Diversity has ruined war. We need less not more. There’s really no choosing to it if you want win. 100% at all $cost, diversity decides. No skill in that.
Yeah, let's do attacker diversity so people can stop bringing blade. (sarcasm)
Then watch as the diverse attack teams of the bgs get steamrolled by a beefed up mystic defense team. Goodluck fighting aw boss majik with your groot and hulk buster.
Why do you guys that don’t like this idea think it forces you to use blade? That’s like saying you are forced to place diversity. You would have the option to risk a higher percentage of dying with a worse champ for a few more points. It would be a counter to blade. It’s not a champ but it could be a counter. Most alliances lose and win 50% of their wars. My alliance plays alliances that have more blades then us and less blades than us. The amount of blades doesn’t determine who wins like defender rating did. You still have to have enough skill to not die but that’s made a lot easier by having a blade. Exactly why this isn’t a terrible idea like you think. People in my alliance that have blade think he’s too powerful with the trinity synergies.
If he's too powerful and makes the game easy then your alliance mates should make things challenging for themselves by bringing low tiered champs to attack.
And attacker bonus kill was introduced to make skill more necessary.
There is simply no need for attacker diversity. If they introduce attacker diversity and it becomes the new black, then mystic wars will definitely return
I think before we talk about adding some Diversity...we should talk about bringing back the original fun which is completely removed with the gameplay glitches (mostly noticeable in AW).
I am talking about: broken synergies, blocked Specials (chained with heavy attack), interrupted combos, frequent parrys by AI, insane AI recovering timings (after heavies and SP attacks) etc.
Maybe not noticeble with r4 5* rosters but they exist.
Naw, big money was spent on rolling for heros to use in AW attack. Any type of restriction of using them would be a slap in the face.
It's not a restriction at all. Let's face it.. people paid big money for "easy" and that' exactly what they got. Doesn't mean you also paid for the right to win. Champ still does what you paid for. But now there's an alternate option to win. With that same mentality.. You can't ever come out with a counter to Blade.. like.. Sabertooth..
In master/plat 1 War Rankings, it'd be required, so it would indeed restrict our ability to use our top champs ... in order to still win. Attacker Diversity would also grant even more of an advantage to high skilled pilots.
It's already a bad user experience when you pull a champ like Colossus that you cannot use anywhere in the game.
Now when you pull a good or great champ, your alliance may tell you that you cannot use them to attack for diversity sake? Sounds really fun... (sarcasm)
Worst idea ever.
This is definitely not meant as a personal attack. However the reason I am being quite vocal against this is because @DorkLessons you have a big voice and influence in the community and I am concerned that Kabam may actually listen to you on this.
How about instead of adding more of diversity, which is not fun at all, balance the champs more and make every champ have a use in the game?
I had this idea months and months ago and my thread got laughed at. 😢😢
And rightly so. This is a terrible idea. I DO NOT want others to dictate what champs I rank up and use. Defender diversity was already bad but still kinda tolerable since it didn't adversely affect my gameplay experience but attacker diversity will.
Most people don't play this game to showcase their "skill" by taking an underpowered champ against an overpowered opponent placed on an overpowered node. Some people still do it but it's solely for novelty YT videos and for bragging to alliance mates. That is not the main focus of this game. People just want to win fights by using the most efficient champs. That's it. If you take a Joe Fixit and fight RoL WS, the majority of the responses would be "Y tho?" and not "OMG, you're so cool bro!"
Actually @DorkLessons I would like to see attack bonus increased for minibosses and bosses that could keep ties from happening cuz a lot of alliances only only lose 240 and can die 20-30 times to a boss but the other alliance solos the boss. It bring in more skill to war rather than restricting alliance on what attackers they can use with attacker diversity
I think this was suggested and ignored on a number of occasions. I like it, would definitely move wars to being more tactical and resourceful however I firmly believe it would not ‘stop’ or reduce piloting by any means, on the contrary it may even trigger it further!
It's already a bad user experience when you pull a champ like Colossus that you cannot use anywhere in the game.
Now when you pull a good or great champ, your alliance may tell you that you cannot use them to attack for diversity sake? Sounds really fun... (sarcasm)
Worst idea ever.
