When diversity doesn’t matter anymore :/ (see pic)

Ok. Well congrats, we’re right back at it. To be fair I have a 5/50 magik 99 and a duped 3/45 magik (both on defense) what else did they expect to happen??

Comments

BulkHuster

Huffma89 wrote: »

Only issue i have is juggs r4 MD 5.. and dorm m5. You evade and basically dead. If they would have fixed this early in war it still would have been good

They just NEED to fix MD asap! It’s been way too long

Speeds80

War has always been who spends wins, this just brings skill back into it because it's going to be way harder and way more revives to 100% these defenders, so we should have more people not getting boss kills. Now if they buy revives they don't guarantee themselves a win. My alliance will go back to our old strategy of only reviving if we look like winning. Honestly though I hope they have changed the war matchup criteria, my alliance has dropped from t3 to tier 8, ( our fault for too many idiots dripping accidental duped defenders) we are competing for 3* and 4* shards, we keep getting 10m + matchups, we don't even want to play war but how else do we get loyalty for map 5

Thatweirdguy

War is back to being no fun. But this was inevitable. Diversity made it too easy so there wasn't enough revenue coming in.

GroundedWisdom

Cable wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

Cable wrote: »

Lets face it Kabam saw a drop in revenue from diversity and decreased diversity points so that we would go back to mystic wars. #moneygrab

Nope. This is a side effect of several changes happening in sequence. When diversity points were first introduced they arrived simultaneously with a change to the maps that made nodes trivially easy to knock over. This made mystic dispersion largely worthless, because it was too easy to kill almost any defender on any node. When they started increasing the node difficulty after realizing that the nodes were dialed down too easy and because players complained the maps were too trivially easy to 100% complete the increased difficulty *alone* was enough to start encouraging alliances to experiment with non-diverse defenses.

What people are seeing now isn't a sudden reaction to the current AW situation, its the natural consequence of the fact that if nodes are too easy the defender doesn't matter and diversity points are all-important, but if nodes are hard enough the defender matters a great deal and diversity points can be ignored if you can place a strong enough defense, mystic dispersion or otherwise.

People *want* to place their strongest defenders, and in every iteration of AW recently they either had a gun to their head telling them not to, or that gun was slowly pulled away and allowed the players to do what they already wanted to do. Reducing diversity points and reintroducing attacker kill points addresses some of the worst problems with 15.0 and 16.0 AW, but it reintroduces the 14.0 problem of mystic dispersion and non-unique defenders. That problem needs to be addressed separately, not with diversity point tweaks but better node design.

If this is indeed the case why not keep diversity points where they were and introduce the new scoring system of attacker kills?

This makes AW so you are not facing 3-5 Magik or Juggs as mini bosses and there is an element of skill added. It’s not that hard when you think about it. After all wasn’t all the 12.0 nerfs put in place for diversity???

The nerfs of 12.0 had more of a reason than just Diversity.

DNA3000

Cable wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

Cable wrote: »

Lets face it Kabam saw a drop in revenue from diversity and decreased diversity points so that we would go back to mystic wars. #moneygrab

Nope. This is a side effect of several changes happening in sequence. When diversity points were first introduced they arrived simultaneously with a change to the maps that made nodes trivially easy to knock over. This made mystic dispersion largely worthless, because it was too easy to kill almost any defender on any node. When they started increasing the node difficulty after realizing that the nodes were dialed down too easy and because players complained the maps were too trivially easy to 100% complete the increased difficulty *alone* was enough to start encouraging alliances to experiment with non-diverse defenses.

What people are seeing now isn't a sudden reaction to the current AW situation, its the natural consequence of the fact that if nodes are too easy the defender doesn't matter and diversity points are all-important, but if nodes are hard enough the defender matters a great deal and diversity points can be ignored if you can place a strong enough defense, mystic dispersion or otherwise.

