We will get a clear picture when we will have our first war. I am ok with the score system if I have the liberty to make changes in our strategy to get max score but I don’t want to get caught with the limitations of this new system.like the previous when you can’t do anything when you reach to the limit of the scoring.
Does any one have more info on how this diversity thing works to get max points.
Technically speaking, to get the maximum amount of points you need to kill all three bosses (I'm presuming three battlegroups), explore 100% of the map, kill every defender on the map while not dying once, and place a maximal diversity defense (i.e. unique defenders per battlegroup). On top of that, you can lower your opponent's score by 80 points for every kill your defenders gets, up to a maximum of three kills per defender (240 points).
So you have two things to consider. You need to maximize how many points you get, but you can also try to reduce the points your opponent gets by generating defensive kills. The trade off is that a unique defender is now worth 30 bonus diversity points, but a defender kill is worth 80 (up to three, as mentioned previously). So a duplicate defender that can get a kill is worth more than a unique but weak defender that won't generate a kill.
The best strategy for placing defenders is situational to your alliance and your likely opposition's capabilities.
I'm just disappointed how we circled back into a tougher situation than during AW 14.0.
Worse nodes.
Worse layout.
It's great that we finally got back a metric for skill but we're back where we were and another 2 steps back. I don't want to use the word "long con", but it's a little fitting. We no longer have Thorns, but we have Bane, Buffet, Masochism, Spite, and Arc Overload. It doesn't make any sense.
It seems that Attack bonus should be weighted. A standard 240 on most nodes seems ok, but when you get to the mini bosses and boss (especially a boss) it’s naturally going to take more champs to kill a boss. Making the starting value higher for these specific nodes seems necessary.
To recap, new war comes out and its 100% diversity....kabam says its here to stay so players empty their resources into less then ideal champs, but boy do we cause an uproar
They do a little bit of rejuggling, and it's 100% defender rating with a side of 100% diversity...players continue to empty their resources into less then ideal champs and we just continue to murmur back and forth while kabam says they are still making changes.
Once everyone has exhausted their resources kabam says they have managed to fix it all and they were listening to us the whole time and have changed it back to what war used to be (mostly skill and good defenders) with just a small side of 2.5% diversity....sigh...here comes a gold realm and a wave of events just in time for 6*s....
My only point is this was a rolled out series of events to increase player spending both of resources and actual money.
we just got the ole, wash, rinse, repeat treatment. your a clever clever girl kabam.
I'm just disappointed how we circled back into a tougher situation than during AW 14.0.
Worse nodes.
Worse layout.
It's great that we finally got back a metric for skill but we're back where we were and another 2 steps back. I don't want to use the word "long con", but it's a little fitting. We no longer have Thorns, but we have Bane, Buffet, Masochism, Spite, and Arc Overload. It doesn't make any sense.
I'm just disappointed how we circled back into a tougher situation than during AW 14.0.
Worse nodes.
Worse layout.
It's great that we finally got back a metric for skill but we're back where we were and another 2 steps back. I don't want to use the word "long con", but it's a little fitting. We no longer have Thorns, but we have Bane, Buffet, Masochism, Spite, and Arc Overload. It doesn't make any sense.
I agree. I never minded the thorns anyway.
Thorns had multiple counters. Archangel, Crossbones, Black Widow, etc..
Some of these new nodes with the right placement have almost zero counters giving us no option but to whip out our wallets if we don't even possess the exact right champ for that specific node/defender combination. Thorns seems fun compared to the stuff they have now.
I'm just disappointed how we circled back into a tougher situation than during AW 14.0.
Worse nodes.
Worse layout.
It's great that we finally got back a metric for skill but we're back where we were and another 2 steps back. I don't want to use the word "long con", but it's a little fitting. We no longer have Thorns, but we have Bane, Buffet, Masochism, Spite, and Arc Overload. It doesn't make any sense.
I agree. I never minded the thorns anyway.
Thorns had multiple counters. Archangel, Crossbones, Black Widow, etc..
