The premise that one can create a system / product that your customer cannot easily understand which will serve to improve customer satisfaction is a bold and laudable goal.
I wholeheartedly support you in your endeavors. I look forward to the customer engagement whitepapers that arise from this activity.
The main thing that annoys me is that now I don’t know how to get a good score and I probably just need to read a lot here and elsewhere to find the best styles of play needed for big points.
As the devs have been writing about “good players this” & “good players that”, I must make my opinion of a “good player”. A good player is a one who has a high win ratio no matter how. PVP currently is about quantity, not quality as gaining trophies and gold is more dependent on time than success in a single fight. That’s why I use a pvp team that has less than 30 second long matches all the time, win or lose, since there is no reason to play 50-300 second matches with 95 % win ratio. Earlier GW system was beautiful IMO, since it had clear rules and not too strict formulas on how to play. OK, the need for summoning and color bonuses favoured some troops, but that was just nice extra. Now I don’t know if I should just try a team that loops or is in some other way efficient in the new system but lacks the color or summoning aspects.
I don’t know how I should win. This is something a “good player” doesn’t like. And something a good player shouldn’t even need to think. 5/0 should always be better than 4/1.
“The biggest issue this game has is the Guild Wars scoring system.” - said no one ever (until now)
I thought GW was shut down to fix all the bugs. Not to implement unneeded changes to it… That are most likely bugged… But we won’t know for sure. Cause the math behind it will be hidden from us.
Best away to avoid 1000’s of tickets. Is not by forcing your customer base to be ignorant. But by giving us a product that is 100% stable before adding to it.
I don’t contest the numbers of new players thanks to Guild Wars. Though I can’t help but fear what the retention rate will actually be wth them. If the veterans that usually mentor new players continue to rage quit the game.
@Saltypatra bug report here:
my guild mate scored worst possible result (a bit over 1k points instead of over 2k points) the one time he made a perfect game : won in one turn never letting ai have their turn
is it possible its a bug with dividing by zero granting zero or even negative in the end?
(sorry i didnt have time to read all 300 posts checking was this reported but i saw no dev response so maybe it wasnt)
They are counting every move you make as a turn. I highly doubt that your player made 1 move and eliminated 4 enemy troops. That would be one hell of a cascade.
I did run into a single troop defense today, but that still took 2 moves to cast the 2 astrals to beat it.
its a good player. he did over 9k points (5/0) yesterday with that one fight being bugged into just a bit over 1k points -_-
i dont doubt in him
The way the scoring was originally coded, you needed to allow the enemy to gain at least some damage and some Mana to maximize these bonuses. Sirrian changed his original post in a way that makes it appear they have addressed this, but that has not been directly confirmed.
could have been they addressed it after my guild mate already finished the fight
but i at least would like to know its beiong fixed now - before i decide how to play my future games?
We have no clue if there was a bug with these formula in-game.
The speed bonus was also wrong as you outlined and Sirrian confirmed it with “of course the formula is the one that you corrected”. So it seems to me typos mistake and nothing to do with the game code.
But they could have corrected other bugs since the beggining of the GW so every report could be outdated…
A lot of the score reports made it look like the MAX function was actually being used. I’m very curious to see how the next round of scores look.
Was getting 1225 per battle, didn’t lose any troops, won 5. Had a duplicate pair though.
Didn’t read the entire thread. From what I gather from the formulas there are several conclusions:
True damage is bad since you are lowering your potential damage output (it’s already maxed by the enemy’s HP and armor anyway).
Keeping troops alive is better than summoning since you take more damage despite having healthier troops at the end of the fight.
Healing teams are horrible since they take more turns and take more damage.
Devour, death mark, strip armor, instant-destroy effects are bad since they lower your potential max damage.
3 out of 4 of these seems to punish different play styles that are not necessarily bad plays. Scoring system definitely needs further work.
@Arturo, She was referring to a game I had yesterday. It was not 1 move or action. It was a looper team that won as I never lost control of the 1st turn thus never letting the AI have a turn. Therefore somewhere in the end calculation there are zero’s involved thus I felt penalized for throwing a perfect game so to speak. I scored 1314 that game with 9239 overall for the day.
Yes, from all we know this seems very likely. Going by reported numbers, both the damage based bonus and the mana collected based bonus fail in case the AI part is 0.
He didn’t say anything like this on damage efficiency, but the formula he posted also had that 4 in it. So unless there was some error in the code, there is no dividing by zero in the formulas he showed. It is just supposed to default to a value of 4.
My guess is that even though you won on your first turn, you spent most or all of the 30 moves that they are using in that part of their formulas. I don’t doubt that you did win on your first turn, just that it isn’t counting that 1 turn as 1 turn.
All that said, with the amount of damage you dealt, and mana you generated, maybe next time it happens you let the opponent take 1 turn on a skull distract and see how it effects the score?
Yes on another game I did let the AI have 1 turn which a Famine pinged me with its trait. I scored 2724 that game.
do you realise that the 4 in this case is worst possible result?
for example:
max ( 4, 521my mana / no enemy mana coutn as 1) = 521
insatead of 521 (or even more) you are getting 4?
and calculation flaw shouldnt punish players who did even better game than letting enemy have one turn, after all isnt this score about being a “good player”? 
Who did you guys face yesterday in GW ?
Fair enough. But this still doesn’t mean that there is an issue with division by zero, It suggests to me that your efficiency scores are far higher than the default value of 4 (possibly a global average?) and shows that the formula as they are, aren’t good for what they are supposed to do. Which is to separate good players from average players.
We faced Tyrant yesterday.