Was just previously agreeing with other guy that at this time, at higher levels, it's all about defender rating (which is very boring)
The OPPOSITE of Diversity is Uniformity. And that's what this new AW has truly created. A Uniform system where EVERYONE does exactly the same thing. There is no room for skill or creativity anymore. We fill in the boxes. Our opponents fill in the boxes. We wait around to see who has the higher Defender Rating.
Create 10 clear paths
Restrict people from placing more than 1 of the same defender per path. (Like sudoku)
Like if u bring 10 magiks, u'll have to place them in 10 different paths, u won't be able to create a path full of magik.
That way ur defenders will still be as useful as they were, but u'll need more strategy while placing them.
10 paths is too many, sometimes you are forced to play with less than 10 per bg. 9 paths are fine. Diversity should attain max score with 60% of defenders being diverse. Bring back defender kills as a strategy to compensate for less diversity, but at a disadvantage. 3 defender kills match 1 diversity point. Make full exploration of the map increase rewards wether you win or lose. Let's make it beneficial to keep fighting and progressing on the map. There will always be a winner and a loser, just give everyone more incentive to finish the maps
Create 10 clear paths
Restrict people from placing more than 1 of the same defender per path. (Like sudoku)
Like if u bring 10 magiks, u'll have to place them in 10 different paths, u won't be able to create a path full of magik.
That way ur defenders will still be as useful as they were, but u'll need more strategy while placing them.
That I think makes the same mistake the current 15.0 war makes: it focuses on champion diversity when the game should be trying to encourage map placement diversity. In other words, it should encourage alliances to make different maps, and ideally it should encourage alliances to place differently in every war: there should be a "predictability penalty." I have this gut feeling that if an alliance always placed defenders in the same way and their opponents knew this there should be a mechanism for those opponents to take advantage of that. If such a penalty existed, and I've mentioned some ideas about this, then the players would fix the problem themselves. Good alliances would punish predictable ones, and that would apply pressure to become less predictable over time.
A unique per path rule is just a smaller version of the uniqueness rule: unique per alliance, unique per battlegroup, unique per path. It is better in that it reduces the scope of the problem, but it preserves the nature of the problem.
There's also some weird corner case problems with this rule. You'd have to change the mechanics of placement a bit to accommodate this. Currently, you pick your team first and then place them second. Suppose I am the last player to place in my battlegroup and I pick my team and I place my first four defenders. There's only one spot left, but it is possible that my last defender is illegal for that path. But if I'm not an officer I can't move any of my previously placed defenders. I am stuck unable to place the last one. I would have to wait for an officer to juggle to place. It is not a big problem, but it is the sort of thing you have to think through when making these kinds of gameplay rules.
I am no longer allowed to be negative around here. So let me say that I am positive that whatever changes they make to aw won't be good unless it's bringing back defender kills and lowering diversity points.
Was just previously agreeing with other guy that at this time, at higher levels, it's all about defender rating (which is very boring)
The OPPOSITE of Diversity is Uniformity. And that's what this new AW has truly created. A Uniform system where EVERYONE does exactly the same thing. There is no room for skill or creativity anymore. We fill in the boxes. Our opponents fill in the boxes. We wait around to see who has the higher Defender Rating.
Was just previously agreeing with other guy that at this time, at higher levels, it's all about defender rating (which is very boring)
The OPPOSITE of Diversity is Uniformity. And that's what this new AW has truly created. A Uniform system where EVERYONE does exactly the same thing. There is no room for skill or creativity anymore. We fill in the boxes. Our opponents fill in the boxes. We wait around to see who has the higher Defender Rating.
We are a 9m alliance facing a 14m alliance. Our war ratings are the same. We will lose because of their defender rating being higher. Before the war even started, now we are stuck for 24 hours waiting for the loss. War should not be decided based on who has more diverse champs.
I've seen some great resolutions to the current system. But I have to say, why do we need them? Some of them are great, don't get me wrong, but can't we just have the old scoring system back? Just give us higher Skirmish rewards for diversity. Let us decide whether we want a better shot at shards or gold.
