I'd like to reiterate what many have expressed, that the AW nodes are without a doubt, near meaningless. We recently had a war against a group a bit stronger than us by roughly 2mil alliance rating. I joined atk with my "3rd string" ATK champs because it was just short of a guarantee we were going to lose knowing what we know about the scoring system post 15.0.
I walked through linked noded champs and the mini with 1 champ KO'd by the miniboss mainly due to my own misstep. Those same opponent champs in the 1st gen. AW? I never would have considered taking them on with links up and definitely wouldnt have been able to beat them with my 3rd string champs without risking a team KO long before the miniboss even if I had played perfectly.
In the previous version it would have been a tough match indeed, but definitely within our reach to pull out a close victory if we played well. I can imagine that it could have been a very exciting fight for all of us instead of the current snoozefest where we haven't even bothered to talk about strategy with lane assignments, how many kills we have compared to theirs(because they no longer matter), which team member we're going to "carry" to the boss etc........
I truly cannot seem to find anything about the new format that resonates any excitment for me and my teammates. I'm nearly in shock to realize and admit that AQ is actually more engaging than AW now. That is in no way a "good thing" in my book.
This is an example of a problem I mentioned early on with the current system. It "devolves" to an undesirable state that is very difficult to get out of. Basically, alliances are placing the most diverse defenses possible to get the best diversity points possible, and those defenses are necessarily a lot weaker than you'd expect. This means everyone else must try to match them by also placing highly diverse defenses to try to equalize those diversity points, and then everyone is facing easier defenses. And then the chances of both sides easily completing the map rise substantially.
This is a vicious cycle. If everyone is completing the maps most of the time, diversity points become the most important determiner for who wins. Which forces everyone to maximize those points. Which causes defenses to be weaker. Which causes everyone to complete maps. Which causes everyone to prioritize diversity points even more.
It is easy to say, and I'm guessing the devs themselves might be thinking, that the obvious counter-move is to not place easy defenses. If you place a hard defense you can stop your opponent from completing the map 100% - at least in some tiers of AW - and that would overcome the loss of diversity points. In that way, diversity points are the "tie breaker" they keep mentioning.
The problem is that this ignores game psychology. Any alliance that attempts to use this strategy is taking a huge risk if everyone else doesn't. While you can try to force your opponent to complete less than 100%, in most tiers you can't do that all the time: probably less than half the time at best. In some tiers the odds of forcing an incomplete might be less than 10%. Any strategy that works less than half the time is in effect a losing strategy. Any strategy that works less than 10% of the time is suicide. It is better to place a weak defense and assume your odds of beating your opponent on diversity and rating points is about 50/50. Trying to go against the herd and place non-diverse will generally cause you to lose more wars. This *forces* alliances to shoot for high diversity as the only viable strategy.
This was an early obvious problem I was worried about a few thousand pages ago. It only looks like there are two options for placement, but in fact the current system forces everyone to either conform to one and only one defense strategy or pay the price for trying to be different.
Which is an ironic problem for a diversity system to have.
I'd like to reiterate what many have expressed, that the AW nodes are without a doubt, near meaningless. We recently had a war against a group a bit stronger than us by roughly 2mil alliance rating. I joined atk with my "3rd string" ATK champs because it was just short of a guarantee we were going to lose knowing what we know about the scoring system post 15.0.
I walked through linked noded champs and the mini with 1 champ KO'd by the miniboss mainly due to my own misstep. Those same opponent champs in the 1st gen. AW? I never would have considered taking them on with links up and definitely wouldnt have been able to beat them with my 3rd string champs without risking a team KO long before the miniboss even if I had played perfectly.
In the previous version it would have been a tough match indeed, but definitely within our reach to pull out a close victory if we played well. I can imagine that it could have been a very exciting fight for all of us instead of the current snoozefest where we haven't even bothered to talk about strategy with lane assignments, how many kills we have compared to theirs(because they no longer matter), which team member we're going to "carry" to the boss etc........
I truly cannot seem to find anything about the new format that resonates any excitment for me and my teammates. I'm nearly in shock to realize and admit that AQ is actually more engaging than AW now. That is in no way a "good thing" in my book.
This is an example of a problem I mentioned early on with the current system. It "devolves" to an undesirable state that is very difficult to get out of. Basically, alliances are placing the most diverse defenses possible to get the best diversity points possible, and those defenses are necessarily a lot weaker than you'd expect. This means everyone else must try to match them by also placing highly diverse defenses to try to equalize those diversity points, and then everyone is facing easier defenses. And then the chances of both sides easily completing the map rise substantially.
