Territory War Ties [Merged]

Replies

  • I'm really liking TW--nice jobs devs.

    I'm hoping the issue with matches always ending in a tie has a solution already and that TW is currently "tuned" as more of a tutorial / trial session. And I hope whatever that solution is--the main factor will be based on the strategic decisions each guild makes.

  • Peer
    299 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Can anyone actually show that ties are possible? Other guys keep telling me there cant be a draw but they do not know why.
  • I personally think awarding points for defense will make it stale. No softening the enemy, no tries with scrap teams, that is strategy, too. I also think they didn't include this on purpose, because they want guilds attacking.

    Chars lost in attack is also bad, because especially some tanks and glass cannons just love to die, and that is part of the squat strategie. same here.

    There is no easy way, and I guess we will soon see the top guilds exchanging victories, as they will face each other quite often, and have a spreadsheet ready.

    Banthas want to eat me, but I eat back!
  • Simple solution- if both sides set a full defence and then, on offence, both sides obliterate the other sides defence (clearing all sectors), then, and only then (to avoid guilds colluding to only 600 banners each) both sides draw as first.

    Name another competition in the world where drawn first equals draw second.
  • I mentioned this in a comment I posted earlier; didn't see this thread, but I'll add it below:

    My guild and the guild we're facing have completely wiped each other out. (It was a blast) While the rewards between 1st & 2nd aren't very substantial, I'd still like to see a tiebreaker system added. After all, a lot of us are super competitive. Also, among guilds with deep rosters, I have a feeling ties will be happening on a semi-regular basis.

    I think that using time as a tiebreaker is a bad idea. (I.e. whichever guild wipes out the other first is declared the winner). This would hurt guild synergy and would be disadvantageous to guilds in an inconvenient time zone.
    I suppose one tiebreaker could be declaring victory for the guild that used the least amount of toons on offense. This would be the "efficiency" tiebreaker. Not sure I'm all on-board for this because guild members with weaker squads could then be encouraged to watch from the sidelines while the big boys did the work.

    I think a PERFECT option would be to have each guild "deploy" their remaining toons into the opposition's territory upon a full clear. These are the leftover toons that haven't been used on offense or defense. Think of this in similar terms to what you do in TB after doing platoons and combat missions. This would be a barometer of your efficiency as a guild, but also shouldn't have the effect of making less powerful guild members gun-shy with experimenting with fights with their under-powered toons along the way (whereas the previous example citing number of toons used would have that very effect). This would still, in theory, give the advantage to the guild that has more GP to start, but could very well swing in the other direction if your guild is defeated frequently in battle. (Note: I was impressed with the matchmaking for TW and I feel as though MOST guilds were matched to a guild within 1 million of their GP). Also, we know that deployment is already a mechanic that the devs have used before, and I believe that would make it a more feasible option than some other equally appealing ideas (i.e. sudden death matches, extra territories popping up, etc).

    Would love to hear feedback on this! Have a great one, ladies and gents :smile:
  • Drazz127 wrote: »
    They would be smart to give both guilds first place for their hard work in the event of a tie. They don't need any more riots so close together over rewards which aren't that much different.

    +1

  • Can’t.....guilds would collude and put in little to no effort to intentionally tie. You already have people at the top levels of the arena colluding with the other people on their shards to trade victories so they can all stay at the top and not drop into the next tier of ranks.

    Well it is a lot harder since the mach is random and different everytime, not saying its impossible but its harder than the usual shard chats.Also the difference betwenn first and 2nd is not that huge I think in term of rewards.
  • We lost by 10 points because one battle wasn't accounted for as the last enemy toon died the very millisecond the battle was recorded as a timeout draw...
  • +1 for the solution when both guilds wins if there is tie
  • JG44D2 wrote: »
    Another stellar release on this game. A tie, lol. Shouldn’t remaining GP or number of battles determine the winner? Just watched us tie a guild who needed multiple attacks to clear the last line. I finished the majority of their last line with one attack while having a defense that took 5 attacks to defeat. What a joke. Should just change the name to Ties instead of GvG. Everyone gets a trophy.