Has anyone actually fought a war and watched people quit fighting with two heathly champs simply because they lost one and had this "feeling of defeat" that @Kabam Miike states multiple times is the impetus for this new system? It seems to me like we got a broken AW as a result of trying to solve a problem that didn't actually exist. Even if I am wrong, which I doubt, the cure is worse than the disease.
It's a real issue. To the point where people were more concerned about not giving the Opponent Kills than Attacking.
Only people who are terrible at the game give up after one death, and their opinion should not matter to Kabam.
I wonder who of the top alliances down to tier 4 complained about this to kabam LOL
I've never had this problem with my alliance. We only had to keep close track of our deaths to know where we stand and keep them as low as possible. The only time we'd ask someone to give up was even getting stuck on a difficult node, because we didn't want the person to give 9 deaths to our opponent by reviving couple times! Mainly on shared nodes.
I've seen some great resolutions to the current system. But I have to say, why do we need them? Some of them are great, don't get me wrong, but can't we just have the old scoring system back? Just give us higher Skirmish rewards for diversity. Let us decide whether we want a better shot at shards or gold.
It is a fair question that players ask often. And there's a simple, if not always satisfactory, answer. The devs generally have reasons for making these kinds of changes that fundamentally revolve around fixing what they perceive to be problems with the way the game was. Player complaints, data mining, and other information can convince them that their solution is bad, but none of those things is likely to convince them the problems they perceived don't actually exist. So reverting to the way the game was would just return them to square one with the same problems to solve. And clearly those problems were bad enough to them to cause them to do all of this, so they would be compelled to immediately do something else.
Given that, MMO devs would rather try to change the implementation from something that poorly solves the problem to something that better solves the problem. They would prefer to move forward. That's why reversions are so rare. Even with all of the controversy and protests surrounding 12.0, it is worth noting that exactly none of the major changes in 12.0 were reverted. Some were softened. Some were reworked. All of them are still here. None of the major nerfed champions were returned to their original strength. Challenge rating, Diminishing returns, Armor Penetration, Block Penetration, Critical resistance are all still here, some in less developed forms. No one convinced the devs that the reasons for doing those things were invalid, they were only convinced that some of those things went too far too quickly.
It is clear the devs believed the old war was broken. We might be able to convince them the 15.0 version is not right. But it is extremely difficult to convince them that 14.0 was fine enough to convince them to go back to it. That's why suggestions to tweak the new system can sometimes effect changes, but suggestions to roll back to the old system tend to fall on deaf ears. To convince the devs to roll back to 14.0 war, you would have to convince them that not only is 15.0 war bad, but that no possible set of changes to it have any chance to make it better. That is a tough hill to climb.
Dude, I don't care about any of these arguments... WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PUSH THE FIX FOR VISION?!?!?
None of his SA do any power burn damage, meaning they don't do any damage, PERIOD. This bug has been on the radar and KNOWN for 1.5+ months at this point! Seriously guys, this is ridiculous... Vision is a major character for high level players in AQ, War, and Act 5. Not having him usable but focusing on "making sure that 6* content is moving forward!" is insulting and ridiculous.
Just a thought.... After everyone is set with the same/max Divirisity and war ratings start to shift.
Will Thanos be mandatory for Tier 1?
Thanos has divirisity and PI not possible to match, even with unlimited resources.
Whoever has a Thanos should list themselves on Ebay!!!! (Kidding, don't ban me)
Fixing War is simple and does not need to be a complex overhaul. I will lay it out real quick:
1) Make 2 portals able to hit the leftmost mini-boss (currently only 1 does)
2) Keep diversity internal to battle groups. Its current state is apparently a bug, but it also makes the most sense. I does not grant advantage to alliances who have champs like a Deadpool or Kang, and each attacker is only fighting in one battle group anyways. Spreading it across the whole alliance is an incredible headache to manage as well. Plus, with less than 150 champs (107 currently I think), this would reward having 50 different defenders in each battle group vs having 100 unique defenders jammed into 2 BGs with the third BG filled with nothing but Magik, Dorm, Nightcrawler, etc. Which is where the meta will trend, and it will be complete unfair for whichever BG ends up drawing that opponent's BG.
