I am recommending the addition of War of the Three Kingdoms related Path of Valor event challenges.
Tier 1 - Use 2 flags
Tier 2 - Use 4 flags
Tier 3 - Use 6 flags
(So in total usage of all 12 flags)
This would might increase the participation of players, and there would be less unused flags.
i agree. Point values should be: Tier 1 - 150 points, Tier 2 - 300 points, and Tier 3 - 450 points.
Yes that gets my vote …
However I still expect to see hundreds of unused flags followed by repeat complaints about a broken part of the game ….
Unfortunately it’s not a priority to do any repair / overhaul of W3K
great suggestion to motivate people to use flags, and to reward those who do!
(hope there will also be additional rewards in 3 Kingdoms for those who use more flags!)
Yeah now there idea that I guess will make everyone kinda happy 
…
Im for it as is solution to a problem that has plauged the forum since the start of wok3 … Many a merge …
Could folk still finish the pov with out completing the event though ?
900 points isn’t that much. I know the first round of 28 day POV, I finished days ahead (I only buy the little pass after I finish POV to level 30). I think I missed maybe two daily challenges and did all the event and the regular challenges (titan, war flags, what have you). So missing one event challenge, if people didn’t want to participate in Wo3K, shouldn’t lead to being unable to finish POV.
Yes please 
At least for those who have opted in. How to prevent people from just fleeing the battle though?
The system is so flawed and doesn’t feel like team work at all - it was discouraging to read the Q & A - I didn’t get the impression that anything would be done to improve this “event”. Or did I read that wrong? Maybe the heroes have already brought in the bucks SG were hoping for and by that they are already outdated 
Oh, well, here’s to hoping 
Superb idea @PlayForFun - you got my vote. If SG can do it for Events, surely it’s not a stretch to extend it to W3K?
Under the current setup, typically the alliance with the least number of unused war flags will win. 
that’s my alliance 
.
That’s the way I understood it too. Paraphrasing, “Oops we rushed to get it out, it’s broken but fixing it isn’t a priority”… smh.
It would be nice for to add a challenge for this - but:
Stop complaining about unused flags people - they don’t matter!!!
I have pointed this out before, nobody can counter the logic, but people keep whining about it so here goes again.
Unused flags don’t matter because of two reasons
Loot is an aggregation of 3 different aspects of W3K
You received loot based upon the results of your kingdom
There are many thousands of flags involved here for all 3 kingdoms. It would be extremely unusual for one kingdom to have a statistically significant number of excess unused flags when compared to the other kingdoms when added across all those warbands. Remember, it doesn’t matter that Shu has 1400 unused flags and Wei has 1500. It only matters that Wei had 100 more which is almost certainly going to be a tiny impact vs. the thousands of flags involved.
Loot is calculated based upon individual performance
Unused flags help you here. Your performance using all flags should not be less than someone who skips flags. You get more loot.
Loot is calculated based upon skirmish results
The same flag effect is here, but not quite as minimal as with the kingdoms, but still nearly as problematic as a traditional war. Your typical alliance with 25 members will be working with 150 flags and each flag (on average) is worth about .67% of the total score. In a skirmish, each flag is worth (on average) about .08% of the total score. And again, it is only the difference between the two that matters. If one side misses 75 flags and the other side misses 55, it is only the difference of 20 flags. In this example, that would be comparable to about 2 flags in a typical war. And the big picture, 50% will win their skirmish and 50% will lose. If everyone uses their flags, 50% will win their skirmish and 50% will lose.
I like the idea! Whilst I do follow @GeeWally arguement that the rewards outcome is not necessarily massively influenced, I think rewarding flag usage is a nice idea.
The other thought I had was to give a few coins for each flag used. If you gave 5 coins a flag, that’d be 60% of a pull for all 12 flags, don’t think that would affect SGGs bottom line, but be good motivation for players - and even if some just start and flee, that’s still an improvement in my book.
Something needs to be done… Reduced loot… Carrot or stick… Just make it happen.
Great idea. Also there is the idea that war hits and Wo3K hits should count as the wanted missions of killing heroes. Hopefully SGG will do something about it, the current version of Wo3K is just not something to be excited about.
I personally think that it should be totally revamped. Instead of the current format of 100 strangers vs another 100, make it another alliance activity. The alliances would be assigned to a kingdom(by choice or random), for a period of time, say a year(six wars seems to be quite fair). Each skirmish would be carried out in the current alliance format, simply the alliances would match up with another alliances from a different kingdom. Whereas in the skirmish, each alliance would be able to choose its own rule of battle as the defense. Until the start of the skirmish the opponent would not know what they are going into. The rules of battle can evidently be different between the two sides. You might attack on rush, and defend on arrows. After each skirmish the current rewards are given, and the winning kingdom gets a big morale boost, and the winning alliances and the best players accordingly. The war finishes after the sixth skirmish (one year, too long?), and the final rewards should be given based on final results, and rightly assessed according to the yearlong efforts of the players.