This is a vicious cycle. If everyone is completing the maps most of the time, diversity points become the most important determiner for who wins. Which forces everyone to maximize those points. Which causes defenses to be weaker. Which causes everyone to complete maps. Which causes everyone to prioritize diversity points even more.
It is easy to say, and I'm guessing the devs themselves might be thinking, that the obvious counter-move is to not place easy defenses. If you place a hard defense you can stop your opponent from completing the map 100% - at least in some tiers of AW - and that would overcome the loss of diversity points. In that way, diversity points are the "tie breaker" they keep mentioning.
The problem is that this ignores game psychology. Any alliance that attempts to use this strategy is taking a huge risk if everyone else doesn't. While you can try to force your opponent to complete less than 100%, in most tiers you can't do that all the time: probably less than half the time at best. In some tiers the odds of forcing an incomplete might be less than 10%. Any strategy that works less than half the time is in effect a losing strategy. Any strategy that works less than 10% of the time is suicide. It is better to place a weak defense and assume your odds of beating your opponent on diversity and rating points is about 50/50. Trying to go against the herd and place non-diverse will generally cause you to lose more wars. This *forces* alliances to shoot for high diversity as the only viable strategy.
This was an early obvious problem I was worried about a few thousand pages ago. It only looks like there are two options for placement, but in fact the current system forces everyone to either conform to one and only one defense strategy or pay the price for trying to be different.
Which is an ironic problem for a diversity system to have.
Exactly! I love your posts, so well thought out. This vicious cycle makes it tough to really do anything but max diversity. On LINE last night we were talking about how ridiculous AW has gotten. People placing Vision and IP solely for diversity and just crossing fingers the group we go against doesn't have a higher rating is ridiculous.
I've said it before and i'll say it again, defender kills are the answer.
This is why aw is pointless.
Everything is tied except defender rating. Win/lose this isn't fun. Defender rating is the ONLY tie breaker in our tier.
Make it stop. There's nothing kabam can do with the nodes to make this any different. There's nothing that kabam could do with diversity to make this any different.
The only thing that separates the winners from the loser in a competitive war is defender kills. In which we would have lost that war. I don't feel good about that win.
If they bring back defender kills it needs to be a very small amount like 10 points per death. So diversity will still be the trump but rating won't determine the winner
All kabam has to do is tell us specifically what changes they are working on!!! DO NOT GIVE US A GENERAL, VAGUE, SCRIPTED RESPONSE.
The tiny feedback we do get is all just beating around the bush responses and frankly just angers us more. This isn't a government operation where we have classified information. This is general knowledge that needs to spread to the player base.
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
atleast they can update us but they are ignoring.
it being very frastuating to play this broken war scoring system....
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
I do agree they are more than likely reading the thread when they can find the time. But popping in once a week or longer just to say something along the lines of "we are still working on it" isn't very helpful or eliminate the high levels of frustrations players are left to suffer. I understand you and others are probably not feeling so much pain and have some better patience, but others not so much. Just because Miike pops in here (rarely) doesn't mean he is dropping any useful answers to us.
I can completely understand @nuggz level of frustration and wanting answers now. Many of us are suffering some very odd and painful losses and are not getting the rewards we normally have and our progression in game is now going very much slower or has come to a near halt. We are in the dark on what changes are even being considered or when changes will be made, so it makes it a lot harder to want to rank up champs for the current system because of the worry new changes to the system could counter any current choices we are making now.
Im not trying to debate with you, rather just point out why we are desperate for answers and that what we are receiving isn't at all helpful for many of us. If you can't see someones frustrations from their aspect of the game its best to let them comment and not bother to reply. They are simply giving their arguments in hopes of a mods reply, not a users rebuttal.
It's been 2 months since the announcement and a month an a half of terrible AW and it still isn't fixed. No defender kills was pointed out in like the 1st post after the announcement, yet it takes a team of developers to figure it out when all they needed was a 5th grader who knew how to add a few numbers together.
They are not responding to us. Sure they pop on occasionally and copy and paste a script, but they have yet to actually respond to us on our concerns. (The point system, defender kills, etc)
That's been our topic since day one and still they haven't given us an answer.
We've shown pictures of aw loses by jist a few point and it being from defender rating. When those points should have noting to do with the outcome of a competitive war winner. Yet that's been the tie breaker in our wars when every other catagory is capped out
When people are losing because of a few Points and seeing that Defender Rating is the lower metric, that's exactly what it's functioning as, a tiebreaker. Now, people are certainly entitled to their opinions and feelings on the current setup, but if they're ignoring the existing metrics and losing, that's nothing anyone else can help.