This is definitely not meant as a personal attack. However the reason I am being quite vocal against this is because @DorkLessons you have a big voice and influence in the community and I am concerned that Kabam may actually listen to you on this.
How about instead of adding more of diversity, which is not fun at all, balance the champs more and make every champ have a use in the game?
Now that would be fun.
No personal attack taken my friend.. Just getting some discussion on this going is all. You mentioned getting a colossus as a bad experience.. Mainly because this champ needs a little tuning. But once he's been tuned.. like lets say.. Luke Cage.. or Red Hulk.. Would this still be the case?
The other reason I bring it up is there are a lot of champs people glaze over because their main focus is just God Tier only.. They aren't fully looking at Utility and usefulness of champs because again.. they didn't make the God tier list.
This has nothing to do with making it harder.. but adding another level of complexity and strategy to the game. Going full diversity on Attack might be a detriment.. maybe it's not meant for that.. maybe it's just swapping out 1 champ to get the win. I mean I've heard people bringing in 3* Ghost Riders or 3* Stark Spideys to war.. JUST so they can steamroll the entire war path with a Blade lol..
I would imagine people willing to step out and maybe use one different champ out of the 3 can edge a win out with some extra points.
Pilots are a whole other matter.. that just sucks.. So you can't do anything because of pilots.. and until that is settled.. I guess none of this matters.
This idea is horrible for a ton of reasons.
1-With the current state of alliance war this would be another present to the big spenders. Who cares if I die 30 times and I lost the attack bonus? I have the attacker diversity.
2- we would have to do re do all the rank up decisions.
3- we need specific champions for the alliance war in the current state, we can’t take care of certain nodes without those champions.
4- this alliance war seasons are a total mess in my opinion, if the majority of people use blade and other few champions is because of the bs we have to face in aw. Attacker diversity would not be a solution.
5- I have never thought I could say this but I think Dave is working for kabam at this point. This idea seems to treat us like a bunch of idiots. That’s why I unsubscribed him.
Yeah, let's do attacker diversity so people can stop bringing blade. (sarcasm)
Then watch as the diverse attack teams of the bgs get steamrolled by a beefed up mystic defense team. Goodluck fighting aw boss majik with your groot and hulk buster.
You nailed it man!! I don’t know how someone can think that this attacker diversity thing would be a good idea!
It's already a bad user experience when you pull a champ like Colossus that you cannot use anywhere in the game.
Now when you pull a good or great champ, your alliance may tell you that you cannot use them to attack for diversity sake? Sounds really fun... (sarcasm)
Worst idea ever.
This is definitely not meant as a personal attack. However the reason I am being quite vocal against this is because @DorkLessons you have a big voice and influence in the community and I am concerned that Kabam may actually listen to you on this.
How about instead of adding more of diversity, which is not fun at all, balance the champs more and make every champ have a use in the game?
Now that would be fun.
I’m concerned too. I think that in the current state of the game this would be the worst thing ever.
I had this idea the other day, but for a different reason. The new alliance I am in tied in a war and I thought, well things like this should never happen. So I thought about defender diversity and thought if we add attacker diversity, this could help eliminate ties maybe. I would have it where these points are only added in the event of a tie to be used as a tie breaker and determine a winner, because lets face it, ties count as losses basically, both alliances lose out on season points and drop in rating and get loser rewards.
This came to me during my stream yesterday as we were discussing Alliance War, and how there are all of a sudden a TON of Blades out there.
Of course Blade was made to counter a lot of the Mystic unavoidable damage type champs, but he's got a lot more utility than that for other champions as well.
Defender Diversity was brought about to counter placing Magik, NC, and Ultrons all over the place in every war.. and I think it's been pretty good in that regard. Those few points can really push you to the victory for having a diverse squad and use of proper strategy!
I would love to entertain the idea of Attacker Diversity. Something that offers a fair amount of points for Summoners willing to step out and use a Spider Gwen on their attack squad.. or an Iron Patriot, Carnage, Karnak, Miles Morales, King Groot etc. Champions we don't and won't normally use because they aren't "God Tier".
