May it a way to resolve the controversy of glory perk system


#1

I read the topic concerning PVP point reward which is controversial. I guess u guys got the wrong point.

Rewarding the extra glory is a fine way to advocate challenging the stronger players, but not like the system at present. Leveling up would strengthen troops to some extent, but just normally. Some low level players could build ultimate team as well via purchasing gems.

Here is the core unit of my friend who is just about level 300. As reference, I posted my screenshot of level 900+ in the end.

Admittedly, he didn’t achieve the max state. However, the combination and passive abilities are strong enough to smash most level 1000 players.

@Nimhain @Sirrian I reckon the perks of challenging difficulties are supposed to based on the strength rating of team u used instead of the gap of the player’s level or the “total time of playing”, which is a sound way to encourage players, including the high level players, to use weak team skillfully.


#2

Seems that low level players need less pvp battles than high level players to reach the same amout of pvp points…
That’s unfair…


#4

Indeed. To judge by players’ level dose not make sense.


#5

I understand what the developers were thinking. If a level 100 player draws dhjl as an opponent, it should be worth more than if a level 900 player draws dhjl: the lower-ranked player has fewer traits, fewer troops, fewer ascensions, etc.

As you pointed out, though, it is easier for lower level players to go up the leaderboard since their battles are worth many more points apiece – it is super frustrating, even as a player who doesn’t want to contend for a top spot.

Maybe if there were a level ceiling beyond which it’s assumed you’re at full power? By level 200, 250 at the latest, I had the ability to field multiple teams that could take on the highest level players with some success. In this system, lower level players still get bonus points, they just get fewer of them relative to the roughly-equal players at levels 250 and up.

(For all I know, this is how it works already. In that case, the numbers need adjusting to correct for perceived imbalances.)


#6

I’ll just repeat once again what I said many times in global chat already. Keep in mind how NEW the entire system is and stop assuming it’s set in stone and “omg I want it this way” or “it SHOULD be THAT way”. There’s plenty of time to balance it, we’re not even through the first half-week of a test run of the system heh.

All that said, I do sign under the idea that (if it was CORRECTLY and well balanced) team score should be the base for rewards, and not the level. (and I do stress the balance necessity for obvious reasons, before we end up with 1 or 2 teams everyone uses because their score is undervalued and it’s THE way to farm now).


#7

Level 100 player can have full power team as well, if he use the team that team points as high as high level players, he shouldn’t be able to get so much pvp points…


#8

Maybe as a potenial reward for the freshmen of gems purchasers. Kidding…lol


#9

I disagree, this is penalising people for having done more, which is the theme that has dominated two threads now… l’m not proposing to repeat that any further here though :stuck_out_tongue:

I just wish I could get decent rewards without 60% of battles being against Maw and Mercy cheese teams…


#10

Hmm. This topic has been discussed in many different places, so it is possible I missed the suggestion, but here is an alternative.

The way I think the system works right now is that when you refresh your PVP choices, the system draws three players at random from the player base. The lowest team score becomes your 2 Glory/1 Trophy option, the middle is given the 3/2 slot, and the highest becomes the 4/3 option. There appears to be some filtering in place, but the draw pool seems to be quite large. So sometimes the hard opponent is only worth 26 PVP points, but (if the level/power gap is large), maybe it’s worth 52.

The alternative is that the hard battle is always worth 36 points, and the game draws from a smaller player pool for those battles. A level 100 player will only ever see opponents in that slot whose teams would have been worth 34-38 points under the old system. And a level 900 player would by necessity always draw dhjl, Krammaster, or one of the other 1000+ players. :stuck_out_tongue:


#11

Thanks for your reply and sorry for the photos. It’s not my pc and I took photos in a hurry. I don’t mean to offend anyone in this issue. As a player, I love GOW as you do and I wish I could help the designer to spark some feasible ideas. Thanks whatever.


#12

Yeah, classifying sounds like a good measure.


#13

Incorrect. That level 100 player will not have extra magic, attack, life and armor from level 10 and 5 star kingdoms. It will be harder for him to take down a team run by someone of an extremely high level. That doesn’t even get to less stone resources to make heavy hitter troops more powerful He deserves the extra points if he takes on that harder fight.


#14

Yeah, you’re right, But I don’t think 50% more battles for high levels players is fair. That’s all I want to say…


#15

I agree with you on that. They need to make some way to offer an actual hard third choice for people at maxed out levels. I think someone mentioned adding a calculated stat multiplier to that third choice. That way, it could be a fight that offers a challenge and gives a big reward.


#16

Should be based on team strength vs team strength since player level dose not mean much.


#17

Isn’t that how it has been? We as players have a base team level we can not go below. The easiest way to find out what that is is to take a troop that is weak or very lackluster and put it into the troop list. Then if you have 4 of them fill up that team with them. Your power level you can not go below will be close to that number for a full team. A common peasant will not be the same power level between 2 different players with different kingdom loadouts and such. User level means less than kingdom levels in certain ways.