Lots of Previews - Guild Wars, Crafting, Dungeons, and more!

Only if you include the new GW points formula as well. I seem to be the only one who doesn’t know exactly what the weightings are or how its calculated after a battle, or if the max points will stay the same or change a third time. :grinning::grinning:

1 Like

The integral sec y dy from zero to one-sixth of pi is log to base e of the square root of three times the sixty-fourth power of what??

Answer: i


The difference is what @Sirrian suggested is an incentive for the player to use a greater variety of troops and what you are suggesting is a punishment if they don’t. Adding a punitive aspect and making players feel forced to do something is much different than giving them a reward for doing it. I like what Sirrian is suggesting, I don’t like what you are.

1 Like

All you have said is true, that’s why I suggest an alternative solution, instead of taking the best 27 scores, someone who can’t play this week at gw could give his battles to another member, it would be a service, so this other member wouldn’t get reward for it. There would also have boundaries to avoid abuses.

I think there is one more misconception in what developers say.
… Because their data is used with statistics. That cannot be interpreted into real life decisions. Ever. (You can’t base anything on them)

Will you make players Paragon and Guilds #1 just because someone extra turned their way with Dragon Soul 8 times in a row? (this isn’t as unusual. I constantly cast at least 3-4 per turn).
Because you know… Both looping teams and Exploders are dependent on the board. Exploders on RNG as well.

By the rules that are presented - RNG will decide the very top spots. And I’m not sure if the community likes it. Because the players who can see 2-3 moves ahead and can read the game, and work with chances of new drops… Are mostly unaffected by the proposed.
… It seems to me that these changes smell of The Dragon Soul data. Because he just does it all.


I still think the color bonus will give more points but i would like a clear answer from the devs it would be really appreciate. If we want a little bit of strategy it would be nice to know % of each bonus

@Sirrian @Nimhain @Saltypatra @Alpheon
@GoldPhoenix0 @Andrew @Lila36


Over 30 battles range evens out. Over a month all the good players will rise to the top. The change in scoring is an attempt to blunt / change the meta and should be applauded


I do not say the attempt is bad.
… I’m saying that what they say they are trying to do cannot be done with what they say is going to be done.

Good players win in less turns? How does that make sense? In PvP - okay, I get that. Dragon Soul Data. In GW? I sincerely disagree.
In the community I play it, a big chunk of players haven’t even used looping transforming teams till I shared the them (some even after it). And they are great players. They just haven’t thought of the possibility or prefer different setup.
If you think about it - it somewhat locks the meta with troops that can get an extra turn… And I can see myself going for X+3 Wisps just to exploit the system on Red+Purple days (exaggerating, but you get the point).

You do not destroy the meta by creating rules that lock you inside of it.
I’ll say it again. The data they mentioned smells of The Dragon Soul. Great Players are decided by decision making. Why should anyone be penalized for playing safe in Guild Wars? Or using Healers (healers = spending a lot of mana for no damage and “wasting” turns by their proposed criteria)? Or playing with Draining Troops?

Denying mana to the enemy instead of getting your own is one of the best strategies in guild wars that the best players utilize to the maximum. I do not see myself enjoying the system if a meaningful amount of points is given for RNG or offensive game-play. Not in Guild Wars. If the points given are so few to be noticed - I wouldn’t probably care or mind. But I’m a cautious person. Better to give my opinion before the milk is spilt.


While I ‘potentially’ agree with your points I’m personally going to hold back all criticism until I see the new point system in action myself for a bit. I’m all about the provable, identifiable, and quantifiable. However prior to release, I do share some your same concerns.

1 Like

I believe we both have the same intentions…
… But I’d be the more assertive one when it comes to the potential risks of future updates. Always better safe than sorry :crossed_fingers:
If the update is fine and everything works the way we believe it will - I’d be as happy as a puppy which gets a new blanket to sleep on. But if it doesn’t - I’d hate myself for staying silent at times when my opinion could have counted.


Our last hope is that the rules don’t need to be all achieved so one player can try the 4 troops alive rule, another one the fewer turns rule, etc.

Color + summoner were already 2 good constraints and the choice of team for each day was already difficult. That’s why I want to believe that these new rules are there to offer more possibilities to maximize the number of GW points without having to put a summoner in your team.

1 Like

I still don’t get why they are so top secret about it. this is really frustrating to don’t know how exactly it work, when i play a game i like to know every rules so i can maximise my points and i feel like they want us to do some miss and try but it’s not the time to do it in such a competitive mode. I really hope they will give us more infos before it’s start.


For those worried about the scoring being based on RnG, it’s always been that way. All players have swings of good luck, cascades, starting boards, and bad ones. What you do with them is the difference, and I believe that’s what the scoring is trying to evaluate. In a single game or even day, luck might play a big role. But over time, the decisions you make (skill) to deal with those random events stars to separate the good players from the bad. This is no different than in poker, where anything can happen in the short term, but in the long term skill starts to show.

The current scoring only has 2 controllable factors, color and losing troops. This has already locked us into a single play style and meta with sunmoners. The new scoring has 5 factors, 3 new and different ways to play. And they are not necessarily compatible, in that you can’t really do all of them, you need to pick certain elements to focus on. This choice doesn’t lock i the meta like the curren summoning scoring, it opens up new ways to play. I’ll also wait for full evaluation until we can try it, but I’m very optimistic about this being a better way than what we have now.


Ok. So the better game play a player has gives them a higher score?

I just wanted to highlight this post here… @beanie42 congratulations brudda you win the Best Post Vangor Has Seen All Week award! Thank you brudda


Everything I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the words for.

The scoring changes are more for opening up the meta, mostly on defense but as defense changes invade teams will adapt. With more factors that effect the score other defensive strategies can emerge that use the different factors to deny points.

In theory, this should prevent the static meta that we currently have. And by keeping how the different factors are weighted secret, it will keep us from figuring out the most efficient teams in a week or two.

One other idea is that they can tweak how each of the factors is weighted each week so that no meta can ever become permanent.


:thinking: nice

I bet people will find it very quick no worry

1 Like

Perhaps, but it will take longer than it would if we knew how they would effect the scores right from the start.

You are right but i don’t see the need to make is secret. Do you know any game or sport where you don’t know exactly how many points you will make if you make a specific move? Imo it remove any kind of strategy.