Territory War Ties [Merged]

Replies

  • Manowar wrote: »
    Ender22 wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    JacenRoe wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    I would prefer ties to that. If defensive points happened I would probably just set defensive squads and skip offensive phase.

    Then you will lose.
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    I personally don't like the defensive points idea. I enjoy using characters I like. Most of those aren't that good. Under this point system. Your not going to use lesser characters because you'll give opposition points. The best part of tw is being able to use your whole roster.

    You would still use your whole roster to win. If beating a team takes 2 tries then you lost one point, to gain 10. If that's what it takes to finish a territory that will give you 700 more points you're not going to skip out on doing anything that risks a loss.

    And besides, you would have MORE incentive to upgrade a variety of toons if they actually need to be good so you could finish an opponent with 2 teams instead of 5-6 scrap teams for example.

    And you drastically overestimate the perverse incentive to put all your good teams on defense. If your favorite/strongest toons are on defense you're going to lose, and give up banners. You need a balance of strong defense teams that can get a few wins on defense, and strong teams that can win efficiency on offense. You are imagining a non-existent problem, and not giving any proof of why it's a concern.

    I never said they were junk toons. For instance my geonosians can take baze out but probably won't win the entire fight. So now I'm being penalized. Basically all the fun is gone if you can't strategically take out squads. Why have those toons.

    The strategy becomes making sacrifices at the right moment better than the way your opponent makes sacrifices. You’d have to decide if that sacrifice was worth it or determine a better solution

    So what you are advocating for is a devaluation of non-meta toons, as if the gap between meta and garbage toons isn't big enough already.

    That is what points for losses does: reward meta toons and penalizes weak toons.

    What is the point of competition if the stronger/more prepared are not rewarded for victory. The whole reason this thread was started is because the vast majority here want a real competition with no ties
  • Ender22
    1194 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Manowar wrote: »
    Ender22 wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    JacenRoe wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    I would prefer ties to that. If defensive points happened I would probably just set defensive squads and skip offensive phase.

    Then you will lose.
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    I personally don't like the defensive points idea. I enjoy using characters I like. Most of those aren't that good. Under this point system. Your not going to use lesser characters because you'll give opposition points. The best part of tw is being able to use your whole roster.

    You would still use your whole roster to win. If beating a team takes 2 tries then you lost one point, to gain 10. If that's what it takes to finish a territory that will give you 700 more points you're not going to skip out on doing anything that risks a loss.

    And besides, you would have MORE incentive to upgrade a variety of toons if they actually need to be good so you could finish an opponent with 2 teams instead of 5-6 scrap teams for example.

    And you drastically overestimate the perverse incentive to put all your good teams on defense. If your favorite/strongest toons are on defense you're going to lose, and give up banners. You need a balance of strong defense teams that can get a few wins on defense, and strong teams that can win efficiency on offense. You are imagining a non-existent problem, and not giving any proof of why it's a concern.

    I never said they were junk toons. For instance my geonosians can take baze out but probably won't win the entire fight. So now I'm being penalized. Basically all the fun is gone if you can't strategically take out squads. Why have those toons.

    The strategy becomes making sacrifices at the right moment better than the way your opponent makes sacrifices. You’d have to decide if that sacrifice was worth it or determine a better solution

    So what you are advocating for is a devaluation of non-meta toons, as if the gap between meta and garbage toons isn't big enough already.

    That is what points for losses does: reward meta toons and penalizes weak toons.


    Thanks for responding to that, I must’ve missed it.

    What I’m advocating is an immense gain of value on non-meta toons. Now you have to invest resources on these toons. They aren’t just throwaways anymore, you need them, and you need them to do well, to beat teams in unique ways or at least weaken them to give you just enough edge to beat them with another non-meta team
  • Bones
    456 posts Member
    Im all for defense win bonuses. Maybe add a maximum of 1 extra point per defense team that wins. This will prevent guilds from losing just from one person losing all the time, and also make coordination and strategy key when choosing an offense or defense team. They cant just throw garbage at a team on defense because you want to have the least amount of defense wins possible. So a maximum of an extra 250 points from defense.
  • Viserys wrote: »
    Chuybacca wrote: »
    It’s simple: +1 point for each defensive toon that survives an offensive attack. It makes the stategy more important on offense and defense.

    It's the same problem people have rightly cited for +1 point for defensive wins. It discourages sending in teams that are meant to pick off key toons or might not win, which does feel like a bit of a noose on the strategy here.

    That's why I proposed +X points for a flawless offense win (5 toons left standing on your side, not applicable if you have less than 5). The effect is very similar, but there's no inherent penalty for an attack you know won't destroy the enemy team.

    This strategy prevents guilds from placing weak defense and saving all of their best toons for offense to force a tie. If a team is so strong on defense that you have to use 2 teams to beat it, they deserve extra points.
  • When in a competition does a tie ever count as the lower position? Either there is a mechanism for deciding a winner (extra time, penalty shoot-out), or the tied teams both take the higher position (i.e. 1st, joint 2nd, 4th).

