Back to 25 teams per zone has taken the fun out of TW
April 2, 2018 8:22AM
edited April 2018
This post will probably get zero attention from “the forces that be” but I had to post it anyway. Adding 15 teams to each zone in TW actually added a layer of strategy and was a great move (I’m guessing it’s getting “nerfed” due to loads of ppl whining about it). Suddenly the back zones became the make or break bonus zones they were intended to be, suddenly fleets weren’t “free zones”, suddenly if you played around with which teams you put in what zones you could actually affect the outcome.
Now, we’re back to full clears and the guild that wins will be the one with the better rng on that given day.
It’s a shame that CG gave in to a bunch of whiney players who don’t really want to play the game, they just want to log in, so their stuff with as little effort as possible and get rewards. TW had actually become fun these last two, after the matchmaking got fixed and we weren’t facing guilds with 20M GP less than us. We lost one, adjusted strategy and won the next. Both were super close and super fun.
It’s still going to be fun, but 90% of the strategic aspect of it has been taken out. Now it’s all down to performance on the day. All of the top guilds are going to place the same teams on defense without too much room for improvisation and the guild that manages to be on point on offense (or gets the better rng or hits the in-battle crashes bug the least) will win.
I personally loved what the extra teams brought to the table and am going to miss it. Once the matchmaking was fixed, I don’t think there was any need to go any further.
Now, we’re back to full clears and the guild that wins will be the one with the better rng on that given day.
It’s a shame that CG gave in to a bunch of whiney players who don’t really want to play the game, they just want to log in, so their stuff with as little effort as possible and get rewards. TW had actually become fun these last two, after the matchmaking got fixed and we weren’t facing guilds with 20M GP less than us. We lost one, adjusted strategy and won the next. Both were super close and super fun.
It’s still going to be fun, but 90% of the strategic aspect of it has been taken out. Now it’s all down to performance on the day. All of the top guilds are going to place the same teams on defense without too much room for improvisation and the guild that manages to be on point on offense (or gets the better rng or hits the in-battle crashes bug the least) will win.
I personally loved what the extra teams brought to the table and am going to miss it. Once the matchmaking was fixed, I don’t think there was any need to go any further.
Post edited by yossgold on
3
- 60.8K General Discussion
- 9 Developer Q&A Archive
- 2.6K New Players
- 30.5K Arena and Character Strategy
- 4K Individual Events
- 4.6K Guild Events
- 4.6K PVP and Rivalry
- 50.1K Guild Recruitment
- 731 Art and Media
- 4.1K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
Replies
I agree, which is why it shouldn’t be uniform for all. Now that they’ve fixed matchmaking, let the higher end guilds stretch their rosters and actually think about the defensive layout.
They made a great move that just needed fine tuning, then a bit of backlash and they just scratched the whole thing. The main idea is that guilds need to stretch their rosters for this game mode to be fun. If you’re a 115M GP guild matches against a similar one - 25 teams per zone does just that. But if you’re in a 150M+ GP guild, you’re most likely going to clear 25 teams per zone and whether you win or lose boils down to performance on offense and the game not crashing while you’re in battle (and we all know that happens quite a lot).
Since now it seems like matchmaking has gotten way better, let the big boys strategize their defense.
You really think RNG is the key deciding factor for the win?
Also, i'd like to note that you're now the one "whining" and that "whining" lead to the initial changes you seem to like.
The reduction combined with the "new" scoring system is actually a step backwards. It reduces strategy and increases the influence of rng on TW outcomes - neither of which is a positive.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
def banners was a bad idea from the start, but the forum seemed to have agreed it was the way to go.
I'm still in favour of increasing def slots to prevent unforced ties and a tie breaker that only comes into effect when there actually is a tie.
25 is an adequate amount of def slots to prevent unforced ties for guilds with 125m GP and lower. (maybe even adequate for higher GP guilds)
in case of a tie, let the guild with most GP posted on def win. This way you can force a tie, but you'll still get 2nd place rewards due to having the least GP posted on def.
Just for curiosity reasons what is your guilds gp. Mine is mid 120s and it doesn't bother me either way. I'm curious where the gp line should be.
I agree with you - but the current system doesn't work like that.
Ironically, the scoring change actually makes it more boring and mundane - especially for multi-national guilds that live in different time zones and/or have different game schedules. Let me explain:
The "new" scoring system encourages you to play extremely cautiously on offense and also make sure to "overkill" so you have all 5 heroes (or as close as possible) left at the end of battle. Since most guilds assign certain teams to specific territories, the two combined yield what turns into waiting for 25 guildies to all use the ideal counter team to maximize offense in every territory. Then waiting and doing the same on whatever the next territory is that you open.
In essence, the last two "improvements" to TW have managed to each make it worse. They both discourage strategy and activity and instead encourage everyone to jump out of the game and onto the guild chat to see who still has "team X to counter the CLS teams left"...while everyone else just waits. This discourages strategy, creativity and fun. I'm pretty sure that wasn't the goal - but it is the result.
Dropping defensive teams back down only exacerbates the problem by allowing powerful guilds to min/max defensive teams - thus forcing the opponent on offense to also min/max offense, due to the scoring system that punishes any attempt that is not successful on the first attempt with 5 remaining units. Nothing like attacking once, then waiting for 49 other guildies to all get on and do the same. Then doing it again 9-12 hours later. It's actually becoming more boring than TB, because at least there you have more than 1 battle to play.
ETA: The irony is that the change to the scoring system was allegedly to alleviate a problem that only happened 5% of the time. So instead, the change to the scoring system when combined with the reduction back to 25, makes TW a lesser experience for all.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
I can totally understand where you are coming from. Even where I'm at there isn't a lot of strategy to choose from. This is the first tw where we have had 25 since they changed it. There were a lot more options with additional squads. Couldn't imagine how stale it would seem at the top with 25.
Oh well.
Exactly. When your roster is stretched, strategy comes into play.
Just curious, how does having to set 5 extra teams on defense (an average of 1 per person) make it unrealistic or less fun? If you don’t want to sacrifice your offense then just put a trash team in there. I think having weak teams to fight is fun, because I get to use my underpowered teams, like my bounty hunters or Ewoks to actually take a team out.
agreed, also fighting underpowered teams adds to the fun.
however, the 35/30 slot meta walls kinda prevent both guilds from reaching eachothers weak teams, making the later territories irrelevent alltoghether.
meta walls are the way to go, but also make TW a whole lot less fun to play. Atleast, imo it's less fun. More slots will result in bigger meta walls and less good teams left for offence. In theory you could easily fill up the extra slots with scrap teams, but in practice it usually doesn't happen. At the very least those scrap teams are moved back to not mess up the meta wall.
That’s because you managed your rosters wrong. The idea isn’t to set the hardest defense you can, it’s to set the hardest defense you can, while also leaving something for offense and strategically “hiding” your softer zones. That’s fun.
Also, read back, I’ve clearly said, in 3 posts at least, including the OP, that for guilds under 140M GP of course it shouldn’t be the same. There needs to be proper tiering. For a 150+M GP guilds, 25 teams per zone makes it random.