PvP - No longer fun

[Rojo1]

I put up all Yellow troops this week. I have a brain. I do fire bombs on map week. Lots used to put up whatever event was but now most want to be a prick IMO.

[A01020201]

before Guild Wars there was only PVP, over the years the game in a lot of ways has gotten away from strategy, and more about doom skulls, or explosions, I think when we were still under 350 troops it was more fun. That being said your trophies used to matter, we had many trophy races to see what guild we could overtake next and the great race to get to 1m trophies, we eventually made it to #3 then they added a lot more game modes and this made the status of trophies obsolete because they do not do anything for the player, however completing guild events does help everyone out, sorry for the long wordy explanation

[A01020201]

Most of our original grind was done on 1x speed lol

[UKresistance]

Make sure you use that brain during GW next week. Anyways Zuul goth x3 grave seer now

[Venar]

I hate myself for saying this, but a lot of the PvP and meta problem are actually caused by the Hero update.
Now that Hero have not only traits, but class synergy, skill trees, and weapons with +8 upgrades, the game has become very volatile. Single gem matches cascade and explode and create barriers, and weapon are becoming crazy.

I was happy when they decided to buff the hero, it was needed. But it was not a very balanced update, many tree options are just ill-advised and should not exist, and the weapon buff added to it, just creates monstrous heroes.

[Clark]

@Venar

a lot of the PvP and meta problem are actually caused by the Hero update.

I agree, I was thinking on this the other day as well after reading some of the responses. An easy fix would be to remove the hero from Defense teams since there is no benefit to him/it for wins or losses.

[Alkali]

@Jonathan

I agree, and I think it’s super lame. I’d still really like to see some kind of system that rewards people for setting good defences, and for beating them, too.

Won’t that work against this whine of meta teams?
If defending is worth something good, even I’d put up the teams I hate.
Please don’t suggest things that will make things worse. I don’t want to ruin the fun for others, but I will when it pays off.

@Zepp

The Baby Dragon should be the magic level of the caster, or the level of the victim’s Baby Dragon troop. This shrinking level nonsense never made sense.

I never used DE in pvp, but I use The Possessed King and his transform behavior is different in pve and pvp. In pve he halves the troop’s stats, in pvp the level gets halved but the stats are the ones from the replaced troop… the healthy replaced troop.
Not only once this spell actually backfired on me when my TPK transformed a beaten down to 30 life troop into a 70/70 (armor/life) Famine (thank you very much).
Even got once killed by a freshly added Webspinner …
(the defender doesn’t need to put up much to defeat me, I bring the troops to defeat me xD)

[Jonathan]

@Alkali

in pvp the level gets halved but the stats are the ones from the replaced troop… the healthy replaced troop.

I think they actually just get the defender’s full kingdom bonuses, which can be quite a bit.

@Alkali

Won’t that work against this whine of meta teams?
If defending is worth something good, even I’d put up the teams I hate.

@Jonathan

In other words, would you feel better about going up against a troll defence if it meant you might earn twice as much gold, e.g.?

The idea was that you are rewarded accordingly for having to fight tough or annoying teams. While it would encourage people to set these kinds of defences, I think this thread shows they already do.

[Rojo1]

Lots do but if this were a thing all would. We don’t need it any worse than it already is.

[Jonathan]

Is there an amount of gold that you could earn from beating a Lust or DE team that would make it worth it, for you?

As I mentioned above (I think), I don’t actually think it’s as bad as it’s been made out to be - although that could be a bias - and it seems that the new PvP matchmaking algorithm has actually worked, somewhat, in terms of diversity between the three choices presented, as per this thread:

@Starlite

Here are the teams I got to choose from, […]

@Jonathan

Looking through the second image, I started to see a fair few repeats (of the same opponent, mere selections apart). Diversity of teams within the same selection still seemed pretty good, though

I think wishing that PvP was nothing but Fire Bombs or other easy defences is unrealistic; instead, I think it would be worth asking, “What could we get that would make facing these meta teams worth our time/energy?”.

I also don’t think that setting the same defence as everyone else would reward you in the situation I proposed, which would be compounded by the matchmaking. To rack up defence rewards, people have to actually fight you, and we all know people are drawn to a more enticing defence .

[Slypenslyde]

YEah I think this is a good line of thought.

Sometimes I want “more challenge than explore but brainless” and a lot of times PvP provides that. It’d also be nice if there was a mode that was “hard battles and good rewards” but slower, and less reliable wins.

[Starlite]

To be honest, I think the only usefully or interestingly challenging PvP in the current format of the game is Guild Wars.

Regular, ranked PvP has too few rewards and too high an end-goal (either 1900 points or leaderboard) to want to spend much time on each battle.

[Rojo1]

I have never lost to DE in guild Wars. I don’t really lose to it in pvp either. I just retreat because the 5 min is not worth the trouble.