3) Change scoring to the below:
Points Breakdown:
Node Exploration: 300 per Node (equals out to before, when it was 450)
Boss Kill: 20 000 Points
Defenders Placed: 50 per Defender Placed
Defender Diversity: 125 per Unique Defender
Defender Rating: 0.002 per PI
Attacker Kills: 150 per Kill (please note this only works with diversity INTERNAL to BGs, not alliance wide)
Defender Kills: 50 per Kill
This points breakdown actually leaves a skill element (not dying) and makes diversity matter. And as for not attacking because you're afraid you'd die... clearing the node in less than 9 deaths is still a net point gain for the attacker, so it shouldn't be a big deal. Without defender kills, the skill element is completely gone, and war's outcomes are determined before the first punch is thrown. Which simply put, just isn't any fun. This is a game, right?
The above setup challenges an alliance to make the best possible defense it can while also using 50 diverse champs in each battle group, which is great for variety and will make war less boring. It also keeps skill a factor. If you can clear the map in less deaths than your opponent, you can beat an opponent that is more highly ranked than you. Which is how war should be.
Finally, the above will work, but I would also consider adding a few new buffs to some nodes. Specific to groups, like "Robots gain X on this this node", "Inhumans gain Y on this node", "Villians gain Z on this node". We have all of these tags on our heroes, use them!
The scoring system is an idea, but the problem with adding Defender Kills into the metrics again is it creates the same issue. It contradicts Diversity, and also makes it possible to KO into a Loss again. That would be two of the objectives of the changes. Basically, teams would opt to use the same Defenders regardless, and the KOs would be the focus.
the ko's should be the focus. do you actually play this game? seems like you spend more time on the forums than playing.
He doesn't.
He specifically said he stopped playing awhile ago and just comes on here to bother people. Sucks, because you replies more than the real players and they're probably basing things off of his untested ideas assuming he's the voice of the people.
He never said that at all. "He" plays the game and speaks for himself. He also understands the game overall, and looks at the whole picture, not just one demographic.
Except you did though. You said you stopped playing because you were tired of all the stupid changes, and now you just come on here to mess with the people who haven't left yet. I don't have time to go through your 1000s of posts, but it was absolutely said. This is the game for you. Rather than tap and swipe on the screen, you come here and try to push buttons and further your own pointless agenda. Have fun.
Thank you for waiting patiently as we worked behind the scenes to continue to improve the new Alliance Wars. We’re still making some adjustments, and want to re-emphasize that this will be an iterative process - one that we are dedicated to. We have greatly appreciated all of the constructive feedback Summoners have provided us with, as well as those that have urged their fellow players to grant us some time to look into both your comments and the way that Alliance Wars is currently running.
At this time, we can say that we have made a decision to keep Defender Diversity dependant on individual Battlegroups, and not based on the entire Alliance, as originally intended. This is something that many of you have requested, and something that we agree is better for players. This way, we’re shifting away from having to focus on your entire Alliance’s rosters, and to only those you are playing with directly.
We are still working on some things behind the scenes to ensure that we hit our goals that we wanted to achieve with this new iteration of Alliance wars, including the fact that Defender Diversity is meant to be a tie breaker, and not deciding the war. We will continue to make more iterations and adjustments until we have fulfilled our goals of making Alliance Wars more fun and engaging, as well as making the mode more varied, and to address concerns you all brought up.
Stay tuned! We will have more information to share with you next week!
Since you are keeping the absurd idea of defender diversity then at least reduce the points for it.
I have yet to see anyone say .. Oh goody I got a spider gwen that will be good for Defender diversity... we still curse at getting these terrible champs.
I don't see how you can avoid not adding kills back still. Otherwise it will be 150 diversity vs 150 diversity and come down to PI every war.