    Sorry all you wrote are right except for the last line.
    Nobody* gets a trophy.
  • Fauztin
    1265 posts Moderator
    Just set some defence rewards. You lose on offence the other side gets 10 banners.

    This occurred to me as well. Then I thought about a -1 banner system for every failed offense attempt, for those that throw waves at Super defense teams to soften them up.
    "I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar." ~ Hoban Washburne
  • Corvus
    190 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Kreontas wrote: »
    Yeah but then again if both got 1st place rewards wouldn’t everyone intentionally draw every time? It would be the best strategy

    exactly.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n

    You could still require a full map clear to gain 1st price, since there is nothing you can do to do better in that case
  • I wrote this on another thread, but it seems more appropriate here:

    My guild and the guild we're facing have completely wiped each other out. (It was a blast) While the rewards between 1st & 2nd aren't very substantial, I'd still like to see a tiebreaker system added. After all, a lot of us are super competitive. Also, among guilds with deep rosters, I have a feeling ties will be happening on a semi-regular basis.

    I think that using time as a tiebreaker is a bad idea. (I.e. whichever guild wipes out the other first is declared the winner). This would hurt guild synergy and would be disadvantageous to guilds in an inconvenient time zone.
    I suppose one tiebreaker could be declaring victory for the guild that used the least amount of toons on offense. This would be the "efficiency" tiebreaker. Not sure I'm all on-board for this because guild members with weaker squads could then be encouraged to watch from the sidelines while the big boys did the work.

    I think a PERFECT option would be to have each guild "deploy" their remaining toons into the opposition's territory upon a full clear. These are the leftover toons that haven't been used on offense or defense. Think of this in similar terms to what you do in TB after doing platoons and combat missions. This would be a barometer of your efficiency as a guild, but also shouldn't have the effect of making less powerful guild members gun-shy with experimenting with fights with their under-powered toons along the way (whereas the previous example citing number of toons used would have that very effect). This would still, in theory, give the advantage to the guild that has more GP to start, but could very well swing in the other direction if your guild is defeated frequently in battle. (Note: I was impressed with the matchmaking for TW and I feel as though MOST guilds were matched to a guild within 1 million of their GP). Also, we know that deployment is already a mechanic that the devs have used before, and I believe that would make it a more feasible option than some other equally appealing ideas (i.e. sudden death matches, extra territories popping up, etc).

    Would love to hear feedback on this! Have a great one, ladies and gents :smile:
  • Zolaz
    378 posts Member
    Just feels like TW was designed for higher GP guilds to tie and to get the least rewards possible.
  • Moved to Territory Wars subsection.
  • If you wipe out the oppositions defence completely you get first place whether you win or draw.
  • Nah leave it like this
  • jedilord
    284 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    have anyone of you ever read the details of the tw, or is there a mistake in translation?

    in german it says:
    you get +10 banners for every platoon that can be deployed in a conquered territory, so i think there is hardly a possibility for a tie in tw...
  • Stoka
    6 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    it feels bad when you spend the time to coordinate and play to have the same resault as if you were not playing... if it wont be first place reward then add some gp dumping of chars at the end or give points to def for surviving the attack...like 5points...that would require more strategy and would disscurage zerging enemys...
    But at this state its just bad and a slap in the face to all guilds with a tie!
  • 9VexXuM.jpg

    Why do we have less points in what should have been a tie?
    Then - as we did - you had the last enemy toon die the 0.01 seconds before the battle was declared a draw. No points scored but battle won...
  • Naw wrote: »
    Ledinis wrote: »
    As John_Matrix pointed out, successfully winning on defense should also award points, would make ties rare + people would actually need to think on what squads they want to use efficiently instead of zerging.

    No, emphasize offense, not defense. Give extra the way it was done in the tournaments. Each surviving member in offense should give +2, each dead one -1.

    With this the number of banners would go like this:
    5 survive - 10+10 = 20
    4 - 10+8-1 = 17
    3 - 14
    2 - 11
    1 - 8

    It gives enough variance and emphasizes offense more.

