About the rush wars⊠Well as much as i like the 3 and 4* rush wars i hate the 5* ones. Because rush 5* matches are basically dependent on 2 things: 1, Sheer luck with the starting board and 2, Alfrike. If you have Alfrike you will win almost all your defenses and most of the attacks, just because of that one hero, she is absolutely gamebreaking on very fast. So very fast wars will be about which alliance has more Alfrikes which is basically P2W at its finest.
Sounds like a jerk response, so according to you this is one of those âdonât like it donât use itâ type scenario and we should blindly like everything that gets added?
Problem is then you miss out on path of valor, i guess the better option would be to have the new order that way people can opt out depending on whats coming next i know fast wars will be horrible because i dont have deep pockets nor the heroes so just like tournaments i dont bother with that trash
Youâre saying literally the same thing as me lolâŠ
The thing you seem to disagree most with is the comment about it being even with regards to slow or fast hero availabilityâŠ
Iâm talking about overall averages being even⊠For mid level alliances OVERALL there will be a ROUGHLY even distribution of Slow, fast and whatever else mana heroes⊠Dependent on spending, availablity and summons⊠So OVERALL it is even.
So if you look at an INDIVIDUAL this statement holds true:
But I specifically stated overall averages
Anyways, the distinction is moot as weâre both saying the same thing.
Couple thoughts:
-
really cool. I like new rules! Yay variety!
-
I wish the Fast Mana were literally fast mana instead of Very Fast. Since we already have one event at very fast mana, I think the nuanced variety of going fast woulda been neat - as well as being less of a boon to the slower heroes, aaand more of a nerf to the very fast people.
-
for equalizer⊠does this affect heroes who have their max health boosted or reduced? (Iâm looking at Baldur as a hero who can skirt around the âequalizerâ and still have an effect over time thatâs useful, ya know?). Wondered if there were other heroes who sorta skirt around this (Seshat with her replicating minions is probably a good thing as well. But yeah, thereâs gotta be some specific heroes that this really favors, and some if really dumps on, right? )
-
closing with a: cool. Yay new rules!
Boosted and reduced HP are not status effects, so no.
HOWEVER, Baldur required his brawler buff in order to have the random damage and the mana protection thing. This buff IS an effect and as such is removed.
While wars are stale bringing in some new variations would shake things up a bit. All they had to do was mandate a tank color to add variety. These variations are horrible that they decided on. Rush attack will be strictly decided by your board and nothing more. Think 30 Telurias was bad wait til facing 30 Alfrikes.
Yelnats, theyâre never, ever, ever going to give someone (even a leader) control over another players roster or teams. Thatâs just asking for a massive disaster of animosity. And I donât blame them.
Guv, the problem with very fast isnât necessarily that the matchmaking will be uneven, itâs just that very fast PvP sucks. At the top level itâs 100% luck based. Completely. There is 0 skill involved at all. Itâs not that one team will have an advantage over the other, itâs that everyone involved will find the process insufferably pointless. Yet, equally pointless.
Still really hoping they scrap Very fast war. I can already imagine the Alfrike +19 tanks with Heimdall/MotherNorth/Alby left wings. Maybe G.Owl on right wing as well. Very fast revivers are just broken and not fun in wars.
Rush tournaments are my favourite, Iâm happy to see my slow heroes shine in wars next.
I am all for Fast, not Very Fast. And now seeing a good reason to finish those slow 4*, lil John etc. and the 3.70 slow 5* heroes I keep skipping. If only the mats would show up!
Big worry I now have is that I do just that, and everyone complains so much they get rid of it and then those slow heroes Return to the bench never t be seen againâŠ
As I said. People will love it or hate it.
Same as the current war rules
Well, that would make Roc more viable, given how much of that birdbrainâs value is straight up stats (top 15% of effective HP and top 25% of attack score)
Fun fact: there are only 4 heroes in the top quartile of both effective health and attack:
- Roc
- Lianna (with costume bonus, w/ or w/o costume)
- Domitia (with costume bonus, w/ or w/o costume)
- Odin
in my opinion that would be a fun idea too, but the attacker would be disadvantaged i think because the enemy would always be quicker then him at chargin mana and with a bad board you got punished more then you are with normal or fast wars
In theory, yes, but I donât subscribe to that theory.
For example, consider the following heroes on my roster (as currently leveled and emblemed)
- Kunchen +18, Slow, 860 Power
- Seshat +18, Fast, 860 Power
- Alfrike +14, V. Slow, 860 Power
Those three heroes have precisely the same power (as the game calculates it), but there will be clear differences in the effective power of those heroes under a Rush War vs other. If the evaluation of the heroes does not take those factors into consideration, thatâs going to skew things. If one alliance happens to have more heroes with slow & v. slow mana in their top 30, that alliance will easily overwhelm an âequally poweredâ team that happens with more fast & v. fast heroes.
Now, maybe when youâre looking at the top 900 heroes of a full alliance (30 players @ 30 heroes), that might fall out, but the fewer war participants an alliance has, the more likely it will be that youâre going to run into that problem, due to increased variance between players/alliances.
Not at all. That would simply exacerbate an extant problem; if the calculations werenât inherently off for Rush Wars, then the miscalculation as to which heroes were in the Top 30 wouldnât be as important.
Indeed, it might be less of a problem when you are dealing with alliances that have lots of War Depth; just as youâre going to trend towards a more even distribution of Faster vs Slower heroes with 30 players with 30 âwar-readyâ heroes, youâre going to find even more regular of a distribution when you consider 30 players with 60 âwar-readyâ heroes each.
Overall, yes. But aggregate results donât speak to individual experience.
What sort of comfort it that to the those alliances that happen to be skewed towards the âfastâ end of the hero pool, that âoverallâ things average out? Will that make them pleased to seemingly be âdesignated losersâ every time they face a team with âequalâ power in Rush Wars that has less of a skew towards fast heroes?
In principle, looking at things âoverallâ is like telling someone who, after several years of playing, has only one HOTM that itâs âfair,â because somebody else, who did the same number of draws, over the same time frame, got all the HOTMs except that specific hero.
No, friend, unless the mana speed of heroes isnât considered at all in War Matchmaking (including by way of âHero Powerâ), the natural, inevitable variance between alliances will hurt alliances according to how heavily that alliance happens to be skewed towards faster heroes. And, if it isnât normally used for the Matchmaking calculation, the skew-benefit is reversed, with those with a higher percentage of faster heroes having the advantage.
Very fast heroes need level 11 mana troops to get charged up faster while fast heroes need level 29 mana troops (not counting talent and costume bonuses).
So it will be more difficult for the attacker to charge up their heroes if they donât have level 29 mana troops. This means that the people who have these troops (who are spenders) will have a big advantage.
As FTP I donât really like that idea (Iâve been playing for 3 years and 4 months and I have a set of level 23 mana troops) and I donât think that many (if any) FTP or CTP players have 29 mana troops.
As much as Rush Attack is an RNG fest, donât you think the current titanium wall tank + 4 fast/very fast hero defense meta is rush attack for the defense regardless?
I will on the other hand be glad to go all out with a slow/very slow rainbow setup.
also very fast heroes would be disadvantaged because are made and thought to be less strong or tank then a fast hero
Ahhhhhh â â â â that is going to blow.