@Kabam Miike I think this is a step in the right direction, but let skill determine the winner. The point above is exactly right. Points for defender kills would help make war more skill-based and also allow an alliance freedom to better decide their strategy for defense. Do I have my entire alliance place duped Magik, duped NCs, duped Juggernauts and risk losing diversity points but know that if I can stop them defensively I might still win? Defender kill points would at least give us this freedom back.
It was clear diversity was here to stay, so I'm glad its just gonna stay per BG to avoid a major spreadsheet war.
The only problem is no actual change has been made yet and we are still left to suffer a PI war. No frustrations have been removed to make AW enjoyable and we are to continue on in the dark.
All this time to do nothing. How many meetings did this take?
Can we cut placement phase to 2 hours and do away with attack phase altogether? There's really no need for it anymore. Let's just measure pi, pass out awards and move on to the next one.
It was clear diversity was here to stay, so I'm glad its just gonna stay per BG to avoid a major spreadsheet war.
The only problem is no actual change has been made yet and we are still left to suffer a PI war. No frustrations have been removed to make AW enjoyable and we are to continue on in the dark.
i completely agree. you guys have enough data to realize that this war is trash. balance the point system better so we can have a war that isnt based solely on pi
We're getting ready to lose a war where we both 100%, they have diversity, and we have 80 defender kills to their 28. That's insane that this can happen. Talk about buying a war.
Thank you for waiting patiently as we worked behind the scenes to continue to improve the new Alliance Wars. We’re still making some adjustments, and want to re-emphasize that this will be an iterative process - one that we are dedicated to. We have greatly appreciated all of the constructive feedback Summoners have provided us with, as well as those that have urged their fellow players to grant us some time to look into both your comments and the way that Alliance Wars is currently running.
At this time, we can say that we have made a decision to keep Defender Diversity dependant on individual Battlegroups, and not based on the entire Alliance, as originally intended. This is something that many of you have requested, and something that we agree is better for players. This way, we’re shifting away from having to focus on your entire Alliance’s rosters, and to only those you are playing with directly.
We are still working on some things behind the scenes to ensure that we hit our goals that we wanted to achieve with this new iteration of Alliance wars, including the fact that Defender Diversity is meant to be a tie breaker, and not deciding the war. We will continue to make more iterations and adjustments until we have fulfilled our goals of making Alliance Wars more fun and engaging, as well as making the mode more varied, and to address concerns you all brought up.
Stay tuned! We will have more information to share with you next week!
Was one of your goals forcing officers to create spreadsheets and track down everyone's roster to max diversity? Because that is exactly what has happened. It's making my, and many other officer's, lives miserable. I want to play a game where I can create the best offense and defense. I do not want to have to spend hours on a spreadsheet and looking at rosters because of a gimmick.
So basically, no changes. Defender kills need to return. Diversity needs to count less. So far Kabam has not made any meaningful progress toward fixing war. If a 9m alliance gets matched up against a 14m alliance like we did this war, we have 0% chance to win. We have absolutely no way of winning because both teams will place 150 unique defenders but the 14m alliance will have a higher defender rating. Both groups can 100% all 3 BG and we will lose. It literally doesn't matter what we do. In the old system, we may have won based on defender kills for having smarter placement. In this system, it doesn't matter what we do.
THIS IS NOT FAIR. THIS IS NOT WAR.
It's a battle of who ranks their champs higher. It's not our fault we are matched up against an alliance with higher rated defenders. We could have more skill than them. We could place champs in a smarter way based on the nodes. But we will still lose war because they have played the game longer and have had more time to rank up their champions. How is this war? How is this competitive? How is this fun?
So basically, not changes. Defender kills need to return. Diversity needs to count less. So far Kabam has not made any meaningful progress toward fixing war. If a 9m alliance gets matched up against a 14m alliance like we did this war, we have 0% chance to win. We have absolutely no way of winning because both teams will place 150 unique defenders but the 14m alliance will have a higher defender rating. Both groups can 100% all 3 BG and we will lose. It literally doesn't matter what we do. In the old system, we may have won based on defender kills for having smarter placement. In this system, it doesn't matter what we do.