Some of these new nodes with the right placement have almost zero counters giving us no option but to whip out our wallets if we don't even possess the exact right champ for that specific node/defender combination. Thorns seems fun compared to the stuff they have now.
I don't think there's any node/champion combination that has zero or almost zero counters. There are combinations that are harder to counter, but that's not the same thing as saying those counters are unavailable.
Also, Black Widow and Crossbones were not universal counters for thorns. Mordo was a common placement on thorns, and Mordo makes Black Widow a subpar choice and Crossbones an even worse choice if the defender has MD.
Remember the flare node we saw in the first AW introduction video by Kabam? That wasn't present in the map when AW was released. Current AW has that node. So yeah, thorough multiple "updates" to war, they finally brought it to a state they had in mind from the beginning and now they reduce the effectiveness of the stat that made season 2 war bearable (resulting in no 5+ NC, Magik, Dorm etc on the map) to virtually nothing and we thank them for that. Wonderful!
1) Why couldn't your team come up with something like this at the beginning when you released the major update for war? You're making it sound like the skill and attack performance is the new major breakthrough in war game mode design - patent pending...
2) Are you going to compensate us for all the wasted time and efforts during the period between now and when you introduced that ****??? All those wars everyone was supposed to win, but lost by 1-50 pts.
3) Have you fired the person who "developed" or was in charge of the screwed up war game mode yet??? Or is he / she still working at Kabam and we should expect more such **** to come out of him / her?
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!
.Dear Mike I like these changes but
I don't think dropping diversty will help weaker alliance it will open fire on them
We will enter a war made of Ice man & magic & hyprion all duplicated are top killing tier
Diversty now will be neglected
This is not a good idea
There will be no balance in the fight
For example my alliance can drop 10 magic in bg
This changes will only reward very skilled players & kabams profit
This will make placement more interesting but on the otherside fighting a couple of Icemen for example in 1 map will be painful
You should revise that desicion
Hate to break it to ya, but even before these awesome changes go into effect, many alliances have already switched weeks ago to mostly mystic defenses. Thankfully, there are even more attack counters to such mystic defenders than ever before. It takes a lot of practice to foster the skill, but that's what makes Alliance War such a fun game mode when skill is rewarded with points.
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!
.Dear Mike I like these changes but
I don't think dropping diversty will help weaker alliance it will open fire on them
We will enter a war made of Ice man & magic & hyprion all duplicated are top killing tier
Diversty now will be neglected
This is not a good idea
There will be no balance in the fight
For example my alliance can drop 10 magic in bg
This changes will only reward very skilled players & kabams profit
This will make placement more interesting but on the otherside fighting a couple of Icemen for example in 1 map will be painful
You should revise that desicion
There are many other areas of the game that help you get to a higher level. This part of the game is based on skill mainly as it should be. It's one part of the game that we have to test our strategy and tactics against other alliances.
Are they just staying away from this thread and peoples questions now?
Did they weigh in on the update to rewards? Or are they continuing with the almost 4 month old reason they gave at release of the updated AW...."There are currently no adjustments being made to the rewards in Alliance Wars, but a revamp is on our radar"
Are they just staying away from this thread and peoples questions now?
Did they weigh in on the update to rewards? Or are they continuing with the almost 4 month old reason they gave at release of the updated AW...."There are currently no adjustments being made to the rewards in Alliance Wars, but a revamp is on our radar"
They finally listened to the player base with the latest announcement making the fundamental change to be about skill. I am actually hopeful that they will address rewards soon in the next couple updates.
Are they just staying away from this thread and peoples questions now?
Did they weigh in on the update to rewards? Or are they continuing with the almost 4 month old reason they gave at release of the updated AW...."There are currently no adjustments being made to the rewards in Alliance Wars, but a revamp is on our radar"
They’re definitely reading as I got a warning for belittling someone (apparently) but no response to any of the questions posed by many people in this thread alone. You would have thought since this is a major update which has gone full circle and made people spend resources on trash champions would have warranted a response but in typical fashion we get nothing...