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
Right they cannot respond to everyone all the time. But if you read this entire thread, you'd see that about 80% of the comments are the same thing just by different people. I'm not asking them to respond to me or anyone individually. I'm asking that kabam answers the question that the majority of us have been asking since day one of this update. If you haven't guessed that's the broken Point system, the winning losing wars being decided by defender rating, defender kills, the fact that it's not enjoyable.
Which means the current solution would be Ranking or boosting in other ways. Without forming an opinion, that would be the answer to optimizing efficiency. We are going to lose Wars now and then in whatever system we play.
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
I mean they have been keeping us updated on what they’re doing I agree this war is lame but ranting like that is going to get you nowhere fast
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
Right they cannot respond to everyone all the time. But if you read this entire thread, you'd see that about 80% of the comments are the same thing just by different people. I'm not asking them to respond to me or anyone individually. I'm asking that kabam answers the question that the majority of us have been asking since day one of this update. If you haven't guessed that's the broken Point system, the winning losing wars being decided by defender rating, defender kills, the fact that it's not enjoyable.
The problem is Defender Kills were removed for an objective, to remove the penalty for making an effort. Plus the fact that it contradicts Diversity. Now, I read your suggestion on making them 10 Points each. I understand what you're suggesting. I offered a similar one, pages back and suggested if they had to add them again at all, it would have to actually be lower than that. About 5 Points per KO. That still creates the similar issue being addressed. If you look at it as worse case scenario, each Player tries and dies everytime. 30 Players, 3 Champs, 15 Items. Assuming they use Revives for said Items, that amasses to 14,440 Points. The problem is not the fact that they have a value. It's the numbers that they can mount to.
When people are losing because of a few Points and seeing that Defender Rating is the lower metric, that's exactly what it's functioning as, a tiebreaker. Now, people are certainly entitled to their opinions and feelings on the current setup, but if they're ignoring the existing metrics and losing, that's nothing anyone else can help.
Kinda proves @DNA3000 vicious cycle description a few posts up to be the case then, right?
When people are losing because of a few Points and seeing that Defender Rating is the lower metric, that's exactly what it's functioning as, a tiebreaker. Now, people are certainly entitled to their opinions and feelings on the current setup, but if they're ignoring the existing metrics and losing, that's nothing anyone else can help.
Kinda proves @DNA3000 vicious cycle description a few posts up to be the case then, right?
Wasn't disputing his observations. I said I didn't agree completely with his perspective. Namely the attack on competition. However, I can understand the purpose of having Defender Rating as the defining metric as well, so I refrained from debating it. I respect DNA and his thoughts. I just pick and choose my arguments based on my own views.
Right, we will always win some lose some.
All of our wars have decided by defender rating.
Rating should NEVER be the deciding factor. It needs to be about skill, after all its a War, a Battle, who's the best.
In my tier, every alliance maxes all their points available. The ONLY points that don't match up are the rating points which usually are with in +/- 50 points of the opponents. Win or lose that should not be the deciding factor.
Diveristy is easy to max points in
Exploring 100% just as easy
All boss kills no problem
Defender rating isn't a problem, it's the fact that there's is nothing to justify a real winner. Who preformed better in the battle. There's no way to prove an alliances skill and abilities in the new war system. I don't want to hear anything about the other points because they are childsplay, easy to max out, just takes a slight bit of organizing between the members of a battle group (again easy). All these points mine as well have a zero value since the numbers don't change between allainces and our ability to play the game well. All those points are washed out from being tied up in every war match up.
Again all points are evenly tied. Which leaves only an allainces rating to decide the winner. The game is about surviving, Making your champs last, tying to beat the content with no or little deaths. The alliance that completes the map most effectively, the most efficiently, should win wars.
In what competition anywhere has a war been decided by stats/rating???? Nowhere!!! It's about who died the least, after an evenly score map completion.
For the players who didn't want to fight the bosses previously due to deaths. If u want to fight a boss on repeat with out worries of dieing repeatedly go fight a quest boss, go fight the collector, Do rol.
A war is a different. If an alliance has to die multiple more times to clear the boss then YES they need to lose that war given all the other criteria was met (diveristy, explore, etc...)
When people are losing because of a few Points and seeing that Defender Rating is the lower metric, that's exactly what it's functioning as, a tiebreaker. Now, people are certainly entitled to their opinions and feelings on the current setup, but if they're ignoring the existing metrics and losing, that's nothing anyone else can help.
Kinda proves @DNA3000 vicious cycle description a few posts up to be the case then, right?
Wasn't disputing his observations. I said I didn't agree completely with his perspective. Namely the attack on competition. However, I can understand the purpose of having Defender Rating as the defining metric as well, so I refrained from debating it. I respect DNA and his thoughts. I just pick and choose my arguments based on my own views.
