I get that you want all the information now, but I think you’re being unreasonable. My possible explanations were hypothetical, and my “life or death” comment was hyperbolical, but my overall point was that people need to relax. We’re (only now) 19 hours into the new system, and someone, maybe several someones, were up very late trying to monitor and correct problems last night. I applaud and thank them for it.
Honestly, I don’t think adding a simple “OP has been corrected” would have been sufficient for you, because it would have begged the inevitable questions “Was it just the post or the code that needed correcting?”. If it was the code (as it apparently was), then there would be people here clamoring for resets and do-overs so they could optimize their 5 battles. This is a no-win situation for the devs.
Omg he changed a post. So what? You’ve been analyzing data for a WHOLE DAY. That 1 little change has lost a ton of manhours of research. I’m simply saying you’re blowing something like that so far out of proportion it’s not funny. It certainly doesn’t wreak of ‘sneaky’ to me. Be happy someone caught it and said something. At least it wasn’t edited on day 6 with or without an “oops” post.
I’m all for transparency but what some players feel they have a “right” to know and be informed of just blows my mind. They’re what 5? 6? Devs vs 10s of thousands of players…cut them some freaking slack and accept that you aren’t entitled to know or get everything you want from them. Once you do you’ll feel the Zen and can back to enjoying the game more.
So my time doesn’t have value, and I shouldn’t expect info from the devs to be reliable, got it.
Unfortunately I can’t, a personal character flaw. I’m either all in or all out, and I enjoy interacting with the devs and the community. And to their credit, from a player perspective,this is the best group of devs I’ve had the pleasure of dealing with. Which is why this incident was so unexpected and surprising. But maybe my expectations have gotten too high based on past performance.
Good. Because again the one thing that really makes my blood boil is the Kerbx2 Forest Guardian over and over and over.
I want out. I love my guild but the current requirements to play GW is no longer something I can support. I enjoyed my two weeks of silence. Picked which battles of the 2 or 3 trophies in PVP I wanted. IGNORED the Kerbx2, found some new and exciting teams to fight that took challenge, brains and some luck.
Today, 3 rounds - Kerbx2…over and over. Nope I am done.
First, I want to thank @Sirrian and the rest of the dev team for listening to the community and addressing the main complaints with the old GW’s system. There are still a few questions concerning the mana generation part of the new system that still need some clarification. Does mana that doesn’t go into any of the troops on my team either because I don’t use that color, or because all the troops that uses that color are already full, still get counted for my efficiency rating?
Also, I have an issue with my score being punished for taking 4+ matches off the board so the opponent doesn’t get them. Good players wouldn’t allow their opponent to have those matches, but taking them counts against my moves score, which goes against the goal of this particular scoring change. I don’t think that taking extra turns off the board should count as a move.
Finally, I pose a question to the community. If you don’t like the metrics they have decided on, what metrics do you propose they use to differentiate good play from average play? What, other than winning with more surviving troops, do you think makes one player better than another?
Please keep in mind that the communication has changed noticeably over the last few months. Primarily due to one (or 2?) extreme cyber stalkers. Its no excuse for not mentioning game changes, but a little slack might be in order. Also @Stan mentioned long hours, I can attest that in the past I had to put in a few long days (30+ hours strait) small things can get missed, even when dealing with things that are more import than a match 3 game.
Well the old system was ok, i dont remember anyone asking for it to be change.
The most complains i saw was about the statue bonus it was not fair to get less points for same fight i agree with this but the 4 troop same color and 4 troop alive rule was imo better and less random then this current system
There was a lot of complaining about (lack of) variety in defense teams, how losing any match in the first four cut your daily points ceiling by 33%, and how people felt forced to play denial/summoner teams to achieve max points every battle (leading to lack of variety on attack). These changes were meant to address the latter two complaints. When 3.1 rolls around we will see a bonus for using different troops on defense, addressing the first point.
Well now devour and deathmark are also useless in attack and summon a troop also penalise you so let me ask you, does the viable attack troop pool is larger?
First, the most complaints were about static boring meta that wasn’t fun. That GWs was a tedious chore.
We are less than a day into the new system and the playerbase hasn’t had enough time with it to see how these changes present new opportunities to deny points with their defenses and shift them to different teams.
Second, The old system wasn’t any less dependent on RNG. It relied on random devour chances, with random AI targeting and random troops lost from death mark. Also, with only 1 factor determining score, average players could score as well as good players by just replacing lost troops with summons and thus wasn’t even good at what it was supposed to do: determine which players were better than others.
The devs want the max score to be impossible to achieve. They give you contradictory goals to force you to choose the one that is more appealing. Want to summon troops and replace losses? You’ll probably go down in damage ratio even though you get full points for surviving troops. Did you annihilate your opponent after four lucky Kerberos casts? You don’t do well for damage, but speed probably gets boosted since you didn’t have to spend turns grinding through armor. Maybe you use a looping team that never turns control over to the AI? Speed goes down, but mana ratio goes up.
None of the troops you listed can maximize every single category of points because that’s not what we are supposed to do in this new scoring system.
Ok so if understand your thinking since the exploder and gem creator are what the dev want us to priorise it mean i should play like they want cause if i don’t i am not a good player?
I mean some people finished battle in 1 turn and AI didin’t even had the time to attack but they still got shitty score. Now if you need to do 7-8 loop just because it’s how it work i say it’s BS and doesn’t represent good player
I have noticed it is now a work day in Australia and we have yet to hear from the developers. THAT is impressive considering the “passion” of today’s quagmire. I spent two weeks looking forward to being paragon but turns out my play was “perfect” for the old GW but today, I was only 9th best but lost zero troops; no summons, all yellow, and they didn’t really do any damage.
It makes me a little mad to think I actually earned the Paragon while waiting. Now I have to spend another 3 plus months figuring it out again. Why not; Let’s throw a d20. Just pick a paragon. Or metric. Or maybe the rewards. One gem? You should be lucky! Maybe the next surprise is another teams paragon is put on top of our guild. Why not?
to think I actually earned the Paragon while waiting. Now I have to spend another 3 plus months figuring it out again. Why not; Let’s throw a d20. Just pick a paragon. Or metric. Or maybe the rewards. One gem? You should be lucky! Maybe the next surprise is another teams paragon is put on top of our guild. Why not?