What is up with this shady AW strategy?

My alliance is currently facing an alliance that hardly placed an defense. At first I thought they only had 2-3 participants. But then I go to check on our map to find they have a full battlegroup on offence on a full scale attack. This can't be o.k. Their gonna have way more kills and attack bonuses than us because they didn't give us many guys to kill and we gave them a full board. Does anyone know if this is against the rules somehow?

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

Appleisgod

You still get attack bonus for just exploring a defender node

Appleisgod

They just gave you a huge advantage

teekq

But I think you’ll have diversity, full Bonus points in each node you explore.

Rajuteda

They are fools

Mr_Platypus

Rajuteda wrote: »

They are fools

Pretty much this lol

IcsGrec

RichiesDad79 wrote: »

Their gonna have way more kills and attack bonuses than us because they didn't give us many guys to kill and we gave them a full board. Does anyone know if this is against the rules somehow?

You get the full attack bonus if you explore an empty node. They just gave you a free win.

unknown

This content has been removed.

shchong2

This tactics won't work anymore in current version of the AW with current point system, correct? So they are handling an easy win for you guys (assuming you don't screw up in your attack), right? Or am I missing something (some kind of new loophole or exploit)?

Toridy

Its not how many def an ally kills that matters, but how many per cent you explore a BG, diversity of def, complete BG.

Run477

They are tanking their war rating so that they can get easier wins during war seasons. Thy could be a little more discreet about it and just not use items. But nope, they have to ensure they don’t win by doing that.

ASV27

Yeah this isn't smart at all. Enjoy the free win.

Mattylo

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Werewrym

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

Panchulon21

They’re tanking for easy wins in seasons.

Mattylo

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

Facing a plat 1 alliance is unlikely. However, I see both sides. I understand the Gold 1 alliances issues with this bc the system is designed in the attempts to keep matchups of alliances even. Problem is we all to some extent either have a significant amount money involved or lots of time involved. So its a matter of strategy. What will yield the best outcome for the season?

So in reality a fix to this is locking alliances into tiers they reached during the season. While the offseason would be used to bring in new players and test new strategies rather than just flat out tanking to destoy the weaker competition.

You also have alliances actively getting caught piloting on purpose since thats an automatic 300 point drop in war rating. Players will always find a way to get around the system. Which is just kinda like how it is in life.

rockykoston

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Werewrym

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Obviously not everything is cheating... I wasn't at all implying that. What I am saying is that purposefully dropping your rating in war so that you can win a bunch of easy wars when the new season starts is an alliances way of manipulating the matchmaking system in an attempt to gain an advantage... aka cheating. It is completely despicable because 1: Alliances aren't man enough to just fight fair wars at their tiers, and 2: It takes away rewards from alliances that are actually trying to play fairly in their respective tiers. It is like an anti Robin Hood move... Rob from the poor and give to the rich.

Werewrym

Mattylo wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

Facing a plat 1 alliance is unlikely. However, I see both sides. I understand the Gold 1 alliances issues with this bc the system is designed in the attempts to keep matchups of alliances even. Problem is we all to some extent either have a significant amount money involved or lots of time involved. So its a matter of strategy. What will yield the best outcome for the season?

So in reality a fix to this is locking alliances into tiers they reached during the season. While the offseason would be used to bring in new players and test new strategies rather than just flat out tanking to destoy the weaker competition.

You also have alliances actively getting caught piloting on purpose since thats an automatic 300 point drop in war rating. Players will always find a way to get around the system. Which is just kinda like how it is in life.

I think another way to solve this would be to first and foremost match alliances with other alliances that have similar alliance ratings and not war ratings. You shouldn't be able to match alliances that can flat out destroy you. I understand being dropped into a lower tier because of the automatic 300 point drop, but I don't think that should effect other players in that tier. They should still be getting matched with alliances in the tier they dropped from.