THIS IS NOT FAIR. THIS IS NOT WAR.
It's a battle of who ranks their champs higher. It's not our fault we are matched up against an alliance with higher rated defenders. We could have more skill than them. We could place champs in a smarter way based on the nodes. But we will still lose war because they have played the game longer and have had more time to rank up their champions. How is this war? How is this competitive? How is this fun?
dont forget to add that the rewards are total **** as well so ya war is garbage
Not sure if this has been discussed or not yet, but what about making diversity a multiplier or divisor of a score? It would make the most sense to have it apply to a score for defender kills so this idea would require them bringing back those points (which as far as I can tell, none of the players are opposed to).
Here is how I think it could work:
(it's not a perfect example but just something to get the idea out there)
If diversity is a multiplier on defender kill points based on actual diversity compared to possible diversity. In a 3 Battlegroup war, compare a defense that is not very diverse (diversity score of 60) that gets 100 kills against a defense that is fully diverse (diversity score of 150) that only gets 50 kills. Let's say that defender kills are 50 points each.
The first defense would get 5,000 points (50 per kill x 100 kills) for their defender kills which would then be multiplied by 40% (60 diversity / 150 possible diversity) so they would end up with 2,000 points for their defender kills. The second defense would get only 2,500 points (50 per kill x 50 kills) for their defender kills but since they got 150 diversity out of a possible 150, their score would be multiplied by 100% giving them 2,500.
Basically the purpose of this system would be to force alliances to weigh their options. They can go with a less diverse defense and get more kills that would end up being worth less per kill or they can go with a more diverse defense that might not get as many kills but each kill would be worth more.
Again, this isn't perfect, just still an idea on how it could be different. Figured I'd add it to the discussion.
So by keeping Diversity BG based, you have now made sure that everyone has 150. The idea behind it being alliance based at least brought some skill back in as no one could max diversity and we would be able to bring our better AWD Defense. Well played. The unit spend must be nice for you.
So by keeping Diversity BG based, you have now made sure that everyone has 150. The idea behind it being alliance based at least brought some skill back in as no one could max diversity and we would be able to bring our better AWD Defense. Well played. The unit spend must be nice for you.
And now if 2 people have the same champ in a bg, he can't be used twice. Whereas if it's for the whole alliance, they will inevitably be dupes and more than one person per bg can use the same champ. This is even worse now
Comments
Agreed.
Create 10 clear paths
Restrict people from placing more than 1 of the same defender per path. (Like sudoku)
Like if u bring 10 magiks, u'll have to place them in 10 different paths, u won't be able to create a path full of magik.
That way ur defenders will still be as useful as they were, but u'll need more strategy while placing them.
10 paths is too many, sometimes you are forced to play with less than 10 per bg. 9 paths are fine. Diversity should attain max score with 60% of defenders being diverse. Bring back defender kills as a strategy to compensate for less diversity, but at a disadvantage. 3 defender kills match 1 diversity point. Make full exploration of the map increase rewards wether you win or lose. Let's make it beneficial to keep fighting and progressing on the map. There will always be a winner and a loser, just give everyone more incentive to finish the maps
That I think makes the same mistake the current 15.0 war makes: it focuses on champion diversity when the game should be trying to encourage map placement diversity. In other words, it should encourage alliances to make different maps, and ideally it should encourage alliances to place differently in every war: there should be a "predictability penalty." I have this gut feeling that if an alliance always placed defenders in the same way and their opponents knew this there should be a mechanism for those opponents to take advantage of that. If such a penalty existed, and I've mentioned some ideas about this, then the players would fix the problem themselves. Good alliances would punish predictable ones, and that would apply pressure to become less predictable over time.
A unique per path rule is just a smaller version of the uniqueness rule: unique per alliance, unique per battlegroup, unique per path. It is better in that it reduces the scope of the problem, but it preserves the nature of the problem.
