I’m not going to read 120 posts of this, sorry.
Um. I agree that we should know basically everything about the formula - and I really really like to know everything I can, personally, competitive or not - but I’m not exactly going to quit the game just because I don’t, either.
I’d like to know how that’s even remotely relavent. You’re complaining about a scoring system implemented 2 weeks ago and citing statistics for the last 2 months as a justification?
And for the record, bracket 4 here and couldn’t care less if I don’t know the exact formula. I know the important factors that go into the scoring as does everyone else playing GW.
I fail to understand how the new scoring is unfair in any way. By definition “fair” is that everyone has the same knowledge & understanding (or even lack there of in this case) and has the same opportunity & basis as everyone else. No one has been given an advantage over anyone else. We’re all at the same disadvantage of not knowing precise percentages of bonuses and we’re all fumbling through it on even footing. Everyone is scored using exactly the same formula whatever that may be. So any claims of things being unfair are simply untrue and you don’t understand what fairness is. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it unfair.
@Aelthwyn, Dark Riders are signing up
we arent top 50 but still would like to have clarity in scoring system 
in this case they dont since the system is too complex, it divides ppl into ones who are able to calculate it and who arent
a fair system would be one that doesnt require such complex calculations from a player
this is match 3 game not quantum mechanics
Okay, an example. Suppose the speed weight were inverted to have a negative impact, so you get a score deduction for fights taking less than 50 moves, maximum deduction for winning the first round. This is perfectly within “secret changes” territory, it doesn’t modify the formula in any way. It would be a perfectly reasonable change, fast teams already benefit from damage and mana ratio, control/denial teams would then at least benefit from slow fights. One might also argue that surviving more than 50 moves requires more “good” play then just nuking the opponent down.
Now to make this example concrete. At which point would the speed weight affect your decision making, if you knew about it? Would you switch from fast to slow teams once the combined score gain from damage and mana balances out the score lost to speed? Earlier? Later? I don’t believe your answer is “never” here, you know too much about maximizing scores.
If this was a petition to have GW reworked again and seriously this time. I would have said sign my guild up. Though since its simply to divulge the parameters that make up the current system. Not very interested in it. As the current GW is a lot less fun and more a chore. At least the old GW had fun going for it from me.
I think everyone wants the same thing, whether you like the new scoring system or not.
A level playing field (which admittedly we have since everyone is subject to the same rules) and a transparent scoring system (which we currently don’t have since we can only make educated guesses as to how our scores pan out based on how we play our battles).
I just don’t see how a competition like GW can be run with secrecy surrounding the most important aspect that determines who wins at the end of the day/week. Maybe I’m just nuts, who knows?
Out-of-context is never a good idea…
@Aelthwyn was replying to that:
So on, about GW being succesful in terms of popularity. Nothing to do with the new rules…
Only once we talked about fairness in the OP post:
It’s based on the fix of one bug at the end of the 1st day which reduce the points that players can get. So if one player did his 1st-day battles during the 2nd day, he should have less points than having it done in the 1st day.
Hi Aelthwyn, we are in. Please add Tyrant to your list. Apart from scoring rules, Tyrant wish that dev can increase reward of gw.
This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
This topic was automatically opened after 4 hours.
This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
This topic was automatically opened after 4 hours.
First baby!
Um, OK. So you’re saying that if the developers made the objective of speed the opposite of what was stated, that it would cause players to change their behavior. Well, yes, in such a case I would have to agree. Players would obviously switch to looping lockdown teams since there would only be one path to a maximum score.
I think your example is a reach. No, beyond a reach - stretching credulity, especially to say that is within “secret changes territory”. You might just as well have said that if the devs changed using troops of the daily color to be a penalty, that behavior would change. Of course, it would, but that is a preposterous example.
Can you give me an example that doesn’t invert the existing rules and expectations?
Edit: I’ve been sitting on that post for hours waiting for the thread to unlock. Hopefully the autolocks are done now and we can continue a reasonable conversation.
This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
Thanks @Ozball…
On a macro level it probably wouldn’t change much, but on a micro level there are some interesting decisions that details would affect. For example, if you can kill the last troop with either skulls or a spell cast, which should you do? How about taking one extra turn to fill up and cast that exploder, should you prefer the mana efficiency or the speed? The general play is automatic, but there are usually a few small key choices that at this point are simply guesses rather than strategic decisions, and yet those are the main points where scores can be differentiated.
The other issue is not just how it affects decision making, but how it affects player perception and buy-in for GW. Often you don’t even know whether your play was any good (or at least any good according to the devs/GW criteria), and quite often right now it can “feel” like you played almost identically (and even tracking the stats can look very close) yet the scores can be drastically different. There needs to be some sort of feedback that lets you know how you did, because if the scores just feel random, players will simply stop caring or giving those scores any respect. Others have already proposed it, but if the details must be kept hidden from us, at least some sort of feedback would help (for example, a star rating like speed 4* mana 2*).
Now that I think about it …
… The thing I’d welcome in GW to determine skill the most …
Is “4/5-match bonus”. Every time you move the board into a non-frozen 4-match by manual board control or abilities that <Remove/Destroy> gems - you gain points. Has a limit. (Doesn’t work on exploding and gem transform skills).
I mean come on, this one should be obvious. I believe this is the bread and butter “skill” here, if we can call something any in an RNG game. Being able to see extra turns even through expert board foretelling and statistics of new gem drops from the top.
Replace the speed bonus with this and I believe more players out there would be happy. This should be the last criteria. Being fast in GW makes no sense. The battles has always been about “careful, safe and precise” approach, rather than PvP grindfest of battles per hour.
If that one is replaced, I would be more than happy. People wouldn’t be gated by troop choices for quick battles, their decision making would feel natural (because when you see a 4-match to be taken without any harm, you take it. That’s common sense. If the mana is not for you, you take it to deny the enemy) and people wouldn’t be punished for playing the game right.
I’m not so sure, I got my best 5/0 score today with brown and used Great Maw against all five Psion/Rag/Famine/X meta teams.
Scored 7,333 in total. The Maw devoured a troop in every battle.
So by this evidence I would conclude that devour certainly isn’t useless in Guild Wars as it currently is scored.
Edit: Though this is a new week if I’ve forgotten again the scoring changes so maybe my score is bad… 
