It seems to me that there are at least four major motivations of these raid tournaments:
- To engage players with new content
- To allow players to compete against each other and establish a performance-based ranking
- To reward players based on performance
- To generate income for SG
It is clear that the challenges, as they currently operate, are struggling with points two and three. The devs have already conceded that the events are not functioning as intended, particularly with respect to pairings. Some defenses are getting attacked, many are not getting attacked at all. Rankings seem heavily dependent upon RNG rather than strength and skill.
SG should consider rethinking their approach to these challenges. I believe that the following system would better meet the goals outlined above.
- At the beginning of the tournament, divide players into tiers based on their defensive team power. I realize that team power and the makeup of the defense don’t describe a player’s full strength, but it should be correlated and seems like a reasonable starting point.
- Each day, each player is assigned 5 targets within his/her tier. Victories within each tier are worth the same amount of points, regardless of differences in team power. Victories in different tiers are worth different amounts of points. Harder tiers offer more points, weaker tiers less. Each player is awarded points each day for belonging to a tier, and these points increase with tier strength. This prevents a player that goes 0 for 5 in the top tier from having less points than a player than goes 1 for 5 in the bottom tier, for example.
- Matchups are assigned in advance, so that each player is assigned five attacks and five defenses each day. If a player does not use an attack, it counts as a victory for the defense.
- A defensive victory earns points. As with attacking victories, defensive victories earn the same number of points within a tier and different points across tiers. Defensive victories should earn fewer points than offensive victories to reward attacking skill more than defensive AI/RNG.
- At the end of each day, players are assigned to new tiers based on their overall performance. Top performers within a tier are promoted to higher tiers, bottom performers within a tier are relegated to lower tiers.
- Eliminate the 4 strikes you’re out rule. To allow SG to to earn income, instead allow players to retry one to two failed attacks per day by paying gems. A rematch victory should earn fewer points than a clean victory. The defending team should earn the difference. This gives the defender some credit for its initial victory.
- Rewards at the end of the challenge are awarded based on final scores, as they are now.
I believe that this format would solve most of the problems we are currently experiencing. Players would be assigned competitive matches from the get-go. Each player would get five attacks and five defenses each day. No one would be kicked out before the event ends. And most importantly, although RNG would still play a role in scoring, its significance would be greatly diminished. Final rankings would more accurately reflect team strength and player skill.
Thoughts?