Now the beauty of it is.. You don't HAVE to use them.. Just like you don't have to place Defender Diversity.. you can load up your attack squad with the Trinity till you meet Neo on the other end.. But again for those willing to use other champs, or champs that diversify the BG's attack model, they are rewarded accordingly and could win through upset. :-)
Also I think this would be the Ultimate show of skill as to the Alliance that can with with ANYONE! :-)
What do you think? Do you have a counter idea? Something to add?
I think this would give too much advantage in AW to bigger alliances. I think this would be a great idea in AQ though as well as bonus points for kills like in AW. This could really change the whole only prestige matters for ranking that is going on right now.
5- I have never thought I could say this but I think Dave is working for kabam at this point. This idea seems to treat us like a bunch of idiots. That’s why I unsubscribed him.
I like Dave and his content/enthusiasm, but I think this is misguided. Blade is here to stay. It is what it is. People need to accept it. Even if you removed him from the game and placed dorms, mephistos, magik everywhere, Ghulk is actually just as good if not better against them and can solo basically any boss. Spark is a better overall champ in general than blade is, and has utility that is vital for AW. For those attackers who don’t rely on regen, spark might be preferred over blade. Magik is still a god. You still have to try on purpose to die in a path while using Iceman. No blade in this game still wouldn’t change the current state of things.
Players are much better than they used to be. Much better than kabam gives us credit for.
Champs are more dynamic than they used to be and there’s basically a counter for everything.
The only solution to satisfy the masses is making the nodes harder... a mashup of AW and the worst of act 5. But be careful what you wish for before you’re all up on the forums screaming for new champ counters to handle the increased difficulty, and then kabam listens and gives it to us, and then you’re on here screaming for kabam to nerf them. You know, pretty much what’s happening right now.
5- I have never thought I could say this but I think Dave is working for kabam at this point. This idea seems to treat us like a bunch of idiots. That’s why I unsubscribed him.
I like Dave and his content/enthusiasm, but I think this is misguided. Blade is here to stay. It is what it is. People need to accept it. Even if you removed him from the game and placed dorms, mephistos, magik everywhere, Ghulk is actually just as good if not better against them and can solo basically any boss. Spark is a better overall champ in general than blade is, and has utility that is vital for AW. For those attackers who don’t rely on regen, spark might be preferred over blade. Magik is still a god. You still have to try on purpose to die in a path while using Iceman. No blade in this game still wouldn’t change the current state of things.
Players are much better than they used to be. Much better than kabam gives us credit for.
Champs are more dynamic than they used to be and there’s basically a counter for everything.
The only solution to satisfy the masses is making the nodes harder... a mashup of AW and the worst of act 5. But be careful what you wish for before you’re all up on the forums screaming for new champ counters to handle the increased difficulty, and then kabam listens and gives it to us, and then you’re on here screaming for kabam to nerf them. You know, pretty much what’s happening right now.
man I didn't wish for anything. I think that the only way to make this aw better is to demolish them completely and re do everything from scratch. I think that all the possible changes kabam can make to this system right now would be terrible. That's why I think that the attacker diversity idea is horrible. I don't want blade to be nerfed, I don't want harder nodes either. I would like to see this aw system demolished but it is not going to happen.
buff up old champs. this will automatically allow people to bring diverse champs. if some other old character gets the abilities similar to current god tier attackers, they will automatically become a choice of people. its really frustrating to see the entire summoner leaderboard filled with blade face. this implies something is wrong. make characters equally viable, that's the solution. but kabam will never do that.
This idea is horrible for a ton of reasons.
1-With the current state of alliance war this would be another present to the big spenders. Who cares if I die 30 times and I lost the attack bonus? I have the attacker diversity.
2- we would have to do re do all the rank up decisions.
3- we need specific champions for the alliance war in the current state, we can’t take care of certain nodes without those champions.
4- this alliance war seasons are a total mess in my opinion, if the majority of people use blade and other few champions is because of the bs we have to face in aw. Attacker diversity would not be a solution.
5- I have never thought I could say this but I think Dave is working for kabam at this point. This idea seems to treat us like a bunch of idiots. That’s why I unsubscribed him.