Didn’t meant to be interpreted as a jab, just getting a better understanding of that particular part of the discussion. I find his discussion points interesting.
At this point I’ve given up on how Kabam decides how they want to do AW, I’m looking at it as a shard farming method...makes it easier to deal with any of the nonsense.
Which means the current solution would be Ranking or boosting in other ways. Without forming an opinion, that would be the answer to optimizing efficiency. We are going to lose Wars now and then in whatever system we play.
Sorry again you miss the point alliance war isn't fun and isn't war. It's a cheap diy AQ right now. You don't need to actually fight to win, you know before starting the result in the main.
War needs to allow the ability for weaker teams to win and tbh that's through skill and dying less. There are many cases of real battles were strategy and the captains ensuring they kept their troops alive longer while killing the enemy faster won the day.
If you're in an alliance and you don't like dying then don't play AW, but war has to be war otherwise call it short AQ because right now at best that's what it is.
Comments
This is an example of a problem I mentioned early on with the current system. It "devolves" to an undesirable state that is very difficult to get out of. Basically, alliances are placing the most diverse defenses possible to get the best diversity points possible, and those defenses are necessarily a lot weaker than you'd expect. This means everyone else must try to match them by also placing highly diverse defenses to try to equalize those diversity points, and then everyone is facing easier defenses. And then the chances of both sides easily completing the map rise substantially.
This is a vicious cycle. If everyone is completing the maps most of the time, diversity points become the most important determiner for who wins. Which forces everyone to maximize those points. Which causes defenses to be weaker. Which causes everyone to complete maps. Which causes everyone to prioritize diversity points even more.
It is easy to say, and I'm guessing the devs themselves might be thinking, that the obvious counter-move is to not place easy defenses. If you place a hard defense you can stop your opponent from completing the map 100% - at least in some tiers of AW - and that would overcome the loss of diversity points. In that way, diversity points are the "tie breaker" they keep mentioning.
The problem is that this ignores game psychology. Any alliance that attempts to use this strategy is taking a huge risk if everyone else doesn't. While you can try to force your opponent to complete less than 100%, in most tiers you can't do that all the time: probably less than half the time at best. In some tiers the odds of forcing an incomplete might be less than 10%. Any strategy that works less than half the time is in effect a losing strategy. Any strategy that works less than 10% of the time is suicide. It is better to place a weak defense and assume your odds of beating your opponent on diversity and rating points is about 50/50. Trying to go against the herd and place non-diverse will generally cause you to lose more wars. This *forces* alliances to shoot for high diversity as the only viable strategy.
This was an early obvious problem I was worried about a few thousand pages ago. It only looks like there are two options for placement, but in fact the current system forces everyone to either conform to one and only one defense strategy or pay the price for trying to be different.
Which is an ironic problem for a diversity system to have.
Exactly! I love your posts, so well thought out. This vicious cycle makes it tough to really do anything but max diversity. On LINE last night we were talking about how ridiculous AW has gotten. People placing Vision and IP solely for diversity and just crossing fingers the group we go against doesn't have a higher rating is ridiculous.
I've said it before and i'll say it again, defender kills are the answer.
This is why aw is pointless.
Everything is tied except defender rating. Win/lose this isn't fun. Defender rating is the ONLY tie breaker in our tier.
Make it stop. There's nothing kabam can do with the nodes to make this any different. There's nothing that kabam could do with diversity to make this any different.
The only thing that separates the winners from the loser in a competitive war is defender kills. In which we would have lost that war. I don't feel good about that win.
Look at what I'm showing you
What are the plans moving forward?
TELL US EXACTALY WHAT KABAM PLANS ON CHANGING AMD WHAT THEY WILL NOT!!!!!
The tiny feedback we do get is all just beating around the bush responses and frankly just angers us more. This isn't a government operation where we have classified information. This is general knowledge that needs to spread to the player base.
Look at what we are showing you
@Kabam Miike
I hope so. The problem has been going since day 1 and we have yet to get any answers. They haven't answered one of our question or even made a small hint towards what we've been saying. It's NOT Acceptable
They have been keeping is updated on what THEY are doing but they have yet to answer any of our real questions. As a matter of fact they don't respond to us at all.
They've been responding all along. They're listening to the feedback, and have commented periodically. They can't answer every comment, and when there are more adjustments, they let us know that they're coming. This has been a long Thread. They're reading it. That doesn't mean they can respond to every question and comment made.
atleast they can update us but they are ignoring.
it being very frastuating to play this broken war scoring system....
