Each time I manage to lose a GW match, I become more frustrated with the point system from a design standpoint. The problem with the system currently is that it ends up feeling like you’re in a contest where your opponent gets to decide how much you bet on each game after the game is over. So no matter which match you lose, it’s always the worst one you could have. Compound that with a system that where everyone expects to win virtually all their matches but yet relies on a giant amount of RNG and you end up with crazy amounts of player frustration…
Some weeks you win and some weeks you lose. Yeah RNG plays a small part but this is an RNG game.
I got a win count as a loss last week…Now THAT is frustrating as all hell.
2 Likes
I appreciate the comment, but I don’t see how your response relates to anything I said.
1 Like
That part of the system seems the most straightforward. You win, you face harder fights that are worth more points. It’s already been adjusted so it’s not so top heavy and punishing if you lose. I like that you have to earn the chance to face the higher tiered opponents.
2 Likes
The board is largely RNG, and not knowing the layout of the starting board is your biggest obstacle. Try to circumvent this by going in with solid control teams that have a backup plan if you start losing troops. Versus equal stat range opponents, most games are winnable if you go in with the right choice and are not terribly terribly unlucky on the starting board based on what you brought in. Some games are just unwinnable given what you brought in and the starting board based on what you brought in and no amount of good decisions at that point will matter, and whether or not your team is “good” or “bad” from the situation will at times depend on the starting board. I play the odds more that I wont get a favorable starting board and plan my team accordingly than if I do, because when I do, the fight is generally pretty easy.
It also helps not being in a bracket where you get one-shot by everything the opponent can do. I get that a lot on my low level account. Orcs with skull damage in the 50s vs my 40 combined health/armor, 15 skull damage troops. I shrug them off because I’m not meant to win these in the first place, and I still do sometimes.
This happens randomly sometimes. I’ve seen a loss count as a win for someone else, too. It’s okay because it rarely happens, so it only plays a small part. 
(yes, I am being facetious)
1 Like
I’m not looking for playing tips. My guild is in GW bracket 1.
The last part about RNG was just meant to show how RNG frustration works to intensify the scoring frustration.
I think people would find it less frustrating if the fights actually increased in difficulty more dramatically, but you were guaranteed a chance at each of them. Even in bracket 1 the Paragon fight is often easier than the earlier rounds. Good GW offensive play is not a guarantee of lots of troops and good defensive team building skills.
1 Like
Yeah being in bracket 1 as well I wouldn’t say the paragon fight is “often” easier. Sometimes it has been, but often the paragon has had some truly nasty teams. That said, because there are fewer people in the higher tiers, of all 30 gets to face the same 1 person guaranteed, it’s a lot easier to come up with a strategy to win that.
Yes I like winning and it can be frustrating to deal with stupid losses outside my control. But I don’t want an easy road to the big point match. Guild Wars is probably the hardest thing they have on there and yay for having something difficult in the game that forces me to explore my collection (hello counters to their counters on yellow day). You can only bombot your way through casual and explore so much before you want something more.
4 Likes
i admit since PC stat bug followed up by gem spawn reworks, especially at orc week, the gw has been much harder for me and feels much more like a pure rng
yesterday i was gradually killing enemy team bit by bit nearly unscratched, until one turn skull skydrops made it kill 3 of my 4 units in one turn. it felt stupid and totally as if the ai were cheating.
i would have been very frustrated if not the fact since i got 4x speed i stopped caring about my results (the bless!)
1 Like
While a lot of matches do have a fair amount or greater capacity to RNG. Also trying to calculate probabilities based on choices can also help. Some might say it doesn’t. Though if you see a 2 2 spit and a gem match down the middle. You can with a fair amount of probability determine the likelihood of a match, not just RNG and so on for other things. In the end I would say RNG is part, playing probabilities is another, and wrapped up in determining the best course of action for that particular moment. If I was to use an example my real life friend just plays via risk in matching. Over consideration for probabilities. And I have taken his team while at his house and played his team remarkably well with this thinking. So now he tries more for it. I think some miss that while RNG is a thing. There are only so many calculations associated with a given action that can be produced. And when you notice them a bit, some of what GoW is becomes less RNG and more predictable. Yes it has some predictability factors in it. IE if there are skulls at the top there’s a high probability any action at this location will produce another skull or a skull match. And that lands itself into the realm of predictable probability over RNG. There are also many others. Its RNG that it does have is more common than well seeded logic. So its not entirely hard to catch onto some of its more common behaviors. If it was well seeded in its RNG then the consideration for probabilities would become harder. Thankfully its RNG it uses is not.
To give you an example of seeding : What are random seed values? - Grasshopper. And I would say that GoW is probably seeded under the badly seeded category. So if you pay attention or if you already have. You already know some things its more prone to enacting.