#5 is absolute GOLD my man. And you're absolutely right.. I work for them.. They pay me in kittens every third tuesday of the month.
Let's analyze shall we.. I mean since you unsubscribed for a foolish assumption anyway.. why not see it through.
Dave attempts to TALK and DISCUSS an option that will help people be more adept with their rosters and their champions abilities instead of relying on a set group of champions = Works for Kabam..
Rewarding people who step out of the norm and try something new in the game.. You know to keep things fresh and interesting = Works for Kabam..
on a whole continually educates you on how to finish content as efficiently as possible so you aren't using resources = Works for Kabam
I mean.. would you like some more examples or was this enough?
Now as for your actual reasons.. You realize this is just theoretical.. No details have been worked out so half of those reasons are you just working yourself up.. Who's to say the amount of points would even be enough for the big spenders?
2. Why would you have redo your rank ups? Are you going for full diversity? Have you thought about maybe changing 1 champ around? Do you only have 3 set champions ranked that you can use.. you have nothing else?
3. How sure about this are you? You know there are other champs in the meta that can also take some of the load. It's not always about the same champs over and over.
4. Seasons does need some work I agree there.. My hope was that people were noticing the changing meta.. IE WS, Luke Cage, Red Hulk, and see that they are tuning champs.. This is something good.. and can really bring this idea into fruition if enough of them have been worked.
5. See my above statement.. because this is ridiculous..
buff up old champs. this will automatically allow people to bring diverse champs. if some other old character gets the abilities similar to current god tier attackers, they will automatically become a choice of people. its really frustrating to see the entire summoner leaderboard filled with blade face. this implies something is wrong. make characters equally viable, that's the solution. but kabam will never do that.
This is also a viable option.. but I still like the idea of diversifying for points. However in terms of them never doing that.. They already are doing it. They've been slowly doing it over the last year.. But hopefully they ramp it up a little more. Luke Cage and Red Hulk were awesome updates to old champions.
It's already a bad user experience when you pull a champ like Colossus that you cannot use anywhere in the game.
Now when you pull a good or great champ, your alliance may tell you that you cannot use them to attack for diversity sake? Sounds really fun... (sarcasm)
Worst idea ever.
This is definitely not meant as a personal attack. However the reason I am being quite vocal against this is because @DorkLessons you have a big voice and influence in the community and I am concerned that Kabam may actually listen to you on this.
How about instead of adding more of diversity, which is not fun at all, balance the champs more and make every champ have a use in the game?
Now that would be fun.
No personal attack taken my friend.. Just getting some discussion on this going is all. You mentioned getting a colossus as a bad experience.. Mainly because this champ needs a little tuning. But once he's been tuned.. like lets say.. Luke Cage.. or Red Hulk.. Would this still be the case?
The other reason I bring it up is there are a lot of champs people glaze over because their main focus is just God Tier only.. They aren't fully looking at Utility and usefulness of champs because again.. they didn't make the God tier list.
This has nothing to do with making it harder.. but adding another level of complexity and strategy to the game. Going full diversity on Attack might be a detriment.. maybe it's not meant for that.. maybe it's just swapping out 1 champ to get the win. I mean I've heard people bringing in 3* Ghost Riders or 3* Stark Spideys to war.. JUST so they can steamroll the entire war path with a Blade lol..
I would imagine people willing to step out and maybe use one different champ out of the 3 can edge a win out with some extra points.
Pilots are a whole other matter.. that just sucks.. So you can't do anything because of pilots.. and until that is settled.. I guess none of this matters.
My response got deleted? Will try again...
All good bro.
I see more where you are coming from.
However even if every champ becomes a viable option, which feels like is a long time away. (Luke Cage was a joke ever since I started playing the game well over a year ago)
I still stand by that managing diversity offense or defense is an awful user experience, especially since there is nothing in the game Ui itself to help with this. Please see my earlier posts I addressed to you, would be curious to hear your response or if you have a solution for this.
Also as mentioned by somebody else.
Say there is a Dormammu Boss in AW and one member brings a Joe Fixt or Antman instead of Gladiator Hulk.
Usually I would say what goes through the Leader or Officers mind is
“Why did they bring that champ?”