I do agree they are more than likely reading the thread when they can find the time. But popping in once a week or longer just to say something along the lines of "we are still working on it" isn't very helpful or eliminate the high levels of frustrations players are left to suffer. I understand you and others are probably not feeling so much pain and have some better patience, but others not so much. Just because Miike pops in here (rarely) doesn't mean he is dropping any useful answers to us.
I can completely understand @nuggz level of frustration and wanting answers now. Many of us are suffering some very odd and painful losses and are not getting the rewards we normally have and our progression in game is now going very much slower or has come to a near halt. We are in the dark on what changes are even being considered or when changes will be made, so it makes it a lot harder to want to rank up champs for the current system because of the worry new changes to the system could counter any current choices we are making now.
Im not trying to debate with you, rather just point out why we are desperate for answers and that what we are receiving isn't at all helpful for many of us. If you can't see someones frustrations from their aspect of the game its best to let them comment and not bother to reply. They are simply giving their arguments in hopes of a mods reply, not a users rebuttal.
That's been our topic since day one and still they haven't given us an answer.
Right they cannot respond to everyone all the time. But if you read this entire thread, you'd see that about 80% of the comments are the same thing just by different people. I'm not asking them to respond to me or anyone individually. I'm asking that kabam answers the question that the majority of us have been asking since day one of this update. If you haven't guessed that's the broken Point system, the winning losing wars being decided by defender rating, defender kills, the fact that it's not enjoyable.
The problem is Defender Kills were removed for an objective, to remove the penalty for making an effort. Plus the fact that it contradicts Diversity. Now, I read your suggestion on making them 10 Points each. I understand what you're suggesting. I offered a similar one, pages back and suggested if they had to add them again at all, it would have to actually be lower than that. About 5 Points per KO. That still creates the similar issue being addressed. If you look at it as worse case scenario, each Player tries and dies everytime. 30 Players, 3 Champs, 15 Items. Assuming they use Revives for said Items, that amasses to 14,440 Points. The problem is not the fact that they have a value. It's the numbers that they can mount to.
Kinda proves @DNA3000 vicious cycle description a few posts up to be the case then, right?
Wasn't disputing his observations. I said I didn't agree completely with his perspective. Namely the attack on competition. However, I can understand the purpose of having Defender Rating as the defining metric as well, so I refrained from debating it. I respect DNA and his thoughts. I just pick and choose my arguments based on my own views.
All of our wars have decided by defender rating.
Rating should NEVER be the deciding factor. It needs to be about skill, after all its a War, a Battle, who's the best.
In my tier, every alliance maxes all their points available. The ONLY points that don't match up are the rating points which usually are with in +/- 50 points of the opponents. Win or lose that should not be the deciding factor.
Diveristy is easy to max points in
Exploring 100% just as easy
All boss kills no problem
Defender rating isn't a problem, it's the fact that there's is nothing to justify a real winner. Who preformed better in the battle. There's no way to prove an alliances skill and abilities in the new war system. I don't want to hear anything about the other points because they are childsplay, easy to max out, just takes a slight bit of organizing between the members of a battle group (again easy). All these points mine as well have a zero value since the numbers don't change between allainces and our ability to play the game well. All those points are washed out from being tied up in every war match up.
Again all points are evenly tied. Which leaves only an allainces rating to decide the winner. The game is about surviving, Making your champs last, tying to beat the content with no or little deaths. The alliance that completes the map most effectively, the most efficiently, should win wars.
In what competition anywhere has a war been decided by stats/rating???? Nowhere!!! It's about who died the least, after an evenly score map completion.
For the players who didn't want to fight the bosses previously due to deaths. If u want to fight a boss on repeat with out worries of dieing repeatedly go fight a quest boss, go fight the collector, Do rol.
A war is a different. If an alliance has to die multiple more times to clear the boss then YES they need to lose that war given all the other criteria was met (diveristy, explore, etc...)
Didn’t meant to be interpreted as a jab, just getting a better understanding of that particular part of the discussion. I find his discussion points interesting.
At this point I’ve given up on how Kabam decides how they want to do AW, I’m looking at it as a shard farming method...makes it easier to deal with any of the nonsense.
Sorry again you miss the point alliance war isn't fun and isn't war. It's a cheap diy AQ right now. You don't need to actually fight to win, you know before starting the result in the main.
War needs to allow the ability for weaker teams to win and tbh that's through skill and dying less. There are many cases of real battles were strategy and the captains ensuring they kept their troops alive longer while killing the enemy faster won the day.
If you're in an alliance and you don't like dying then don't play AW, but war has to be war otherwise call it short AQ because right now at best that's what it is.
New AW, working as intended.