    Says a lot about the cynical attitude of CG to insist the effort put in when a tie occurs makes both teams losers.
  • Ender22 wrote: »
    Viserys wrote: »
    Chuybacca wrote: »
    It’s simple: +1 point for each defensive toon that survives an offensive attack. It makes the stategy more important on offense and defense.

    It's the same problem people have rightly cited for +1 point for defensive wins. It discourages sending in teams that are meant to pick off key toons or might not win, which does feel like a bit of a noose on the strategy here.

    That's why I proposed +X points for a flawless offense win (5 toons left standing on your side, not applicable if you have less than 5). The effect is very similar, but there's no inherent penalty for an attack you know won't destroy the enemy team.

    Inherent penalty? You send in a team to pick off a key toon, and then come in afterwards with a second team and a win, you win. You gain 10 points and they gain only 1. And, this happens both ways. Now you have to consider how to outdo your opponent at another level.

    Flawless offense should be considered a huge miscalculation and mistake on your part. If you beat them that badly, you wasted toons. You shouldn’t be rewarded for that.

    What you should be rewarded for is building a team that can take a beating against more than its fair share of teams

    +1
  • ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    Defensive wins takes all the fun out of it. No more using your full roster. Wouldn't risk loosing. More meta toons against meta toons takes all the strategy out of combat. No more using unique tactical squads to weaken better squads. Makes tw like every other thing in this game.

    how many guilds can field 250 meta squads on defense and still have enough offense left to beat 250 enemy meta squads?
  • I outright hate the TW now, second time wedid a full clearance and we’re still denied the achievements, once because we lost due to a bug and the second time due to an inevitable tie. My guild is so strong that barring any bugs there will always be a tie!
  • GrandAdmiralSledge
    95 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    @CG_Kozispoon how hard would it be to just give the first guild who clears out their competition a 50 banner bonus? That will eliminate 99.999% of ties, and 100% of the ties that occur with the top end guilds who fill 100% of their sectors and then defeat 100% of the enemy's sectors.
  • Because it is not fair. #Timezones
  • Julmay
    176 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Not everyone plays at the same time. This makes a time issue a rather bad choice for a tie breaker. My guild has people from Florida to Austrailia. Their presence across the pond should not be a negative.

    A good barometer would be the number of attempts needed for completion. This is the best solution that i have seen that has little chance of manipulation.
  • ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    Defensive wins takes all the fun out of it. No more using your full roster. Wouldn't risk loosing. More meta toons against meta toons takes all the strategy out of combat. No more using unique tactical squads to weaken better squads. Makes tw like every other thing in this game.

    how many guilds can field 250 meta squads on defense and still have enough offense left to beat 250 enemy meta squads?

    Your right. So we will just counter old metas over and over. You can look up on the forums to find the perfect counter then implement that squad. Can't wait to counter zaul with Rex again brings back so many memories.
  • RobArt wrote: »
    Because it is not fair. #Timezones

    Correct, some folks are busy with real life, work, school, problems, ect. I was matched with a guild from China who have a massive timezone difference. Also that would cause guild leaders to put pressure on players to get stuff done early.

    There are definitely better ways
  • How about awarding defensive squads 1 point for each successful hold or survival
  • Kozispoon
    3245 posts EA Staff (retired)
    For more information reagrding this issue, please give @CG_Carrie 's announcement a looksee.

    Territory Wars: On Ties
    Thank you for your patience 8D Forum Guidelines
  • How about awarding defensive squads 1 point for each successful hold or survival

    I agree, though I would make it 5 points for a defense meaning that if it took 3 teams to bring down 1 you end up with -5, would force people to have to think before attacking. I think it took the enemy something like 7 attempts to beat one of our guilds Kenobi/Barriss team to claim a territory, heroic last stands like that should be worth something.
  • For more information reagrding this issue, please give @CG_Carrie 's announcement a looksee.

    Territory Wars: On Ties

    @CG_Kozispoon - Hello, is there a chance we could get a percentage that adds in all "win's" that were by exactly 10 banners, please?
    #AcolyteShootsTwice
  • Just 1 point/attack resisted. That would work perfectly as tie breaker
  • Hannibal_Bexus
    620 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    If they changed the rules every week, buffs and bonuses for different factions or individual toons, and even placed bans (no rebels this week) or requirements (area x requires ewoks on defense) it would keep TW interesting indefinitely and be a constant roster check for all but the biggest whales. This might also help eliminate some ties (edit: and prevent the constant meta squad wall that so many people seem to fear). The point system could be changed similar to the old tournament system.
    A challenge (not win) earns points relative to the GP difference. Challenging a stronger team earns more points. Challenging a team with 4 units already defeated earns almost no points.
    A win OR loss earns points based on units left standing (+x for each enemy defeated, -x for each unit lost) This would kill almost all ties.
    Post edited by Hannibal_Bexus on
  • For more information reagrding this issue, please give @CG_Carrie 's announcement a looksee.

    Territory Wars: On Ties

    @CG_Kozispoon - Hello, is there a chance we could get a percentage that adds in all "win's" that were by exactly 10 banners, please?