Just some wild stuff, not that I can dream about SGG taking it seriously.
this should come to player’s attention every w3k at least, not sure why i didn’t saw this sooner!
even if there will still be players who don’t do pov, i’m still sure the unused flags will lower significantly.
I agree with you on everything else, but this is complete nonsense:
So far every single W3K skirmish I have been in (which is every single iteration of the event) has been decided by flag usage. Never has a skirmish won that has used fewer flags. And that is because in the region of the game I play in we are not talking single flags, but hundreds of unused flags, typically the winning side has used about 100+ flags more than the losing side. Same again this time with our side losing (300 flags left) to the other side (200 flags left).
Is this a problem?
That is a different question, maybe we just don´t care? Which is the best answer. This event is so horribly designed I honestly don´t care. I sign up and collect free loot for doing absolutely nothing. Which is probably one of the main reasons for not using flags, you spend time on using flags, but most people don´t get better loot if they do.
There are only 2 parts of the loot that matter: Personal performance (if you make 12 OS and end up top 3 or so) and the whale loot (highest roster power) you get for spending a lot of money on the game.
Skirmish loot and warband loot are junk no matter what. So I simply don´t care, if I win or loose a skirmish/warband. And obviously I don´t spend enough money to get better whale loot.
Since they changed the system to get increasing attack bonus it has become rather easy to get 12 wins, now it is not about how many wins you do, but about counting points and attacking the easiest 31 and 32 point targets. If you are into that sort of thing… I am not, I just hit 12 targets without looking at points, so I ended up 3rd overall. whatever, it´s not important.
However 2 reasons why I still would do something about flag usage:
The whole event is based on pure egoism and zero teamwork, flag usage is one symptom of it. More things would need to change, but this is one of them.
It is ridiculously easy to fix this problem, there are probably 5 easy solutions out there, that all could be implemented in 1hour of programming time (OK some of them would require a few more hours), so why not fix an easy to fix problem, that is the absolutely biggest point of complaint for the entire event?
I mean come on a friggin intern can “program” an exclamation mark that pops up when you have unused flags. No it won´t reduce unused flags to zero, but it probably would reduce the problem by a significant amount, costing SG about 10€ of wages… Other solutions can be added like the proposed PoV/PoG quest. Nobody said you can only do 1 thing. And no I am not going to repeat all the solutions proposed out there, you can read them all up yourselves.
You’re still missing the big picture.
What matters is not the number of flags used, but the difference in the number of flags used. If one side didn’t use 200 flags, it really doesn’t matter a bit if the other side didn’t use 199. In my own case, our side won with 45 more flags used. However…if the other side had used 45 more flags and one shot every single one of those, they still would have lost. I suspect what may happen is that as the battle wears on over several days, a sort of fatigue sets in and that members of the losing side start to prioritize other aspects of the game. The effects of the poor flag usage gets magnified as later flags are not used effectively.
Everyone should keep in mind that the rewards to an improved individual ranking can make up for the poor flag usage. Any unused flags will automatically improve individual ranked performance. This is an aspect I think most people forget as there are no rewards for individual performance in the alliance based war.
So keep this thought in mind. Would you be happier with higher flag usage and lower individual performance and still losing (as 50% of teams always will) or happier with lower flag usage and higher individual performance along with the better individual loot. Be careful of what you wish for.
There are a lot of problems in the design of this event and it has a lot of different sides to it.
If you are talking about loot, there are 2 main considerations:
Time efficiency: The best thing to do is to sign up and then never even open the event again. 3 out of 4 parts of the loot have nothing to do with you playing the event, so you´ll get the same rewards no matter if you use a flag or not.
Maximum loot: The only part of the loot you can actually influence is the loot for personal performance. By playing maximum egoism, meaning maximizing your own success by choosing easy high point targets and hoping at the same time that your team mates fail you will get the biggest loot possible. As you say the ideal case would be you being the only person using flags guaranteeing a 1st place loot, how f-ing stupid is that???
Both of these points make this feature so stupid. It should be exactly opposite of both these points.
You are correct that difference in flag use is what decides the outcome of winning or losing the skirmish. However the lower overall flag usage, the higher the avg. disparity will be. Simple to explain: When flag usage approaches 100% disparity approaches 0. That is why increasing flag usage will improve the game experience. And no I am not saying it will make the event amazing, that is impossible with the above mentioned problems (and others). But it would be a step in the right direction.
Besides that there is the psychological factor of having unused flags on a team, which we have been conditioned against by alliance wars.
Anyway this whole discussion is purely theoretical, SG has long ago declared the event finished with no more future development time getting “wasted” on it.