Are they just staying away from this thread and peoples questions now?
Did they weigh in on the update to rewards? Or are they continuing with the almost 4 month old reason they gave at release of the updated AW...."There are currently no adjustments being made to the rewards in Alliance Wars, but a revamp is on our radar"
They’re definitely reading as I got a warning for belittling someone (apparently) but no response to any of the questions posed by many people in this thread alone. You would have thought since this is a major update which has gone full circle and made people spend resources on trash champions would have warranted a response but in typical fashion we get nothing...
I love all of these changes but now that I’ve ranked up a whole team just for diversity what happens to them? Now that it’s all about placing a strong defense they will have no use. Are you going to be giving rank down tickets for all the rank ups that were done just for diversity? Other then that I like these changes and wish this is how it was from the beginning.
Are specific tiers playing on specific levels of difficulty? I recall post from a mod listing each tier and level of map difficulty , but can't find that's post anywhere.
I ask becuz we are in tier8 and it shows we're playing on the "hard" map.
Why are we on the hard map , playing for 3* and 4* shards?
I thought the hard map cut off was at tier7, where5* shards are rewarded.
@MikeHock if you face an alliance in a different tier the system picks which map you will run but the rewards are still whatever tier you are in. At least that is my understanding. After a few losses we got the tier 2 map facing a tier 2 opponent but we still had tier 1 rewards.
@MikeHock if you face an alliance in a different tier the system picks which map you will run but the rewards are still whatever tier you are in. At least that is my understanding. After a few losses we got the tier 2 map facing a tier 2 opponent but we still had tier 1 rewards.
Thanks, LNF (hope you don't mind I abbreviated your name). Still, that seems rather silly, considering that our rewards don't really match the level of difficulty we're about to face. I wish I could find that mod post showing tier levels and map difficulties.
There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards.
This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
It's probably a matter of both Allies playing the same Map. It wouldn't be fair to the lower Ally. Unless they added a further Matchmaking parameter that only Matched the same Tier.
To be honest, I'm not exactly sure how it's determined. For us, it's not a huge deal. Our Rewards are the same, but the Map is easier. Our lineup doesn't change.
There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards.
This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards.
I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches.
I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing.
Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums.
There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards.
This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards.
I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches.
I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing.
Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums.
I agree. That is a huge difference and disadvantage arguably for one of the alliances. Tier 7 war maps include bane and tier 8 does not. Tier 7 includes automatic poison and automatic bleed nodes whereas tier 8 includes enhanced bleed or enhanced poison. Hopefully this issue gets resolved.
Any word on the top left mini boss only having one path to reach it? Every other mini boss has 2 portals you can use to get to them, why is the top left any different?
There's a big difference between hard & intermediate maps and it impacts defensive placement a lot. If it says we're playing the hard map that's what we base our defensive set up around.... not that we should be playing the hard map in tier8 for 4* shards.
This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
Kabam Miike previously asserted that when two alliances at different tiers are matched, it will randomly choose the map for one or the other tier. Of course, your rewards are based on your tier. In my alliance, we alternate between the T1 and T2 maps at present, though we're mostly getting T2 rewards.
I'm looking forward to the changes in the next iteration, but it won't help here -- we can reasonably expect that some alliances will alternate near the boundary between different maps, and Kabam's solution seems reasonable given their choice of how to match. (That said -- it way new alliances are placed is really horrible. Last time we started it took two months to reach our actual level. Two months of rolling over alliances that had no hope ... this was before 14.0, so it's not like we were even giving them easy diversity matches.
I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing.
Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums.
Yes, specific tiers are associated with specific maps. But if you have an alliance at T11 and they get the intermediate map, and they're matched up to an alliance in T12 with the novice map (I"m not sure these are the boundary points, but it's possible to dig up the post if needed) -- then both alliances will get either the novice or the intermediate map, with the choice (according to kabam) at random.