    I've read though all posts here. This is best idea.
  • Platzman
    283 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    Obvious results:

    1) Current state: TW can be only lost, not won.
    You can lose by making all defense and not have enough good toons to conquer.
    Sooner or later guilds start colluding, making some kind of just spreadsheet and random mechanisms to alternate winner rewards even though guild matchups would be different each time.

    2) If in case of all defenses set, all territories conquered on offense game awarded 1st to both:
    Each team uses weak toons on defense and focus only on offense. Boring, tedious.

    3) If surviving toons awarded banners – tanks like STH would be at disadvantage, but who cares. Worse is, you would use teams to soften up defense so you can “reap” it afterwards 5 man standing.

    4) Remaining toons decide tiebreaker – practically same as awarding to more whaley guild. Very closely tied to matchmaking – practically matchmaking decides everything.
    If matchmaking takes pure GP, guild with less “empty gp (53 lvl 7* gear 7 toons, unusable but adding gp for TB) wins.
    If matchmaking takes empty GP into account, the other is at disadvantage.
    No real sweet spot there.

    5) If successful defense awarded points (maybe 1 point for each killed toon) : issues here are with game crashes, but otherwise – would push you to actually decide a lot of times. Teaches you better scout your opponent. Fuels creativity.
    Seems like the only fair way to prevent ties. And may turn this mode to fun experience.

    6) Add third tier of rewards – Win – Tie – Lose . Too little change to actually sway people from scenario 1.

    7) New idea from other post: remove defense cap on back territories - 1) If it awards banners for defense setup, empty GP would be used to full – you would set all lvl 53 toons to that defense… Because that way they would gain you 20 banners. Race who has more such toons? Boring…
  • Goober1_ wrote: »
    Naw wrote: »
    Ledinis wrote: »
    As John_Matrix pointed out, successfully winning on defense should also award points, would make ties rare + people would actually need to think on what squads they want to use efficiently instead of zerging.

    No, emphasize offense, not defense. Give extra the way it was done in the tournaments. Each surviving member in offense should give +2, each dead one -1.

    With this the number of banners would go like this:
    5 survive - 10+10 = 20
    4 - 10+8-1 = 17
    3 - 14
    2 - 11
    1 - 8

    It gives enough variance and emphasizes offense more.

    I've read though all posts here. This is best idea.

    no, you have not:
    jedilord wrote: »
    have anyone of you ever read the details of the tw, or is there a mistake in translation?

    in german it says:
    you get +10 banners for every platoon that can be deployed in a conquered territory, so i think there is hardly a possibility for a tie in tw...
  • I mentioned this in a comment I posted earlier; didn't see this thread, but I'll add it below:

    My guild and the guild we're facing have completely wiped each other out. (It was a blast) While the rewards between 1st & 2nd aren't very substantial, I'd still like to see a tiebreaker system added. After all, a lot of us are super competitive. Also, among guilds with deep rosters, I have a feeling ties will be happening on a semi-regular basis.

    I think that using time as a tiebreaker is a bad idea. (I.e. whichever guild wipes out the other first is declared the winner). This would hurt guild synergy and would be disadvantageous to guilds in an inconvenient time zone.
    I suppose one tiebreaker could be declaring victory for the guild that used the least amount of toons on offense. This would be the "efficiency" tiebreaker. Not sure I'm all on-board for this because guild members with weaker squads could then be encouraged to watch from the sidelines while the big boys did the work.

    I think a PERFECT option would be to have each guild "deploy" their remaining toons into the opposition's territory upon a full clear. These are the leftover toons that haven't been used on offense or defense. Think of this in similar terms to what you do in TB after doing platoons and combat missions. This would be a barometer of your efficiency as a guild, but also shouldn't have the effect of making less powerful guild members gun-shy with experimenting with fights with their under-powered toons along the way (whereas the previous example citing number of toons used would have that very effect). This would still, in theory, give the advantage to the guild that has more GP to start, but could very well swing in the other direction if your guild is defeated frequently in battle. (Note: I was impressed with the matchmaking for TW and I feel as though MOST guilds were matched to a guild within 1 million of their GP). Also, we know that deployment is already a mechanic that the devs have used before, and I believe that would make it a more feasible option than some other equally appealing ideas (i.e. sudden death matches, extra territories popping up, etc).

