Formula for an individual contribution towards AW

I think I have worked out the formula for an individual true contribution to AW. I call it ICAWS ( Individual Contribution to Alliance War Score ).
ICAWS = war points + ( Enemy team average points per flag ) x total number of flags use against the individual defense.

What else should I include in this formula ?

2 Likes

A calculator

Lol jk

On a real note, probably team power of enemies and player should be calculated in there somehow. More points for withstanding higher team powers, less points for withstanding lower(your formula seems defense focused, if including attack than reverse order of points i just mentioned should be included as well)

1 Like

I might recommend the following modification:

War Points + (Enemy team average pts per flag)x(total number of flags used against the individual defense) - (total points won off of individual defense by enemy)

That way, if your defense was tougher than average, you get a net boost to contribution, but if it’s weaker than average, you get a net loss.

1 Like

Add points for removing just the tank and priority targets as Zeline, Gravemaker, Alberich on failed attacks if someone else gets the “defeat” points.

2 Likes

Is anything in this game simple? Lol even things that look simple, complicate pretty quick once analyzed and dissected

Anyways I’ll start over

What exactly are you trying to measure? Participation or performance?

Performance during one war.
Like a boxing match, I suppose, not only about dishing out the punishment, but to be able to absorb it as well.

Offensive performance is measured by points scored

So I’m guessing you’re thinkin defense performance should be measured as well?

It’s about use of war flags, if the defense can waste the attacker flags, then they contribute something, but how do you quantify that.

Points for defensive wins

1 point for a defensive win, then double it each time a defensive team isnt 1 shotted

1 flag = 1 point
2 flags = 2 points
3 flags = 4 points

Something along those lines

Small individual difference but cumulatively throughout 180 flags could differentiate an end result

And decrease chances of a tie

With matchmaking improving more and more, i don’t see a reason this couldn’t effectively be implemented

1 Like

Wont work what if an alliance only have 10 members, their individual war point will be a lot more than an alliance of 30 members.

10 members no longer get matched with 30 members that I’m aware of

Could also throw in some mathematic formula similar to the ones used in possible offensive points that could determine the value of defensive points based on number of defensive teams on the field, bowing in favor of the team with less members

I.e.
30/30 alliances on both sides can score x amount of defense points, points worth is based on value of defending TP and offending TP in each individual attack

These numbers are manipulated based on how many members are participants in each alliance therefore evening itself out whether it’s 1 vs 2 10 vs 15 25 vs 30 or 30 vs 30

Just off the top of my head

I’m sure details would need worked out and tested in both systems but i think in the long run it could be valuable and make defense team coordination even more valuable

My alt alliance has 2 members vs 4 enemy. My total war point is around 1500.

I have also thought about this topic and I’m glad to see you’re taking into account defensive performance. Burning an opponent’s flags is definitely a valid (and solid) contribution a team member can make.

This got mentioned, but it bears repeating: removing a tank or high value hero is substantially more valuable than the actual points assigned. At the least, the attacker who does that should get a pro-rated portion of the team kill bonus, assuming that team gets finished later. That is, if an attacker takes out a tank and, let’s say, two other heroes, then a teammate finishes the last two, the first players should get at least 3/5 of the kill bonus (and probably more).

Lastly, I actually think the biggest issue in calculating something like this is comparing players to others around their level. Of course a player with a team power of 3500 scores more points than a team of 2200. But I don’t think that tells the story. What’s important is how well the 3500 team scores compared to other teams around 3500, and how the 2200 does compared to other 2200’s.

Because of the way alliance war matching works, a 2200 on my side implies a team of around 2200 on the other side (I know it’s about the 30 heroes and blah blah blah, but team power is the best / only available proxy I’m aware of to start measuring this). I want my 2200 to score more points / soak up more opponent’s flags than their 2200 does.

What I’m envisioning is some sort of VORP (value over replacement player) metric. I’m totally making these numbers up, but the baseline for a 2200 player may be to score 100 points and burn 4 enemy flags. But for a 3500 player it may be 300 points and soak 6 enemy flags. If that were the case, a 2200 player scoring 140 would be more valuable than a 3500 scoring 250.

In war, the points are the same for taking a team with TP 4000 or 3000. So taking 50 points of a team TP 3000 is a lot easier than 4000. But everyone get 6 attempts/ flag. Less attempt mean less points.

The value are relative, so if a defense team with TP 3000 force the attacking side with 4000, to use 2 flags, there are at least a gain 50% of the point per flag.

Also, every subsequent attack after the first gets “harder” should be somehow figured in as well or at least a curve. Obviously your first attack should be much better suited than say your 5th or 6th attack which many players could be scraping together anyone they have.

Took this team 6 flags to take my weak defense team down

Prime example @SandMan. Many players don’t have deep benches. After there first 2-3 attacks it might be a mix of 3/4* the rest of the way. This leaves the attacking player at a big disadvantage.

The only performance I care about is alliance win or loss. Individual contribution formulas are dumb and most alliance leaders couldn’t care less.

I ask some of my players to do things that aren’t the most efficient but needed at the time. Sometimes we need someone to stack a bunch of 3 star purples to tank bust a Guin team for a flip. There are lots of other situations where I’m putting people or myself into a spot where points won’t be maxed out.

Something like this is not needed and would take programming time away from stuff that we might enjoy.

2 Likes

Exactly. I still use a few 3* for my 6th attack. 20 fully leveled 4 and 5* heroes is hard let alone the 30 needed for AW.

Cookie Settings