Neither alliance has an advantage; for the T11 alliance, the worst that will happen is that they will see the map they'll get if they lose a few matches (if they get the novice map); and for the T12 alliance, the worst that will happen is they'll see the map they'll get if they win a few matches (if they get the intermediate map).
So long as both alliances get the same nodes, the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map. But so long as you explore enough (where enough is much less than 100%), you'll get all the exploration rewards and it's just a question of if you get winner or loser awards.
It seems pretty minor in the scheme of things, and I don't have a better solution unless they're going to fix matching much more broadly.
War rating is a poor way to do matching because it takes a long time to settle, and is easily subject to abuse (e.g. alliance hoping for easy 5* shards, as well as taking far too long for new alliances to reach a rating that makes sense -- leading to very boring and lopsided matches). So if they worked on improving that, and along the way avoided surprises for alliances near the border between different maps -- that'd seem reasonable. But I don't have a problem with the surprises, despite the fact that it sometimes gives us T1 nodes for T2 rewards.
...the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map.
Exactly. This happened weeks ago where people in very high tiers were on the intermediate map. That hard map is not "slightly" harder; it's a big boost in difficulty compared to intermediate, IMHO. You have added bleed and poison nodes, Bane, Spite, All or Nothing, Buffet, Masochism, more unblockables, Power Shield.... the list goes on.
It just isn't consistent that we played 3 wars in Tier8 and 2 of them were on the intermediate map and 1 on the hard map.
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Win)
Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss)
Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win) Tier8 - Hard Map (?)
Comments
Technically speaking, to get the maximum amount of points you need to kill all three bosses (I'm presuming three battlegroups), explore 100% of the map, kill every defender on the map while not dying once, and place a maximal diversity defense (i.e. unique defenders per battlegroup). On top of that, you can lower your opponent's score by 80 points for every kill your defenders gets, up to a maximum of three kills per defender (240 points).
So you have two things to consider. You need to maximize how many points you get, but you can also try to reduce the points your opponent gets by generating defensive kills. The trade off is that a unique defender is now worth 30 bonus diversity points, but a defender kill is worth 80 (up to three, as mentioned previously). So a duplicate defender that can get a kill is worth more than a unique but weak defender that won't generate a kill.
The best strategy for placing defenders is situational to your alliance and your likely opposition's capabilities.
Worse nodes.
Worse layout.
It's great that we finally got back a metric for skill but we're back where we were and another 2 steps back. I don't want to use the word "long con", but it's a little fitting. We no longer have Thorns, but we have Bane, Buffet, Masochism, Spite, and Arc Overload. It doesn't make any sense.
To recap, new war comes out and its 100% diversity....kabam says its here to stay so players empty their resources into less then ideal champs, but boy do we cause an uproar
They do a little bit of rejuggling, and it's 100% defender rating with a side of 100% diversity...players continue to empty their resources into less then ideal champs and we just continue to murmur back and forth while kabam says they are still making changes.
Once everyone has exhausted their resources kabam says they have managed to fix it all and they were listening to us the whole time and have changed it back to what war used to be (mostly skill and good defenders) with just a small side of 2.5% diversity....sigh...here comes a gold realm and a wave of events just in time for 6*s....
My only point is this was a rolled out series of events to increase player spending both of resources and actual money.
we just got the ole, wash, rinse, repeat treatment. your a clever clever girl kabam.
I agree. I never minded the thorns anyway.
Thorns had multiple counters. Archangel, Crossbones, Black Widow, etc..
Some of these new nodes with the right placement have almost zero counters giving us no option but to whip out our wallets if we don't even possess the exact right champ for that specific node/defender combination. Thorns seems fun compared to the stuff they have now.
I don't think there's any node/champion combination that has zero or almost zero counters. There are combinations that are harder to counter, but that's not the same thing as saying those counters are unavailable.
Also, Black Widow and Crossbones were not universal counters for thorns. Mordo was a common placement on thorns, and Mordo makes Black Widow a subpar choice and Crossbones an even worse choice if the defender has MD.