NickBates10

Pretty sure you get full attack bonus for travelling over a node with no defender on it.

rockykoston

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Obviously not everything is cheating... I wasn't at all implying that. What I am saying is that purposefully dropping your rating in war so that you can win a bunch of easy wars when the new season starts is an alliances way of manipulating the matchmaking system in an attempt to gain an advantage... aka cheating. It is completely despicable because 1: Alliances aren't man enough to just fight fair wars at their tiers, and 2: It takes away rewards from alliances that are actually trying to play fairly in their respective tiers. It is like an anti Robin Hood move... Rob from the poor and give to the rich.

Oh wow, so you never do Arena using the Infinite Streak method?
Isn't that manipulating the Arena matches to gain an advantage and get ahead of others who fight without that method.

Whatever you said about tanking the rating cannot be considered cheating, it is an absurd notion.

Werewrym

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Obviously not everything is cheating... I wasn't at all implying that. What I am saying is that purposefully dropping your rating in war so that you can win a bunch of easy wars when the new season starts is an alliances way of manipulating the matchmaking system in an attempt to gain an advantage... aka cheating. It is completely despicable because 1: Alliances aren't man enough to just fight fair wars at their tiers, and 2: It takes away rewards from alliances that are actually trying to play fairly in their respective tiers. It is like an anti Robin Hood move... Rob from the poor and give to the rich.

Oh wow, so you never do Arena using the Infinite Streak method?
Isn't that manipulating the Arena matches to gain an advantage and get ahead of others who fight without that method.

Whatever you said about tanking the rating cannot be considered cheating, it is an absurd notion.

There's quite a big difference between arena and AW. Arena is made so that the infinite streak is possible. There is no loophole to go through. Whereas in AW tanking is not something that was ever intended to be a strategy. The big issue that I have with tanking is that it takes away rewards from alliances that have fought their way fairly to that tier and those rewards are lost to alliances that are too afraid to fight wars in their own tier so they have resorted to shady methods that look a lot like cheating.

Primmer79

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Obviously not everything is cheating... I wasn't at all implying that. What I am saying is that purposefully dropping your rating in war so that you can win a bunch of easy wars when the new season starts is an alliances way of manipulating the matchmaking system in an attempt to gain an advantage... aka cheating. It is completely despicable because 1: Alliances aren't man enough to just fight fair wars at their tiers, and 2: It takes away rewards from alliances that are actually trying to play fairly in their respective tiers. It is like an anti Robin Hood move... Rob from the poor and give to the rich.

Oh wow, so you never do Arena using the Infinite Streak method?
Isn't that manipulating the Arena matches to gain an advantage and get ahead of others who fight without that method.

Whatever you said about tanking the rating cannot be considered cheating, it is an absurd notion.

There's quite a big difference between arena and AW. Arena is made so that the infinite streak is possible. There is no loophole to go through. Whereas in AW tanking is not something that was ever intended to be a strategy. The big issue that I have with tanking is that it takes away rewards from alliances that have fought their way fairly to that tier and those rewards are lost to alliances that are too afraid to fight wars in their own tier so they have resorted to shady methods that look a lot like cheating.

As of this moment, infinite streak is a way to manipulate the matching algorithm to give you favorable matchups AGAINST THE AI. Tanking gives you favorable matches against real opponents. Neither is cheating, at the moment, but I believe tanking is against the spirit of war. Itd be up to Kabam to say if its cheating or not.

Mattylo

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

Facing a plat 1 alliance is unlikely. However, I see both sides. I understand the Gold 1 alliances issues with this bc the system is designed in the attempts to keep matchups of alliances even. Problem is we all to some extent either have a significant amount money involved or lots of time involved. So its a matter of strategy. What will yield the best outcome for the season?

So in reality a fix to this is locking alliances into tiers they reached during the season. While the offseason would be used to bring in new players and test new strategies rather than just flat out tanking to destoy the weaker competition.

You also have alliances actively getting caught piloting on purpose since thats an automatic 300 point drop in war rating. Players will always find a way to get around the system. Which is just kinda like how it is in life.

I think another way to solve this would be to first and foremost match alliances with other alliances that have similar alliance ratings and not war ratings. You shouldn't be able to match alliances that can flat out destroy you. I understand being dropped into a lower tier because of the automatic 300 point drop, but I don't think that should effect other players in that tier. They should still be getting matched with alliances in the tier they dropped from.

