Territory War Ties [Merged]

Replies

  • ProximaB1_ wrote: »
    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.

    Lol, well, actually, that is where you and I are different. Since I did not use a single meta team. I had a Rex lead, but the team itself was not meta. Efficient use of meta toons is key, and creating a full meta team will make you weak overall.

    Not even my defense teams were meta, yet though as I will have some old meta when I get them.
  • First, the battlefield is too smal for high end guild, they only deploy 10% of their resources and try to conquer with the rest 90%, so of course, all the territories will be conquered without question.

    Second, the standardised banner rewards system, defeating an arena squad above 95k in defence shouldn’t be rewarded the same as defeating a squad at 50k.

    Adjust these two features and I think we will no longer have so many Ties.

    Oh, don’t forget to fix the bug that an offence ends as a draw because enemy squad is destroyed in the last second and others can’t attack that enemy again which results in 10 banner difference for many guilds and is actually counted as a tie too.
  • Rara
    25 posts Member
    I’m not certain adjusting the banner rewards according to GP would be a good idea. Given that a high end guild is going to defeat everything, then the strategy becomes put the worst teams you have on defense to limit the number of banners the opposing team gets.
  • It’s easy. Someone else said it today (post got moved so I can’t give proper credit, though) just give 5 banners for a successful defense.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • theHejiN
    659 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.
  • Reason number one is scoring the same amount of points as the other team if we're being fully honest
  • Reason number one is scoring the same amount of points as the other team if we're being fully honest

    Reason =/= cause
    Proud and Belgian officer of [DTA] BIER DTA | official Lando Calrissian fanboy KappaPride
  • We easily finished in a tie the first go, but knowing that a tie is a loss, we decided to go heavy defense, and it held, and we won. The one were we tied, we finished the map easily with plenty to spare. The two guilds I'm in are both around 95M GP.
    If they don't make any changes, I see the amount of ties dropping dramatically as guilds determine how valuable a defense vs offensive approach is.
    I'd agree that the top guilds may still tie way too often.
  • Just make more slots for defensive squads for high end guilds. Why isn't that already a thing? We were in the 70-80 bracket first time, gave 25 slots per territory. Then we had 7 people not get in for the second one, so we were in the 60-70 bracket, and it gave us 21 slots per territory. Balanced out perfectly. How many slots are top end guilds getting to fill? 35? 50? Just add some more for more depth.
  • Bracket doesn't determine squads, it's # of players / 2
  • theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?
    If you tie, both teams get 2nd place rewards. This is a good policy because it precents collusion, but it’s too easy to tie without colluding because points are mirrored.

    Adding abway to make ties less likely is good—adding points for successful defense achieves this because it effectively creates points out of thin air.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.

    Tie equals to lost for both guilds, both got second place rewards.
  • Are we really worrying about ties when the difference is so minimal in rewards?
  • My 2 cents, in terms of resolving most tie issues, would be to award a small amount of banners... maybe 5 or so, for successfully defending. Or possibly bonus banners for beating a defense team first try. Or lose 5 banners for any unsuccessful attack... any small adjustment like that would solve most tie issues even if both guilds conquer the entire map. It would also add incentive to try harder in both offensive and defensive team set ups. Just 1 of many things that could be done to resolve this problem.
  • 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.
  • theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.

    What's wrong with getting points for successful defending? Or are you one of those people that believe in participation trophies for all?
  • If you tied go with a heavier defense next time
  • Klocko
    1011 posts Member
    In the case of a tie, whoever has the most leftover GP wins.
  • successful in defending = 1 banner, successful in win over an undamaged enemy = 1 banner.
  • theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.

    What's wrong with getting points for successful defending? Or are you one of those people that believe in participation trophies for all?

    Tons of zarriss-kenobis
  • B0untryHR7 wrote: »
    theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.

    What's wrong with getting points for successful defending? Or are you one of those people that believe in participation trophies for all?

    Tons of zarriss-kenobis


    Yes and? That's essentially a meta defense team. Teams should get rewarded for defending successfully. And it would end ties so people could actually get a first place.
  • How about, in the event of a loss, giving a one zeta bonus for clearing the whole map. That way you get the second zeta in a tie since both teams lose.

    And if they ever figure out how to prevent ties, it incentivizes the losing team to still try and finish.
  • If you tied go with a heavier defense next time

    We use best squads on defence second TW. It doesnt matter. Game still ended up in a tie.
    This problem was actually predicted after the beta, but nothing was done about it.
    One of the reasons you play a game is to win, and in TW its just not possible.
  • EternalFlamesRecluta
    10 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    For the stronger guilds in the game, every guild wars ends in a tie. That’s of course not fear at all, these rules penalise the most affectionated players (and most spending, EA).
    Therefore, I just suggest to IMMEDIATELY let a tie result to obtain a first position to both of the guilds. It should be pretty easy to do. In the meantime, you can think about how to determine who win, when tie happens (always above 120milions GP or so).
    Thanks
  • theHejiN wrote: »
    Where is the problem with a tie?

    (another idea might be the minimum power for defense set to 15k. I don't like the idea of banners for successful defending)

    Just leave it as it is, a tie is a tie. Nothing wrong with that.

    What's wrong with getting points for successful defending? Or are you one of those people that believe in participation trophies for all?

    This will lead to player migration and limits your defense options quite a bit, Officers will require only the best teams on defense. In the end the best thing about TW (fighting and trying unusual teams and using your full roster) will no longer be accepted. And this might ultimately turn TW into an extremne form of prenerfed GW So no thanks no Banners for succesfull defense.
  • They should have 3 rewards tiers. Draw could ve like the win awards now. Defeat the same as now and a win should give 3 zetas for high gp guilds + a little extra gear and tokens
  • We are a 120M gp guild and we won the last TW :)
  • melisa
    8 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    When ties are high likely to occur for guilds with high GP than one option would be to reduce the units they can use. For example from certain GP each side could choose let say 15 or 30 (could scale based on guild's GP) characters or even a whole faction that none of the side can use in the TW.
    Post edited by melisa on
  • Nightlores wrote: »
    We use best squads on defence second TW. It doesnt matter. Game still ended up in a tie.
    This problem was actually predicted after the beta, but nothing was done about it.
    One of the reasons you play a game is to win, and in TW its just not possible.

    Hm, that awfully sounds like Tic-Tac-Toe no matter what you do - unless you are really stupid or hit a bug (like many did when one offensive battle doesn't give you the points) - you will end up in a tie. Unfortunately after a few tries Tic-Tac-Toe goes boring and the same applies to TW. I am already so bored that I will probably put all my teams into defense and then have a nice day on the day of the battles knowing that I'll earn top spot in the guild internal ranking for providing about 20 defense squads...
Sign In or Register to comment.