“Are their best champs locked up in a quest? Are they not taking this War seriously?”
“Why didn’t they bring Gladiator Hulk?”
“Does this person know what they are doing?”
“Now we risk losing this AW”
Nobody is saying “Wow, we are really impressed with this person’s skill because they timed out attempting to take down a Dorm Boss with Joe Fixit or Antman, great job”
Comments
Then watch as the diverse attack teams of the bgs get steamrolled by a beefed up mystic defense team. Goodluck fighting aw boss majik with your groot and hulk buster.
If he's too powerful and makes the game easy then your alliance mates should make things challenging for themselves by bringing low tiered champs to attack.
And attacker bonus kill was introduced to make skill more necessary.
There is simply no need for attacker diversity. If they introduce attacker diversity and it becomes the new black, then mystic wars will definitely return
I am talking about: broken synergies, blocked Specials (chained with heavy attack), interrupted combos, frequent parrys by AI, insane AI recovering timings (after heavies and SP attacks) etc.
Maybe not noticeble with r4 5* rosters but they exist.
In master/plat 1 War Rankings, it'd be required, so it would indeed restrict our ability to use our top champs ... in order to still win. Attacker Diversity would also grant even more of an advantage to high skilled pilots.
It's already a bad user experience when you pull a champ like Colossus that you cannot use anywhere in the game.
Now when you pull a good or great champ, your alliance may tell you that you cannot use them to attack for diversity sake? Sounds really fun... (sarcasm)
Worst idea ever.
This is definitely not meant as a personal attack. However the reason I am being quite vocal against this is because @DorkLessons you have a big voice and influence in the community and I am concerned that Kabam may actually listen to you on this.
How about instead of adding more of diversity, which is not fun at all, balance the champs more and make every champ have a use in the game?
Now that would be fun.
And rightly so. This is a terrible idea. I DO NOT want others to dictate what champs I rank up and use. Defender diversity was already bad but still kinda tolerable since it didn't adversely affect my gameplay experience but attacker diversity will.
Most people don't play this game to showcase their "skill" by taking an underpowered champ against an overpowered opponent placed on an overpowered node. Some people still do it but it's solely for novelty YT videos and for bragging to alliance mates. That is not the main focus of this game. People just want to win fights by using the most efficient champs. That's it. If you take a Joe Fixit and fight RoL WS, the majority of the responses would be "Y tho?" and not "OMG, you're so cool bro!"
No personal attack taken my friend.. Just getting some discussion on this going is all. You mentioned getting a colossus as a bad experience.. Mainly because this champ needs a little tuning. But once he's been tuned.. like lets say.. Luke Cage.. or Red Hulk.. Would this still be the case?
The other reason I bring it up is there are a lot of champs people glaze over because their main focus is just God Tier only.. They aren't fully looking at Utility and usefulness of champs because again.. they didn't make the God tier list.
This has nothing to do with making it harder.. but adding another level of complexity and strategy to the game. Going full diversity on Attack might be a detriment.. maybe it's not meant for that.. maybe it's just swapping out 1 champ to get the win. I mean I've heard people bringing in 3* Ghost Riders or 3* Stark Spideys to war.. JUST so they can steamroll the entire war path with a Blade lol..
I would imagine people willing to step out and maybe use one different champ out of the 3 can edge a win out with some extra points.
Pilots are a whole other matter.. that just sucks.. So you can't do anything because of pilots.. and until that is settled.. I guess none of this matters.
1-With the current state of alliance war this would be another present to the big spenders. Who cares if I die 30 times and I lost the attack bonus? I have the attacker diversity.
2- we would have to do re do all the rank up decisions.
3- we need specific champions for the alliance war in the current state, we can’t take care of certain nodes without those champions.
4- this alliance war seasons are a total mess in my opinion, if the majority of people use blade and other few champions is because of the bs we have to face in aw. Attacker diversity would not be a solution.
5- I have never thought I could say this but I think Dave is working for kabam at this point. This idea seems to treat us like a bunch of idiots. That’s why I unsubscribed him.
You nailed it man!! I don’t know how someone can think that this attacker diversity thing would be a good idea!
I’m concerned too. I think that in the current state of the game this would be the worst thing ever.
