People still want to team up and take opponents down obviously.
You could argue that with the new way people will be less motivated to finish off teams.
With the previous way people were less motivated to attack full teams.
Either way if you have a bad alliance with people not working together to win the war as a team you would have issues.
I disagree.
With the new counting, when you team up, both players get robbed: the first attacker and the second (cleanup) attacker as well.
Thus, the best and most efficient thing for any player is to go for any opponent that you have a chance of one shotting. Never mind if you destroy the prey of your ally mates. If you âdo the right thingâ (like me with the guin tanks), you will get robbed. And so will the smaller ally mate who does the cleanup.
But, like I said, very soon this will not matter to me any longer. Fortunately.
However an alliance decides to work together to win the war is up to them.
This change affects both teams equally. Everyone scores less points, but points only matter in the end for who has more. 1 point doesnât translate into 1 unit of loot/loot %.
The previous system was more broken where you could have a player kill all enemy heroes, but one with 1hp remaining, and have someone else come in, finish off that 1hp and get more points than the first attacker.
I just feel sad for my dear (not so strong) ally colleague who is so brilliant at cleanup that, the other day, she got 6 cleanup kills with her 6 flags. Collecting great points for the ally with this activity.
We were a dream team, her and me.
Whenever I could no longer get one shots, we would team up. Very successfully.
But then, who cares about ally cohesion anyway?
Good God, is there anything or any adjustment the developers could make or decide to toy with that doesnât elicit these sorts of responses? We all know that certain aspects of war matching has been a train wreck and most of us also know that SG has been trying many different ideas and has made numerous adjustments to the algorithms to try to rectify these problems. I personally agree with @dontblink, in that it didnât seem equitable to me to have a player almost destroy a team (say, leaving 2 partially dead heroes) only to have another come along and scoop up more points than was given for the original attacks. And, btw, itâs really not my business or concern, but whatâs with the âsoon it wonât matter for me anymore?â If this is some passive-aggressive threat to quit, then quit. Sorry for the outburst, itâs just that these sorts of posts are beyond credulity, and I canât be the only one who tires of seeing them.
There is still a kill bonus of a third of the total attainable points for just happening to be in the right place at the right time for the final team kill shot.
I think this is still more than fair. The previous system just gave an over-sized bonus.
One shot kills should always be the goal. Granted this is not feasible for many players, especially not all 6 shots.
Kill bonus has its place, but shouldnât be equivalent to destroying all of a teamâs hp. The bonus is sort of like a feel good participation award given to little kids rather than a reflection of actual contribution to the war effort.
I had thought the bonus points were specifically to reward lower TP players for getting cleanup kills. Not too sure why it was important to test cutting the bonus down tbh.
If the goal was to make cleanup kills feel like more of a team contribution, then that is certainly being diminished with this change. If this was NOT the goal of having bonus points, then why have the extra points at all?
The only reason I can come up with for this scoring change is that maybe having closer war scores is needed for an eventual elo type ladder system?
I still donât understand the point of bonus points when someone cleans upâŚ
Why not simply give small amount of bonus points on the one-shot kills, say 10-20 points or so. That would be a real bonus, not someone cleaning up. While theyâre at it, why not simplify the entire point system and say, distribute the total possible points per defense amongst the 5 heroes evenly. Awarding bonus only to one-shot kills. This way, even if you crack a team and take 3 out, you get their points worth, whoever cleans up up the last 2 will get the value of 2 heroes only⌠How bad could this be ?
I donât see how changing the scoring system will correct the main problem with wars, which is unbalanced matchups.
If my alliance is outgunned by 10-20% or more, changing the scoring is not going to suddenly make our 3* and 4* heroes equal to our opponents 4* and 5* heroes. If Alliance A is strong enough to reset Alliance B 3 times in the first 12 hours, changing the points wonât magically make Alliance B stronger.
I donât get why anything has to change? Youâll still hit the strong teams and she will still clean up? If it was true ally cohesion why worry about the points. The individualâs points donât matter anyways everyone either gets victory loot or lost loot. Whole alliance wins together or loses together why worry about this small point change.
This seems like a bandaid for a wound that needs stitches. All that matters is the alliance score at the end. Alliance X vs Alliance Z. How does this reduced scoring even up matching? Instead of Alliance X getting 5,500 points they get 4,125 points and Alliance Z getting 3,250 points they now get 2,437. It is still unevenly matched. I am getting tired of the bandaids to try to make it even and yet keep failing. With the amount of time energy and money that was invested into this, you could have made it have itâs own scoring system instead of piggybacking of other scoring systems; it could have been tied it into the alliance score, with wins and losses affecting the alliance ranking, and been able to match up skill vs skill effectively. I really think it is time to move on to bringing out season 2. Stop the bandaids, it cannot be fixed that way. Cut the losses and work twards season 2. Most of the bandaid fixes just made the wars worse.
I think the scoring system based only on HP is flawed to begin with, the system in which killing Gormek rewards you more than killing Guinevere. It discourages most of my alliance members from taking a risk, just preying on mid-level easy targets. I like challenge and always try to take on strongest enemies, and even lower bonus for it wonât stop me from doing that. I donât care if I fail and the clean up guy gets more points than me, but now, that guy probably will not even risk to clean up for some small amount of points.
That was exactly my impression.
And that is how many alliances that I know understood it. To enable smaller players to make a meaningful contribution to the team effort.
I have no idea why this meaningful contribution is now being reduced.
Hm ⌠I just looked out of the window and saw a puppy barking at a doberman. Yapping and yapping, trying to prove what a big, bad dog he is.
I wonder what that reminds me of ⌠
By the way:
No, this doberman has no intention of leaving the neighborhood, to make way for the rule of the yapping little puppies
This doberman has lived in the neighborhood for a year now. And is not bothered by yapping little doggies and their hopping up and down to demonstrate their perceived importance
Maybe some time, when the puppy has grown up, it may meet the doberman on the battlefield 
Thank you for the lovely parableâŚor was it a metaphor? Iâm not sure how I feel about being called a small, yappy dog but the self-satisfaction that I imagine you feel by thinking yourself a big dog (a doberman, no less) brings a small smile to my lips.
Why they not put the same strong teams in war sometimes we must flight a very stronger one and they het help also
@DontBlink Youâre missing the point of what @AnjaValkyrie is trying to explain. Itâs not about how much a weeker player scores over the stronger player, itâs how they work together to earn points for their own team.
So what if I earned 400 points with my head in the Clouds but lost the war. Better to earn & share the points but win the war.
This new scoring makes no balancing for match ups at all, match ups will still be the same. It just reduces the scores alliances make & destroys team work altogether.
Customers are asking for an improvement in match ups, not reduced scores & teamwork destruction.
I was shooting for 500 points this war. Will have to settle for 398. 
This last change is horrible.
In our case:
Impossible to finish of an adversary, when he only has 1 hero remaining and healing is on.
Before you could win the battle with even weaker teams, so it made sense to have 6 teams.
Several of our Alliance still had 2 or 3 times to go but preferred to do something else with their time instead of wasting it on this futile AW
Very, very bad change and so disappointing.
Continue like this and there is no reason to enter AW.