@Kabam Miike I have few questions:
1) Why couldn't your team come up with something like this at the beginning when you released the major update for war? You're making it sound like the skill and attack performance is the new major breakthrough in war game mode design - patent pending...
2) Are you going to compensate us for all the wasted time and efforts during the period between now and when you introduced that ****??? All those wars everyone was supposed to win, but lost by 1-50 pts.
3) Have you fired the person who "developed" or was in charge of the screwed up war game mode yet??? Or is he / she still working at Kabam and we should expect more such **** to come out of him / her?
Thanks
Hate to break it to ya, but even before these awesome changes go into effect, many alliances have already switched weeks ago to mostly mystic defenses. Thankfully, there are even more attack counters to such mystic defenders than ever before. It takes a lot of practice to foster the skill, but that's what makes Alliance War such a fun game mode when skill is rewarded with points.
There are many other areas of the game that help you get to a higher level. This part of the game is based on skill mainly as it should be. It's one part of the game that we have to test our strategy and tactics against other alliances.
Did they weigh in on the update to rewards? Or are they continuing with the almost 4 month old reason they gave at release of the updated AW...."There are currently no adjustments being made to the rewards in Alliance Wars, but a revamp is on our radar"
They finally listened to the player base with the latest announcement making the fundamental change to be about skill. I am actually hopeful that they will address rewards soon in the next couple updates.
They’re definitely reading as I got a warning for belittling someone (apparently) but no response to any of the questions posed by many people in this thread alone. You would have thought since this is a major update which has gone full circle and made people spend resources on trash champions would have warranted a response but in typical fashion we get nothing...
Nobody forced anyone to rank trash champs.
I ask becuz we are in tier8 and it shows we're playing on the "hard" map.
Why are we on the hard map , playing for 3* and 4* shards?
I thought the hard map cut off was at tier7, where5* shards are rewarded.
Thanks, LNF (hope you don't mind I abbreviated your name). Still, that seems rather silly, considering that our rewards don't really match the level of difficulty we're about to face. I wish I could find that mod post showing tier levels and map difficulties.
Actually I believe you have a chance to play either map, lower or higher. I don't think it defaults to the lower.
I've had several lower. Haven't seen a higher. I seem to remember a comment made by a Mod that the easier Map comes up.
This just doesn't make any sense. We just did another war in tier8 on the intermediate map. Now we're still in tier8 but play vs a hard map? IMHO this should be consistent and looked at & possibly fixed.... unless there's something I'm not understanding
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Win)
Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss)
Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win)
Today: Tier8 - Hard Map !?
Last 2 tier8 Wars were on the intermediate Map.
Today in tier8, Hard Map.
Makes no sense.
I do recall the post, but if the map is chosen at random, that affects the placement of our defensive heroes since there are big differences in the nodes. I'm arranging based on a Hard Map since that it what we're showing.
Besides that; I was pretty sure a Kabam mod made a post that showed that specific tiers play specific map levels. I can't find that post since it wasn't in any announcements and it's buried/lost in these forums.
I agree. That is a huge difference and disadvantage arguably for one of the alliances. Tier 7 war maps include bane and tier 8 does not. Tier 7 includes automatic poison and automatic bleed nodes whereas tier 8 includes enhanced bleed or enhanced poison. Hopefully this issue gets resolved.
...the only real complaint you could make is that you get worse rewards for a slightly harder map.
Exactly. This happened weeks ago where people in very high tiers were on the intermediate map. That hard map is not "slightly" harder; it's a big boost in difficulty compared to intermediate, IMHO. You have added bleed and poison nodes, Bane, Spite, All or Nothing, Buffet, Masochism, more unblockables, Power Shield.... the list goes on.
It just isn't consistent that we played 3 wars in Tier8 and 2 of them were on the intermediate map and 1 on the hard map.
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Win)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Win)
Tier6 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier7 - Hard Map (Loss)
Tier8 - Intermediate Map (Loss)
Tier9 - Intermediate Map (Win)
Tier8 - Hard Map (?)