I agree it is a minor difference. I don’t believe it will make much difference though as most specials are maxed well before the hero on 4 and 5 star heroes.
Excuse me, what purpose would this serve?
Why decrease the team power of fully ascended heroes?
Not fully ascended, ok. But fully ascended?
4000+ TP is a milestone.
A milestone that many players worked hard to achieve.
What exactly is the purpose of taking this milestone away from people?
A 4000+ player is … hm… a category.
A 3985 player is not a category. Only a player working hard to achieve the 4000 milestone.
I am not amused.
This is not, maybe, connected with the rumored possibility to increase the power of 5* heroes?
This is not, maybe, a way to make people spend more money? So that they can get back to where they were, before their hero power got nerfed?
I am not amused.
And I would appreciate an explanation.
Please read the entire thread it has been thoroughly explained. There is no reason new players should suffer through horrible AW matches because you treasure the numbers on cards which have never made sense.
@TylerDirtyn
You do not really think that this will actually improve AW matchmaking?
To me, it is just another nerf. Intended to make people spend more money.
In Germany, we have a saying:
The jug goes to the well until it breaks.
And I think I see a few cracks …
edit:
I am talking about nerfing the team power of fully leveled heroes.
2 Likes
I agree, I don’t want to have to reset my think about what a “strong” team’s power is. It’s just optics, but so was the Dow hitting 10,000, or New Years parties.
My suggestion above would keep the same fully-leveled power scores (more or less), while implementing the staff proposal for reducing the unleveled scores.
I agree with your point, @TylerDirtyn, but this was the easiest fix I could think of and relates directly to the staff’s statement that the power difference is a reflection of the specials. Alternatively, the 30 or 43 points could be added in over the three ascensions: 10 points per ascension for 4*, 14 points per for 5*.
2 Likes
I absolutely agree. thank you! 
I’d like to see a truer representation of comparative hero power but this feels off just a bit. By reducing the top end numbers does it make the middle set of numbers too…dense…making AW matching somewhat harder? In other words at a micro level I can more easily see I should use my maxed 3* vs unleveled 4/5* - great! At a macro AW matching level there are now (likely) many more alliances within a particular numeric range but the closer you are to the ends of those ranges the more pronounced your alliances’ overall power/weakness becomes.
Or am I thinking about that wrong?
The problem is the scores will become inflated once again by the time the heroes are ascended to the level illustrated in the Caedmon Gregorian example which is incorrect as they both are basically the same power.
I personally don’t use hero power as a metric when attacking, more of it is experience with strengths, weaknesses and synergy. A 4200 team consisting of Delilah, Obakhan, Azlar, Richard, Kadilen is not nearly as strong as a team with the same power consisting of Alberich, Gravemaker, Guinevere, Panther, Perseus. The latter is a top 10 team, the former is lower diamond. I agree power numbers help to an extent but they aren’t the end all.
@Alberto1
The current matchmaking metrics already do include a heavier weight on your top 5 heroes. (Which they assume will be used in your defense)
3 Likes
I think even with the attributes in Peters being better this makes sense. Lianna special is much better.
1 Like
I love how all the well established players with deep benches keep coming in here and getting sentimental about numbers while all us newer players keep getting matched with your sentimental alliances in war and feed you like Aife and Derric.
There is a problem, this may not fix it completely but it will help. It is a big step in the right direction.
1 Like
The Change will make them closer. Maybe if the decrease in 5* were a little bigger, or the last ascension gets a higher coefficient.
1 Like
I would rather see points increased, so increase tp with 3* and 4* hereos and leave 5* way they are. Same result and lot less complains from players. I know, points don’t matter, but it psycological thing and 4000 is goal to many players.
8 Likes
All though it may reflect better the legendary and epic heros actual strength and better AW match making, I think your focus should be elsewhere. The community that invested hard earned money into your game and got nerfed heros different from beta is very upsetting. Example Boss Wolf!!! Now you wish to lower his full stats by 43 points. On top of his special already being of horrible value to any and all who invested money to get him! I truly believe your focus should be elsewhere!
What if it was Gregorian vs. Peters? The way they weight skills is a different discussion entirely. There are only 13 points difference in power levels throughout all 5 star heroes and that difference must be meant to reflect special skill because all heroes have roughly the same amount of attribute points.
Vivica and Guinevere are 767 and 777 respectively but it would be hard to argue against the idea that Guinevere’s special skill is far more valuable than Vivica’s special skill even though they are only 10 points appart (translates to around 10 to 15 points attack and defense and 15-25 health) Their respective attribute points are 2736 vs. 2794. This would make it seem that the power level is strictly tied to the attribute points but Gravemaker has a total of 2798 points and is only two power higher at 780 which means the skills are poorly weighted. Being such a negligible difference in the total amount of attribute points means that the difference can only be attributed to the skill.
My point is that the special skill weighting is an entirely different issue. Each are different and currently poorly represented by hero power. There is no static across the board issue that could fix this but it is a different issue entirely.
I think this just further confuses things…
A reduction of 43 in panther for instance looks like 734 power when Elkanen is 770??
If it’s purely cosmetic then sure whatever, but this feels like adding more confusion to an already large source of confusion.
Does this affect war matching? Lowering team powers for an alliance with a large amount of event and hotm heroes, that are already more useful and lethal. Seems like something than further mess with war marching - a mechanism that already seems to Generate a lot of frustration
1 Like
This helps war matchmaking. I would suggest that you go back and read the entire thread, it is full of useful information and comparisons with illustrated examples of how the heroes are currently scored.
What heroes should we compare then? Marjana and Gravemaker? There are some really good 5 stars and there are some really bad 5 stars, I think we can all agree on that. The difference in skills is worth more than less than half a percent of the total attribute points given a hero.
Not a nerf.
A nerd reduces the effectiveness of a hero. (A cynic says to encourage spending…the devs say it is because the hero was overpowered to the point that it harmed game balance and that they fixed it, or tried to…)
I always wondered why we have a team cost number? When first starting out I assumed if I ever got a full team of 5* heroes, I’d run into that team cost ceiling, but that’s never been the case.
So maybe a better solution rather than upending all the power numbers and whatnot, just lower the max team cost a bit? I dunno, just an idea to use something that’s always been present in game, yet has never really mattered
1 Like