How often do you win battles? How will this affect PvP in 2.0?


#1

My general impression reading the forums is that people expect to win nearly 100% of their battles. They’re concerned more with the speed at which they do so, with little doubt that they will win. And while the forums are not necessarily a representative sample of the whole playerbase, probably skewed towards the more knowledgeable and committed players, it wouldn’t surprise me if most people did win more often than they lose. Defenders have no inherent advantages, fielding the same troops as invaders, with the same skills, unless the invader is playing on a higher difficulty. But there are counters to every team, the defender effectively picks their team first, and the invader gets to choose which team to field against them. As long as the invader has the troops and resources, they can invade with the right team to beat any defense. And the invader can have a strategy, effectively using whatever synergy there exists between their troops, or simply making intelligent matching decisions, while the AI is relatively simple. While RNG can frustrate a strategy, and tip the battle in either direction, the invader still has an overwhelming advantage.

My own experience is that early on, I won nearly every battle, simply through playing well. While I didn’t have good teams, souls, or traitstones, neither did my opponents. As I progressed, I fell behind by making poor investments in teams that couldn’t compete, and dropped down to about a 70% win rate. Now that I’ve got the troops for a few good teams, enough gems to afford the Celestial armor, and built a Valkyrie soul farming team, my win rate has shot back up to nearly 100% again. I’m just over level 100, and rarely run into a defense team that I don’t think I have a chance to beat anymore.

If this is generally the case, then when the ranked PvP system arrives in 2.0, with defense losses penalizing your PvP points, my prediction is that PvP rank is going to primarily depend on the number of invasions versus number of defenses – effectively, playtime, rather than any measure of skill. It’s possible that win rates are currently skewed because the revenge system rewards players for fielding a weak defense team, but I think that battles will still be significantly biased towards the invader for the aforementioned reasons, even if players begin fielding stronger defense teams. As others have suggested, the dominant strategy is likely to be fielding teams that draw the battle out, to discourage people from attacking them in the first place. Unless the matchmaking system is biased to offer more active players as invasion targets, it seems likely that less-active players will simply lose more points than they can possibly make up. If gold rewards are based on uncollected gold, less-active players would presumably be more attractive targets for other players, if collecting gold is their goal.

Anyone have any data on win rates at various levels or progression? Thoughts on how this might affect PvP in the future, and how it might be best handled?


#2

Take notes. This is the part that genuinely worries me with PVP 2.0. Although we don’t know for sure yet that it will be the same as it is now.

This is me. Level 812 and rising. Half those defeats are on Warlord 4. Factoring in the number of times I’ve, uh, quit the game and not lost, the numbers up there are basically accurate.

Fairly sure I was maintaining a similar success rate before that started recording it.


#3

My realistic win rate is about 90% I’m at level 370. My defense team win rate is about 15%. But that’s because I offered invading people something different that isn’t hard to beat, so they get a refreshing fight. With 2.0 I will going to use much stronger defense i can’t afford my points to drop easy.


#4

Other than the matches that are unbeatable (where the AI gets 10+ cascades on it’s first two moves) I tend to win every match these days. I use the Scout function and have 4 teams for PvP that counter 99% of the teams I see (since 70-80% of players use the same few setups).

I recognize that I am not the norm, far from it. But you can take the level (I’m 299 atm) and Troops pulled out of the equation and still build a team with 4 commons that can beat fully-Traited, all-Mythic teams.

This game is about strategy first and foremost.


#5

My win rate is likely 90-95%, with most losses coming when the opponent gets a lucky break like a cascade of matches that fills all their troops, or a series of lucky 4+ that keep them going, or getting 4 or more sets of skull matches in a single move killing my lead troop. The rest are when a match gets close and just doesn’t go my way: I can’t get around a Bone Dragon freeze or a Silent One is able to silence me before I can finish him off.

Generally when they get a lucky start I just close the application and do something else since it isn’t worth the time trying to salvage a win from a lost position.

However I expect a lot more difficult defenses in 2.0, no more “single fortress gate” type fights. That coupled with stat loss on quit means having to slug it out for each win. Will that make things more aggravating? Will it be more fun with a greater challenge? Will the rewards feel worth the increased difficulty? Will we still be able to use Valkyrie builds against the harder defenses?

Lots of questions will be answered in the weeks to come.


#6

When you reach level 200, expect the difficulty curve to increase sharply until you’ve managed to buff up your troops to be competitive again. You’ll be tangling against level 1000 opponents from time to time, and the power gap between a level 200 and level 1000 is (usually) quite high, as the level-1000 likely has every kingdom maxed and many at power level 5, in addition to ascended teams. You can still win – and often a board-controlling team can maximize your victory rate – but the price of one unlucky drop or misjudged cascade will be much higher.

As you level further and have a chance to adjust, you’ll see your win-rate approach 100% again. I’m just over level 800 now and I almost never lose a match. When I do lose, it often comes from arrogance, and me deciding I can “just muscle through” a given defense without specifically choosing a team to counter them.