I think this would give too much advantage in AW to bigger alliances. I think this would be a great idea in AQ though as well as bonus points for kills like in AW. This could really change the whole only prestige matters for ranking that is going on right now.
I like Dave and his content/enthusiasm, but I think this is misguided. Blade is here to stay. It is what it is. People need to accept it. Even if you removed him from the game and placed dorms, mephistos, magik everywhere, Ghulk is actually just as good if not better against them and can solo basically any boss. Spark is a better overall champ in general than blade is, and has utility that is vital for AW. For those attackers who don’t rely on regen, spark might be preferred over blade. Magik is still a god. You still have to try on purpose to die in a path while using Iceman. No blade in this game still wouldn’t change the current state of things.
Players are much better than they used to be. Much better than kabam gives us credit for.
Champs are more dynamic than they used to be and there’s basically a counter for everything.
The only solution to satisfy the masses is making the nodes harder... a mashup of AW and the worst of act 5. But be careful what you wish for before you’re all up on the forums screaming for new champ counters to handle the increased difficulty, and then kabam listens and gives it to us, and then you’re on here screaming for kabam to nerf them. You know, pretty much what’s happening right now.
man I didn't wish for anything. I think that the only way to make this aw better is to demolish them completely and re do everything from scratch. I think that all the possible changes kabam can make to this system right now would be terrible. That's why I think that the attacker diversity idea is horrible. I don't want blade to be nerfed, I don't want harder nodes either. I would like to see this aw system demolished but it is not going to happen.
#5 is absolute GOLD my man. And you're absolutely right.. I work for them.. They pay me in kittens every third tuesday of the month.
Let's analyze shall we.. I mean since you unsubscribed for a foolish assumption anyway.. why not see it through.
Dave attempts to TALK and DISCUSS an option that will help people be more adept with their rosters and their champions abilities instead of relying on a set group of champions = Works for Kabam..
Rewarding people who step out of the norm and try something new in the game.. You know to keep things fresh and interesting = Works for Kabam..
on a whole continually educates you on how to finish content as efficiently as possible so you aren't using resources = Works for Kabam
I mean.. would you like some more examples or was this enough?
Now as for your actual reasons.. You realize this is just theoretical.. No details have been worked out so half of those reasons are you just working yourself up.. Who's to say the amount of points would even be enough for the big spenders?
2. Why would you have redo your rank ups? Are you going for full diversity? Have you thought about maybe changing 1 champ around? Do you only have 3 set champions ranked that you can use.. you have nothing else?
3. How sure about this are you? You know there are other champs in the meta that can also take some of the load. It's not always about the same champs over and over.
4. Seasons does need some work I agree there.. My hope was that people were noticing the changing meta.. IE WS, Luke Cage, Red Hulk, and see that they are tuning champs.. This is something good.. and can really bring this idea into fruition if enough of them have been worked.
5. See my above statement.. because this is ridiculous..
This is also a viable option.. but I still like the idea of diversifying for points. However in terms of them never doing that.. They already are doing it. They've been slowly doing it over the last year.. But hopefully they ramp it up a little more. Luke Cage and Red Hulk were awesome updates to old champions.
My response got deleted? Will try again...
All good bro.
I see more where you are coming from.
However even if every champ becomes a viable option, which feels like is a long time away. (Luke Cage was a joke ever since I started playing the game well over a year ago)
I still stand by that managing diversity offense or defense is an awful user experience, especially since there is nothing in the game Ui itself to help with this. Please see my earlier posts I addressed to you, would be curious to hear your response or if you have a solution for this.
Also as mentioned by somebody else.
Say there is a Dormammu Boss in AW and one member brings a Joe Fixt or Antman instead of Gladiator Hulk.
Usually I would say what goes through the Leader or Officers mind is
“Why did they bring that champ?”
“Are their best champs locked up in a quest? Are they not taking this War seriously?”
“Why didn’t they bring Gladiator Hulk?”
“Does this person know what they are doing?”
“Now we risk losing this AW”
Nobody is saying “Wow, we are really impressed with this person’s skill because they timed out attempting to take down a Dorm Boss with Joe Fixit or Antman, great job”