the process of change is inherently risky. i think we should drop the rdt issue now. what kabam has done with war is so awesome, along with many of the implementations this month. let’s enjoy it!

I didn't mention those specifically. But your argument is one I see often on the forums, and it's a bad one every time.
It amounts to "hey we got really, really screwed for x amount of months... But hey this cool thing has happened now. It's only half as cool as it should be, but let's just be super happy with it anyway and move on". No offense to you, in particular... But I can't accept those types of arguments. It was the same deal with the appreciation month that people just decided would suffice for the promised compensation that we never saw.

Kabam has shown time and time again that if you just accept a pittance, that's all you'll get. And the next pittance will either be smaller and/or cost you more in game resources. I'm all for touting the good. This month has plenty of good, including these war changes. Does it balance the scale? Not in the least.

Mana_Pot

I don't really understand how worked up people have been getting over RDTs. If you ranked up trash champs just for aw defense then that's on you. When we needed diversity in my ally, we'd just put out 4/40s of whatever trash we needed out there and it worked fine. There was never any need to blow t4cc or anything rare on them. If you did something like blow 4 t2a on a 5* Luke Cage just to fill a defense slot... then you deserve that.

chunkyb

Mana_Pot wrote: »

I don't really understand how worked up people have been getting over RDTs. If you ranked up trash champs just for aw defense then that's on you. When we needed diversity in my ally, we'd just put out 4/40s of whatever trash we needed out there and it worked fine. There was never any need to blow t4cc or anything rare on them. If you did something like blow 4 t2a on a 5* Luke Cage just to fill a defense slot... then you deserve that.

Agreed on the aspect of ranking trash champs. I refused to rank for diversity because ranking for defense in old wars had already bitten me in the ass because of diversity.

I will say that it's absolutely horrible to continue to move the goalposts for players tho. It's just a very bad thing to do.

Mana_Pot

chunkyb wrote: »

Mana_Pot wrote: »

I don't really understand how worked up people have been getting over RDTs. If you ranked up trash champs just for aw defense then that's on you. When we needed diversity in my ally, we'd just put out 4/40s of whatever trash we needed out there and it worked fine. There was never any need to blow t4cc or anything rare on them. If you did something like blow 4 t2a on a 5* Luke Cage just to fill a defense slot... then you deserve that.

Agreed on the aspect of ranking trash champs. I refused to rank for diversity because ranking for defense in old wars had already bitten me in the ass because of diversity.

I will say that it's absolutely horrible to continue to move the goalposts for players tho. It's just a very bad thing to do.

Constantly moving the goalposts as you put it has just caused me to become apathetic to a lot of it. I do what I can without putting myself out and just roll with the outcome. Not terribly exciting. I'm hopeful for this iteration of war, but I admit that I did not miss fighting 10 Magiks.

Mana_Pot

NinjaiX

Mana_Pot wrote: »

I don't really understand how worked up people have been getting over RDTs. If you ranked up trash champs just for aw defense then that's on you. When we needed diversity in my ally, we'd just put out 4/40s of whatever trash we needed out there and it worked fine. There was never any need to blow t4cc or anything rare on them. If you did something like blow 4 t2a on a 5* Luke Cage just to fill a defense slot... then you deserve that.

When you are in the higher AW tiers placing a 4/40 champ will mean you lose the war before it even starts.

<admin edited to remove insult, do not belittle your fellow players just because their opinion differs to yours or you think they play at a lower level>

I play in tier 1-2 and anyone in the top AW tiers knows the score with defenders.

Juggerneyks

First off, im on board with the changes, good work. My only concern is the node difficulty has been cranked up alot since the 1st iteration. These new changes are going to bring alliances back to placing a harder defense and inturn with the increased node difficulty might now make it very hard to get to the boss.

I would suggest returning the node difficulty to pre iteration or 1st iteration difficulty @Kabam Miike which i think would balance out alliances returning their defence to pre diversity

RagamugginGunner

Juggerneyks wrote: »

First off, im on board with the changes, good work. My only concern is the node difficulty has been cranked up alot since the 1st iteration. These new changes are going to bring alliances back to placing a harder defense and inturn with the increased node difficulty might now make it very hard to get to the boss.

I would suggest returning the node difficulty to pre iteration or 1st iteration difficulty @Kabam Miike which i think would balance out alliances returning their defence to pre diversity

We've come full circle but with harder nodes and we're all thankful, lol. Kabam employing the long-con!

Juggerneyks

RagamugginGunner wrote: »

Juggerneyks wrote: »

First off, im on board with the changes, good work. My only concern is the node difficulty has been cranked up alot since the 1st iteration. These new changes are going to bring alliances back to placing a harder defense and inturn with the increased node difficulty might now make it very hard to get to the boss.

I would suggest returning the node difficulty to pre iteration or 1st iteration difficulty @Kabam Miike which i think would balance out alliances returning their defence to pre diversity

We've come full circle but with harder nodes and we're all thankful, lol. Kabam employing the long-con!

Hopefully the player base will jump on this quickly, cause i can see it being a main complaint soon about war 3.0