    @CG_Kozispoon this please. There was a clear bug that was even announced that cost certain guilds (mine included) a “tie” because of the error.
  • Hannibal_Bexus
    620 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    If they changed the rules every week, buffs and bonuses for different factions or individual toons, and even placed bans (no rebels this week) or requirements (area x requires ewoks on defense) it would keep TW interesting indefinitely and be a constant roster check for all but the biggest whales. This might also help eliminate some ties. The point system could be changed similar to the old tournament system.
    A challenge (not win) earns points relative to the GP difference. Challenging a stronger team earns more points.
    A win OR loss earns points based on units left standing (+x for each enemy defeated, -x for each unit lost)
  • If they changed the rules every week, buffs and bonuses for different factions or individual toons, and even placed bans (no rebels this week) or requirements (area x requires ewoks on defense) it would keep TW interesting indefinitely and be a constant roster check for all but the biggest whales. This might also help eliminate some ties. The point system could be changed similar to the old tournament system.
    A challenge (not win) earns points relative to the GP difference. Challenging a stronger team earns more points. Challenging a team with 4 units already defeated earns almost no points.
    A win OR loss earns points based on units left standing (+x for each enemy defeated, -x for each unit lost)
  • Bruv we can't keep giving p2p more and more advantages. You shouldn't have to have a super deep roster to do well. You still get advantages for having very deep rosters anyways.
  • Kyno
    21930 posts Moderator
    Moved to correct sub forum.
  • Sounds a bit complicated. To make it more difficult to tie means to make it more difficult to deploy 250 teams and have enough power left to obtain 250 wins. Minimum char power could be dynamic, based on the active GP. The bigger the active GP, the higher will be the minimum char power required for TW.

    Simple and elegant + easy to adjust in order to get that 5% ties for strong and weak guild alike.
  • Ender22
    1194 posts Member
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    Defensive wins takes all the fun out of it. No more using your full roster. Wouldn't risk loosing. More meta toons against meta toons takes all the strategy out of combat. No more using unique tactical squads to weaken better squads. Makes tw like every other thing in this game.

    how many guilds can field 250 meta squads on defense and still have enough offense left to beat 250 enemy meta squads?

    Your right. So we will just counter old metas over and over. You can look up on the forums to find the perfect counter then implement that squad. Can't wait to counter zaul with Rex again brings back so many memories.

    I actually did just that, countered Zaul with Rex. Only I kind of regretted it because Rex helps me use DN to counter GK/Zariss which is a tougher team
  • kalidor
    1787 posts Member
    Nice. I'm really starting to prefer ideas that minimize the possibility of a tie, rather than ideas of what to do in the event of a tie. I've heard a few good ones from my guildmates during a discussion on that subject, like having a few bonuses that officers can apply once to a territory on defense or offense (+25% offense, +20% TM to start the encounter, etc), increasing the number of overall defense slots, or extra defense slots that can be divvied up on the map (like 25 extra for a 25/area map). The fixed bonuses for FO and Resistance are going to get old fast.
    xSWCr - Nov '15 shard - swgoh.gg kalidor-m
  • LukeDukem8
    384 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    An interesting concept could be the cumulative difference in GP between squads.

    So, in the case of a 100K team beating a 90K team, the offensive side wins 90K (the defensive GP).

    In the case of a 60K team beating a 90K team, you would get 90k + 30K (the Defensive GP + the difference between the squads). This gives an incentive to take a calculated risk to go after the higher GP squad.

    HOWEVER, In the case of a defense win, the defense would win the difference GP. So a 50K squad losing to a 90k squad, the defense wins 40k. if a second team is needed to get the win, the offense team finally earns the 90k (but it cost them 50k for sending in a weaker squad first). The net to the offense is 40k, which is what it cost them to earn the 90k.

    In my mind this seems fair. The defensive earns point, it promotes strategy, it makes you think about who to send in, and rewards those for taking calculated risks.
  • ResmiHardin1
    39 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    I think if it would be possibel to earn points by defending / beating an attacking squad, or reduce the points one gets by beating an allready attacked squad would reduce the number of ties drastically.
    Assuming that even the 100 kk gp guilds do not win evry single attack ofc.
    Cheers MasterHedge
  • Ender22 wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    Defensive wins takes all the fun out of it. No more using your full roster. Wouldn't risk loosing. More meta toons against meta toons takes all the strategy out of combat. No more using unique tactical squads to weaken better squads. Makes tw like every other thing in this game.

    how many guilds can field 250 meta squads on defense and still have enough offense left to beat 250 enemy meta squads?

    Your right. So we will just counter old metas over and over. You can look up on the forums to find the perfect counter then implement that squad. Can't wait to counter zaul with Rex again brings back so many memories.

    I actually did just that, countered Zaul with Rex. Only I kind of regretted it because Rex helps me use DN to counter GK/Zariss which is a tougher team

    Well that's where you and I are different. I only used one squad that was ever used as an arena squad. My nightsisters who I put on defense. Making unique squads out of your complete roster is really fun for me. For instance my r2 was in a zuma lead squad with chopper atf and master Yoda. I don't want to have to use unoriginal squads for everything.
Sign In or Register to comment.