People *want* to place their strongest defenders, and in every iteration of AW recently they either had a gun to their head telling them not to, or that gun was slowly pulled away and allowed the players to do what they already wanted to do. Reducing diversity points and reintroducing attacker kill points addresses some of the worst problems with 15.0 and 16.0 AW, but it reintroduces the 14.0 problem of mystic dispersion and non-unique defenders. That problem needs to be addressed separately, not with diversity point tweaks but better node design.

If this is indeed the case why not keep diversity points where they were and introduce the new scoring system of attacker kills?

I don't know how to answer that question directly, because it sounds like you're implying that if my perspective is correct Kabam would not have altered diversity points in the current iteration. But the one has nothing to do with the other. Defender diversity points were reduced several times in different iterations. It was originally 150 points per defender which was ludicrously high: that was higher than the points you got for *killing* the defender which means a dead diverse defender was worth more than a live non-diverse defender.

The previous iteration assigned 50 points per diverse defender and that was reduced in the current iteration to 30. Those twenty points would not be enough to incentivize players to remove their mystic defenders. The reason why they did this was honestly because of an error in their thinking. They believe that there exists a "correct" value for diversity points that will make diversity points basically not matter unless the war is essentially a tie, and then diversity points would decide the draw. They believe that aiming diversity points to be a maximum of 2.5% of the total will be the "right" value.

Diversity points were never meant to "force" players to place diverse defenders. That seems to be a consistent message they've been saying in all the AW threads, and it is consistent with them also continuing to lower their value as players complain about diversity points deciding wars.

It wasn't always logical, but on multiple occasions Kabam stated directly that players should not place defenders just to get the diversity points. They even went so far as to directly respond to a question of mine regarding defender decisions by saying explicitly that Kabam expected players to place the best defenders they could, and only rely on diversity points as a bonus, not to place for the sole purpose of getting diversity points.

Kabam wants us to place our best defenders, and they want us to place diverse defenses, but the only way for those two things to happen is if the best defender choices aren't always the same things for the entire map. But they aren't doing enough with node configurations to make that happen. They tried to do things like add enhanced bleed and poison to some nodes, but those node buffs are not enough to override the advantages of the best and strongest defenders, at least in most AW tiers.

Brandonius

This is not Kabam’s fault. It is all the bloody whiners on this forum who were not happy with inexpensive wars.

Huffma89

Brandonius wrote: »

This is not Kabam’s fault. It is all the bloody whiners on this forum who were not happy with inexpensive wars.

Lol old system looks amazing right about now. Only problem i really saw was MD

DNA3000

Brandonius wrote: »

This is not Kabam’s fault. It is all the bloody whiners on this forum who were not happy with inexpensive wars.

Everyone can have an inexpensive war if they don't care about strong competition. Just don't spend anything on wars.

If you keep losing because you don't spend, eventually you'll drop to a tier where your alliance without spending will be roughly even with the average alliance that does spend, and you'll start winning half the time again. The alliance war rewards will then be completely free.

Voluntaris

IMWeasel wrote: »

Also Icemans and nightcrawlers. Rediculous. Diversity wasn’t a bad thing. It forced some creativity on the part of defenders

The lack of scoring for skill WAS a bad thing.

DNA3000

DarkestDestroyer wrote: »

Now diversity is gone... everyone wants it back hahaha

Nobody wanted "diversity" gone. They wanted to not be forced to place exactly one of each defender with a points system that penalized them for doing anything different.

And the everyone who complained about being forced to place suboptimal defenders are probably not the same everyone that is complaning that the optimal defenders are now too hard. Thing is, some people want AW to be hard and competitive. Some want it to be an easy past time. I get that, and I do think the nodes now need to be revisited.

But AW is the *only* place in this game where head to head direct competition exists, and it is trivially avoidable for anyone that doesn't want that level of competition, and you even get rewards for losing. Given that, I think it is more logical to listen to the players that want direct competition more than the players that don't, when talking about the one place in the game where that direct competition exists. You can't please everyone, but logically the players you should be trying to please with the one part of your game with head to head competition ought to be the players that actually want that in the first place.