There's also some weird corner case problems with this rule. You'd have to change the mechanics of placement a bit to accommodate this. Currently, you pick your team first and then place them second. Suppose I am the last player to place in my battlegroup and I pick my team and I place my first four defenders. There's only one spot left, but it is possible that my last defender is illegal for that path. But if I'm not an officer I can't move any of my previously placed defenders. I am stuck unable to place the last one. I would have to wait for an officer to juggle to place. It is not a big problem, but it is the sort of thing you have to think through when making these kinds of gameplay rules.
The last formal update was 9 days ago.
Telling us nothing is telling us something, but it isn't a particularly nice thing to say.
We are a 9m alliance facing a 14m alliance. Our war ratings are the same. We will lose because of their defender rating being higher. Before the war even started, now we are stuck for 24 hours waiting for the loss. War should not be decided based on who has more diverse champs.
I wonder who of the top alliances down to tier 4 complained about this to kabam LOL
I've never had this problem with my alliance. We only had to keep close track of our deaths to know where we stand and keep them as low as possible. The only time we'd ask someone to give up was even getting stuck on a difficult node, because we didn't want the person to give 9 deaths to our opponent by reviving couple times! Mainly on shared nodes.
It is a fair question that players ask often. And there's a simple, if not always satisfactory, answer. The devs generally have reasons for making these kinds of changes that fundamentally revolve around fixing what they perceive to be problems with the way the game was. Player complaints, data mining, and other information can convince them that their solution is bad, but none of those things is likely to convince them the problems they perceived don't actually exist. So reverting to the way the game was would just return them to square one with the same problems to solve. And clearly those problems were bad enough to them to cause them to do all of this, so they would be compelled to immediately do something else.
Given that, MMO devs would rather try to change the implementation from something that poorly solves the problem to something that better solves the problem. They would prefer to move forward. That's why reversions are so rare. Even with all of the controversy and protests surrounding 12.0, it is worth noting that exactly none of the major changes in 12.0 were reverted. Some were softened. Some were reworked. All of them are still here. None of the major nerfed champions were returned to their original strength. Challenge rating, Diminishing returns, Armor Penetration, Block Penetration, Critical resistance are all still here, some in less developed forms. No one convinced the devs that the reasons for doing those things were invalid, they were only convinced that some of those things went too far too quickly.
It is clear the devs believed the old war was broken. We might be able to convince them the 15.0 version is not right. But it is extremely difficult to convince them that 14.0 was fine enough to convince them to go back to it. That's why suggestions to tweak the new system can sometimes effect changes, but suggestions to roll back to the old system tend to fall on deaf ears. To convince the devs to roll back to 14.0 war, you would have to convince them that not only is 15.0 war bad, but that no possible set of changes to it have any chance to make it better. That is a tough hill to climb.
None of his SA do any power burn damage, meaning they don't do any damage, PERIOD. This bug has been on the radar and KNOWN for 1.5+ months at this point! Seriously guys, this is ridiculous... Vision is a major character for high level players in AQ, War, and Act 5. Not having him usable but focusing on "making sure that 6* content is moving forward!" is insulting and ridiculous.
Fix. The. Game.
-rt
Will Thanos be mandatory for Tier 1?
Thanos has divirisity and PI not possible to match, even with unlimited resources.
Whoever has a Thanos should list themselves on Ebay!!!! (Kidding, don't ban me)
Except you did though. You said you stopped playing because you were tired of all the stupid changes, and now you just come on here to mess with the people who haven't left yet. I don't have time to go through your 1000s of posts, but it was absolutely said. This is the game for you. Rather than tap and swipe on the screen, you come here and try to push buttons and further your own pointless agenda. Have fun.
Thank you for waiting patiently as we worked behind the scenes to continue to improve the new Alliance Wars. We’re still making some adjustments, and want to re-emphasize that this will be an iterative process - one that we are dedicated to. We have greatly appreciated all of the constructive feedback Summoners have provided us with, as well as those that have urged their fellow players to grant us some time to look into both your comments and the way that Alliance Wars is currently running.