    Would love to hear feedback on this! Have a great one, ladies and gents :smile:

    I agree. In personal conversations I’ve had with ppl I also came up with the post-clearance deployment as an additional tie breaker. That would tie a ribbon on the whole thing.
  • Defensive holds is the best idea. It makes teams think more carefully about how to finish off surviving groups so as not to add extra banners
  • Simply give every defensive team 5 banners whenever they survive an attack.
  • jedilord wrote: »
    have anyone of you ever read the details of the tw, or is there a mistake in translation?

    in german it says:
    you get +10 banners for every platoon that can be deployed in a conquered territory, so i think there is hardly a possibility for a tie in tw...

    No you get 10 banner for beating a defense Team, thats why there are so many draws atm. If you match guild with similar GP and both set full defense and clear the map. Both will have equal banners hence the draw.

    I believe the best solution is as others have already mentioned: If you set full defense plus a full map clear you should get 1st price rewards.

    Otherwise guilds will become bored by this as a draw will become the norm. It already was in beta and it is kind of sad that this was not adressed...
  • Naw
    913 posts Member
    edited December 2017
    jedilord wrote: »
    have anyone of you ever read the details of the tw, or is there a mistake in translation?

    in german it says:
    you get +10 banners for every platoon that can be deployed in a conquered territory, so i think there is hardly a possibility for a tie in tw...

    Conquer: +450 Banners for each cleared enemy Territory (doubled for back row Territories), +10 additional Banners per Defensive Squad/Fleet that can be deployed in the Territory.

    I don't think that additional part ever made it to the game. Open beta testers, was it enabled there?

    (why no colors?)
  • War
    932 posts Member
    This is bad idea that would put favor on trying to find cheesy defense teams, rather than keeping to the strategy of finding the just right team to beat the other. Saving better teams to go against better teams. It would also add our "favorite" part of the game, RNG, to what's currently a strategy mode. We'd see a whole new kind of tie. Ties because attacks stopped before all the territories were won.

    You wouldn't start risking giving points to the enemy side until they messed up first. If your side messes something up, you fight just enough create another tie, and then wait for another mess up on their end. Long drawn out hours of waiting for an itchy trigger finger from the other side. Stalling until an opening that gives your team the advantage.

    Another thing, is that I got to use General Grievous for the first time today! I found a team within the power level of what I figured a Droid team could fight, and threw Grievous into that team. There was a whole slew of of non viable, but fun teams, I got to use for the first time in ages.If defenses gave banners, I'd never set or use a Droid team in this mode. Too easy a target on defense, and too much risk for offense use.

    TW has claimed the best part of tournaments, using your whole roster and micro managing team usage, without the time sink and lousy rewards for time spent. This change would bring back the worst parts of tournaments. All day of staring at your device waiting for the other side to mess up, and lousy rewards for time spent if a trigger happy newbie in your guild loses a battle.

    Let's not ruin what is currently a very fun game mode. If ties are so awful, let's just do coin flip. That using remaining units as deployment points towards breaking ties could also work.
  • Naw wrote: »
    jedilord wrote: »
    have anyone of you ever read the details of the tw, or is there a mistake in translation?

    in german it says:
    you get +10 banners for every platoon that can be deployed in a conquered territory, so i think there is hardly a possibility for a tie in tw...

    Conquer: +450 Banners for each cleared enemy Territory (doubled for back row Territories), +10 additional Banners per Defensive Squad/Fleet that can be deployed in the Territory.

    I don't think that additional part ever made it to the game. Open beta testers, was it enabled there?

    (why no colors?)

    Nope even in beta that was not the case, also the numbers are no longer correct, as you get 700 banners for conquiring a normal territory and 1150 for the backrow territories. At least according to the map ^^
Sign In or Register to comment.