**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
I'm talking about Tanking. Not me losing a War. Not even because I fell victim to it. It's exploiting the Matchmaking, and it is not so easily brushed off. It's an issue that needs addressed.
It’s clear you’re implying to yourself of “those getting taken advantage of” by your posts, no need to deny. Yes I agree it’s an issue, but as this thread comes up every off-season, it’s been discussed many times without any new arguments. There’s no simple solution that doesn’t come with pros and cons. Kabam is aware and perhaps they’ve seen the data and in reality it doesn’t affect rankings much. My alliance never tanks and we’ll gladly take free rewards without spending an item. Come season time, there’s been no difference in the quality of opponents we face.
Using this assumption, in a season of 12 wars, they would win 6 and lose 6. This will net them a score of:
- (6 x 200k + 6 x 150k) x 6.2 = 13.02m
On the flip side, let’s say the alliance tanks to Tier 3, where they are 6 wins away from Tier 2. This would mean they will win all 6 wars in Tier 3, then go 3 for 6 in Tier 2. This will net them a score of:
- (6 x 200k x 5.5) + (3 x 200k x 6.2) + (3 x 150k , 6.2) = 6.6m + 3.72m + 2.79 = 13.11m
You might say that the scores are similar, true, they are. But we are forgetting that the 6 wins in Tier 3 will come much easier and cheaper than the wars in Tier 2.
Also, that’s based on the assumption the alliance goes 3 for 6 in Tier 2, which is rarely the case for a mid Tier 2 alliance. It’s more likely that they go 4 or 5 for 6 as they win their way back up to their equilibrium war rating.
This is why tanking works.
I wanted to test new players in alliance, new paths, defenders.
I like AWars, i enjoy trying new strategies, improving myself And my team, challenging good oponents And having balanced results (you dont really enjoy huge win or loose)
This thing which we Are experiencing right Now, IT really destroys the good feelings you have in wars.
Is really worth to get a bit better starting position in season to disqust another one?
Also I consider this as a cheating, And since we dont do that, we Will get almost unplayable wars in season. Does it seems right?
You have no basis to assert or claim that it is one possibility over the other. What you say is a "rampant problem" is nothing more than an observation that the 'fact' of weaker/missing defences are being placed; it is not "rampant" that alliances are tanking, since you have no basis to know for a fact that that is the predominant intention among all those alliances you might have faced.
In fact I may well wish not to place any defence at all because (1) who knows sometimes even a r3 might be useful to a particular syngery team and i don't want to be caught in a situation where I have to put my questing on hold just because someone is locked in AW; (2) I don't want to modify my AW defence team and take the risk of accidentally placing a wrong team when AW season actually starts up.
You are speaking from the position of someone who has not actually thought through all these issues, and weighed the full costs/benefits of the particular course of action you are advocating for. As many have pointed out, there are still benefits - namely shards and loyalty - for an alliance to enlist for a war even if they have no intention of competing in that war seriously. That is not the same as intending to tank, it is just a shift in priorities in the off season.
I don't buy the plausible but untrue justification. Especially when it's been admittedly calculated enough. People have enough Champs to put SOMETHING on the Map.
This is precisely why I'm saying the best course of action is to separate Off-Season from Seasons. Whether that involves a 2-week break, or just separating progress. Any possible unfair advantage people see, they'll take it, and justify it with any excuse they can. Regardless of who they step on to get it.
Why do your suggestions involve stepping up the tempo instead of say creating incentives for players to continue to participate in and win off-season alliance wars? The fact that alliances aren't putting in effort into off-season alliance wars is simply a sign that they are not worth the hassle. If it is so important to you that alliances play wars every single week, then why not simply increase the rewards for off-season wars? Add t5b and double the 5* shards for each win, I'm sure you will see a marked increase in interest.
The solution should be more about encouraging and incentivising the conduct you want, rather than constraining people's choices.
Off-season AW is a lightest slap contest. Only idiots play seriously and you already lose just by playing at all.