At this time, we can say that we have made a decision to keep Defender Diversity dependant on individual Battlegroups, and not based on the entire Alliance, as originally intended. This is something that many of you have requested, and something that we agree is better for players. This way, we’re shifting away from having to focus on your entire Alliance’s rosters, and to only those you are playing with directly.
We are still working on some things behind the scenes to ensure that we hit our goals that we wanted to achieve with this new iteration of Alliance wars, including the fact that Defender Diversity is meant to be a tie breaker, and not deciding the war. We will continue to make more iterations and adjustments until we have fulfilled our goals of making Alliance Wars more fun and engaging, as well as making the mode more varied, and to address concerns you all brought up.
Stay tuned! We will have more information to share with you next week!
I don't see how you can avoid not adding kills back still. Otherwise it will be 150 diversity vs 150 diversity and come down to PI every war.
I have yet to see anyone say .. Oh goody I got a spider gwen that will be good for Defender diversity... we still curse at getting these terrible champs.
@Kabam Miike I think this is a step in the right direction, but let skill determine the winner. The point above is exactly right. Points for defender kills would help make war more skill-based and also allow an alliance freedom to better decide their strategy for defense. Do I have my entire alliance place duped Magik, duped NCs, duped Juggernauts and risk losing diversity points but know that if I can stop them defensively I might still win? Defender kill points would at least give us this freedom back.
It was clear diversity was here to stay, so I'm glad its just gonna stay per BG to avoid a major spreadsheet war.
The only problem is no actual change has been made yet and we are still left to suffer a PI war. No frustrations have been removed to make AW enjoyable and we are to continue on in the dark.
Can we cut placement phase to 2 hours and do away with attack phase altogether? There's really no need for it anymore. Let's just measure pi, pass out awards and move on to the next one.
i completely agree. you guys have enough data to realize that this war is trash. balance the point system better so we can have a war that isnt based solely on pi
Was one of your goals forcing officers to create spreadsheets and track down everyone's roster to max diversity? Because that is exactly what has happened. It's making my, and many other officer's, lives miserable. I want to play a game where I can create the best offense and defense. I do not want to have to spend hours on a spreadsheet and looking at rosters because of a gimmick.
THIS IS NOT FAIR. THIS IS NOT WAR.
It's a battle of who ranks their champs higher. It's not our fault we are matched up against an alliance with higher rated defenders. We could have more skill than them. We could place champs in a smarter way based on the nodes. But we will still lose war because they have played the game longer and have had more time to rank up their champions. How is this war? How is this competitive? How is this fun?
dont forget to add that the rewards are total **** as well so ya war is garbage
Here is how I think it could work:
(it's not a perfect example but just something to get the idea out there)
If diversity is a multiplier on defender kill points based on actual diversity compared to possible diversity. In a 3 Battlegroup war, compare a defense that is not very diverse (diversity score of 60) that gets 100 kills against a defense that is fully diverse (diversity score of 150) that only gets 50 kills. Let's say that defender kills are 50 points each.
The first defense would get 5,000 points (50 per kill x 100 kills) for their defender kills which would then be multiplied by 40% (60 diversity / 150 possible diversity) so they would end up with 2,000 points for their defender kills. The second defense would get only 2,500 points (50 per kill x 50 kills) for their defender kills but since they got 150 diversity out of a possible 150, their score would be multiplied by 100% giving them 2,500.
Basically the purpose of this system would be to force alliances to weigh their options. They can go with a less diverse defense and get more kills that would end up being worth less per kill or they can go with a more diverse defense that might not get as many kills but each kill would be worth more.
Again, this isn't perfect, just still an idea on how it could be different. Figured I'd add it to the discussion.
And now if 2 people have the same champ in a bg, he can't be used twice. Whereas if it's for the whole alliance, they will inevitably be dupes and more than one person per bg can use the same champ. This is even worse now