I agree the system still needs a lot of tweaking and to kabams credit they have tried to make adjustments to make it more fair.

So long as its a possibility and not against TOS its a strategy being used. Like Mohammed Ali and the rope a dope.

Rixob

youll lose on attack bonus

Primmer79

Rixob wrote: »

youll lose on attack bonus

no they wont. attack bonus is given by node, not defender.

Demonzfyre

Rixob wrote: »

youll lose on attack bonus

As long as they dont die on an empty node they get the full attack bonus. They just need to clear the map 100%

Werewrym

Primmer79 wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

rockykoston wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

LOL, not everything is cheating. I am nowhere near but if someone wants to tank rating, then that's an alliance decision. You want to kill all decision making and strategy from the game or what?

Obviously not everything is cheating... I wasn't at all implying that. What I am saying is that purposefully dropping your rating in war so that you can win a bunch of easy wars when the new season starts is an alliances way of manipulating the matchmaking system in an attempt to gain an advantage... aka cheating. It is completely despicable because 1: Alliances aren't man enough to just fight fair wars at their tiers, and 2: It takes away rewards from alliances that are actually trying to play fairly in their respective tiers. It is like an anti Robin Hood move... Rob from the poor and give to the rich.

Oh wow, so you never do Arena using the Infinite Streak method?
Isn't that manipulating the Arena matches to gain an advantage and get ahead of others who fight without that method.

Whatever you said about tanking the rating cannot be considered cheating, it is an absurd notion.

There's quite a big difference between arena and AW. Arena is made so that the infinite streak is possible. There is no loophole to go through. Whereas in AW tanking is not something that was ever intended to be a strategy. The big issue that I have with tanking is that it takes away rewards from alliances that have fought their way fairly to that tier and those rewards are lost to alliances that are too afraid to fight wars in their own tier so they have resorted to shady methods that look a lot like cheating.

As of this moment, infinite streak is a way to manipulate the matching algorithm to give you favorable matchups AGAINST THE AI. Tanking gives you favorable matches against real opponents. Neither is cheating, at the moment, but I believe tanking is against the spirit of war. Itd be up to Kabam to say if its cheating or not.

Ok I can see your point. However, I still feel like they are slightly different scenarios because one is being used directly against other players to benefit whereas in the arena it doesn't hurt other players.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Werewrym

Mattylo wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Werewrym wrote: »

Mattylo wrote: »

Yeah they could be tanking prior to the season so they can rattle off a bunch of wins when the season starts. Lots of alliances are doing that since in the lower tiers (1-3) your win/loss ratio will be lower. But a tier 2/3 tier dropping down to tier 5 they will most likely be way more skilled and have better defenses then who they will face for the first part of the season when it starts.

Which is really another brand of cheating... I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to face a platinum I alliance in Gold I tier.

Facing a plat 1 alliance is unlikely. However, I see both sides. I understand the Gold 1 alliances issues with this bc the system is designed in the attempts to keep matchups of alliances even. Problem is we all to some extent either have a significant amount money involved or lots of time involved. So its a matter of strategy. What will yield the best outcome for the season?

So in reality a fix to this is locking alliances into tiers they reached during the season. While the offseason would be used to bring in new players and test new strategies rather than just flat out tanking to destoy the weaker competition.

You also have alliances actively getting caught piloting on purpose since thats an automatic 300 point drop in war rating. Players will always find a way to get around the system. Which is just kinda like how it is in life.

I think another way to solve this would be to first and foremost match alliances with other alliances that have similar alliance ratings and not war ratings. You shouldn't be able to match alliances that can flat out destroy you. I understand being dropped into a lower tier because of the automatic 300 point drop, but I don't think that should effect other players in that tier. They should still be getting matched with alliances in the tier they dropped from.

I agree the system still needs a lot of tweaking and to kabams credit they have tried to make adjustments to make it more fair.

So long as its a possibility and not against TOS its a strategy being used. Like Mohammed Ali and the rope a dope.

It is a possibility yes, and not directly against TOS, but then again neither was collusion in wars. It is kind of one of those scenarios that is indirectly against TOS.