Dexman1349

DNA3000 wrote: »

Kabam wants us to place our best defenders, and they want us to place diverse defenses, but the only way for those two things to happen is if the best defender choices aren't always the same things for the entire map. But they aren't doing enough with node configurations to make that happen. They tried to do things like add enhanced bleed and poison to some nodes, but those node buffs are not enough to override the advantages of the best and strongest defenders, at least in most AW tiers.

This. Aside from a handful of key nodes (boss, miniboss, 24, 37, 42), it really doesn't matter what champs you place because they would rarely get kills (or even significant damage) so it was more beneficial to place diversity. Wars in my ally were literally decided by less than 200 points due to defender rating. We'd score 173k+ with 100% explore, full diversity and lose because they would have a slightly higher PI on defense. Out of our last 6 losses, we lost by a combined 550 points.

This may not be true for all tiers, but the upper tiers (ones that run AQ 5x5 regularly) can easily progress through the current war nodes without much issue regardless of defenders placed.

Cloutlordree

Y'all confuse me some complain when just to complain when something fixed or changed

wSWeaponX

What's wrong with MD? What about it needs to be fixed?

UnsaferBinkie7

wSWeaponX wrote: »

What's wrong with MD? What about it needs to be fixed?

The way it interacts with the dexterity buff. The way things count as expiration, like when wolvy has a regen buff and boom another regen buff replaces it, the previous buff didn't go through the full timer...that still gives power, so that's a problem.

Possibly the amount of power gained, yet that's pretty manageable with a lot of the things in game already.

I really love mystic dispersion, but it definitely needs to be fixed.

Armaganon00

IMWeasel wrote: »

They went back to a money grab. War used to be all about reviving and potions. Now it is again. And clearly I know that @Armaganon00 as I brought my blade 🤣🤣

Everything in this game is designed to cost. But the aw design before this last update was pay to win. Now revives count against them. Aw will always kill you with a random parry and 5 hit combo, or just cold snap or limbo.. but they want you to die md will never be nerfed.

GroundedWisdom

Armaganon00 wrote: »

IMWeasel wrote: »

They went back to a money grab. War used to be all about reviving and potions. Now it is again. And clearly I know that @Armaganon00 as I brought my blade 🤣🤣

Everything in this game is designed to cost. But the aw design before this last update was pay to win. Now revives count against them. Aw will always kill you with a random parry and 5 hit combo, or just cold snap or limbo.. but they want you to die md will never be nerfed.

Revives don't count at all. The first 3 Kills deduct Bonus Points. Which means Revives are still no more penalized than before.

Carames

I'll take a war that an alliance can go in and win over the last war system where you could get a matchup that is impossible to win every time. Magik and Juggs have an easy counter. Bring Magik on offense. I don't see this new system as being any more "spend to win" than the last. Less so, in fact, if your alliance has skilled players and good rosters.

WhatRYou

The Best Attacker in MCOC: VISA
The Best Defender in MCOC: MASTERCARD

NDK13

Lol this is nothing we put 6 r4 magik in defence in our bg

rwhack

Make dexterity give you a passive buff and most of the garbage is fixed.

Svain

Have dexterity not give you a buff at all with 1 point, I would be fine with that.

Huffma89

rwhack wrote: »

Make dexterity give you a passive buff and most of the garbage is fixed.

This is the only fixed needed imo

Mmx1991

I'm not sure if the concept of diversity can really exist.

Players will add defenders that max their chances of winning. So if a node gives a 1% advantage to a specific champ over everyone else, EVERY team will place that defender there. Unless of course they add a randomizer node that specifically asks for random champ to be placed there that gives more points and it's different for each team.

DOKTOROKTOPUS

**** diversity