#7

3545 /3520 but I have dropped a few matches mainly on extra turn enemies or board control where ai goes crazy with long multi turn, if I know I have lost I not waiting around for 10 minutes so ai can finish up.
realistic win rate not to far from that though. and yes I use skip some.

ohh at level 685 I think to if that helps. not having a counter to every mythic team, is why skip is used


#8

I agree, which is why I’m concerned that the leaderboard might be about time spent, rather than strategy. The defense team someone fields may have very little impact on its success, though the team score and deterrence factor may have an impact on target selection.


#9

having multiple counters are going to play a factor on leaderboard. and multiple team set-ups to change out for the different opponants.
with right team really isn’t much you can’t win against but having all the teams something a lot of people may not have


#10

It’s a good thing there’s a Scout button. This week, I encountered one near-800 player with a Celestasia-Venoxia-Bone Dragon-Sheggra team (only Celestasia fully traited but that was enough) and one 1000 player with a Carnex-Silent One-Sheggra-Webspinner with none of them traited, and I chose to fought the 1000 player (and won). Everyone else ranged in from 200-350ish range (and some I avoided and most not).

So the point is Scout and see who is on defense. Higher levels may be fightable vs players around your level.


#11

Here’s my stats. One loss in almost 6000 battles is not too bad, in my opinion:


#12

Bear in mind that quitting early isn’t considered a loss. Personally I find very little value in these stats, since the only way for a player to actually lose is for the enemy team to be able to blitz the entire opposition before you get a chance to retreat (a la Great Maw glitching).


#13

You are quite correct that quitting is not considered a loss at this point, although my understanding is that will change in 2.0. So you’re probably also correct that the stats do not have as much value as they might.

I will add that while my defense team is set up to lose, invasion wins really are at 99%. That one loss was a long, long time ago.:wink:


#14

The invasion stat screen has me at 99 percent wins, but realistically I quit out while losing maybe 5% of the time since the last patch.

The biggest threats are Mercy/Maw, and anything that can create a cascade / extra turns. So Goblins, Bone Dragons, etc can still pose a threat. In fact, just the other day I had an untraited, unascended Webspinner completely destroy my team with an unending barrage of lucky casts.

I am picky about who I invade though. I’m doing pvp mostly for the trophies, and right now you only get one trophy for a win, regardless of whether you faced level 1000 player with the best of the best troops or level 200 player with four Peasants. Why take the chance of wasting my time on a riskier team?

Anyway, I’m looking forward to seeing how 2.0 changes those dynamics. Should be very interesting.


#15

Would you mind sharing some of your 4 team builds? I’m level 288, and still primarily use goblins. It is my most consistent team. I’m trying to play with other builds, but I’m terrible at putting decks together. An alternative deck that my friend came up with is giant spider, boar rider, boar rider, Valkyrie. It actually works pretty well, but not quite as good as my goblin setup. I have 13 different legendary cards now, but just can’t figure out a good team with them. Thanks for any help.


#16

Sure @GREEK-13.
Just keep in mind most of my Troops are Ascended and Traited, and some of the teams below are not “complete” (missing Traits and/or need leveling);


All Day Long MFers: (my main team for 95% of PvP)

Celestasia*
Gorgotha
Bone Dragon*
Sheggra**
Khaziel Banner (Brown/Brown)


Goblin Fury:

Goblin***
Goblin Rocket***
Goblin Shaman***
Boar Rider***
Zhul’Kari Banner (Green/Purple)


Original Blue:

Shadow-Hunter*
Behemoth***
Valkyrie***
Druid***
Adana Banner (Red/Yellow)


The Round Table:

Knight Coronet***
Wolf Knight***
Griffon Knight***
Lance Knight*** (only here for the bonuses, for a “true” PvP team, I’d swap in Valkyrie and move her up to 3rd position)
Sword’s Edge Banner (Yellow/Blue)


Mean Street Posse:

Golem***
Pride Hunter*
Serpent**
Skeleton***
Khetar Banner (Blue/Purple)


Walk This Fey:

Treant***
Gloom Leaf***
Green Seer
Rowanne
Forest of Thorns Banner (Green/Green)


I also have several other builds that aren’t used enough to judge fairly on their effectiveness, but I plan on making teams for any situation.


#17

I have used your “Original Blue” team on defense and it works very well. Thank you for the build.


#18

I think i have me some good line-ups if i ever get the troops for them.


#19

Interesting (or not) note, the name is because it was my first “great” team, used from levels 1-80 (Behemoth was my first Legendary, not at level 1 but it was before 10 for sure) and it is Blue-centric.

It was pretty good before Traits, now it’s even deadlier! 3 Water Links, SH has Agile and Behemoth’s tanking potential is increased by Immense.


#20

Thanks for the reply. I will definitely check some of these teams out. I run the exact same goblin team as you, except with green/green banner. A single 3 green match charges my goblin. I have all the troops you mentioned except celestasia, and bone dragon, so your list is very helpful. Thanks again.