Jump to content

Photo

Kongregate - Alliance War


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1
Ivan

Ivan
  • 570 posts

I want to show to anyone interested how recent (or not so recent) changes related to war points/protection and raid lockout affect the war on Kongregate.

 

2jgz8z.png

 

The above picture shows how many flags have been lost in an alliance that is 2nd in the war 4 hours before the round end.

 

2a631n5.png

 

And here we see the amount of points scored by both alliances that are in question.

 

I dont have the picture which would show how many flags the alliance that ranks as 1st has lost. Any player from TED is welcome if he wants to post it. But I have a pretty good idea that the picture is a lot different. We in SP raid active players and high value targets.

 

This is the first time I see something like this happening in my 4 years of play (was away for the better part of this and last year though). An alliance winning the war without needing to take the flags from their direct opposition.

 

Instead,winning the war by raiding targets like this :

 

vzvqkl.jpg

 

Which are worth 20-40 war points. Those compounds are abandoned,trashed, with injured survivors, and most of them with bad defensive setups even while their owner was still playing the game.

And this is the game winning raiding atm. Harder targets are mathematically not viable at all,even if you have the skill,experience and gear to raid them. 1 survivor earning 20-40 wp is better than 3-5 survivors earning 80-120 wp per raid,and in the latter case,only if succesful.

Kongregate is a much smaller community and for that reason was always a bit different. This is just another difference I am bothering to mention, and just to mention. I am not asking for anything or accusing anyone,and also I know why this is unlikely to ever change.

 

I know why so many targets were created out of thin air and why players are able to attack the same inactive target they farmed just few hours ago instead having to wait for 12 hours like in the past. Speed-up raiding works well with a high number of targets,it spends more fuel,which then needs to be bought.

 

And its not new,its been there since alliance wars have started. It was never an issue on Kong, and still i dont think it is.

 

As I said,no suggestions or accusations, take out of this whatever you want. Veteran raiders will know what story those pictures are telling.


  • 5

#2
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

Since your post is far more humble and kind than CasualRace I'll respond with a proper and honest response unlike on his post and hopefully we can just have a normal, non-salt filled discussion unlike him making up excuses and accusing TED of things lol.

 

It's different for different people, I started playing 4 months ago so I started playing how the war system was now so I think it's ok as I've never known it any differently, I definitely understand where you older players are coming from though.

 

I don't see a problem though myself, like you said, it's unlikely to change, I raided Tangerine a few times and DKK once and it wasn't a waste of time, it's still good points.

 

The way I see it is as well is, I've played for 4 months. I did not expect to beat DKK at all and even with 5 I still only won by about 10 seconds or so (DKK may have the log) but it was close to single digits. Even if the math added up, so to speak, there's no point in raiding Mors, Jack or Chris as you'll likely lose even with 5(multiple years of looting/buying gear compared to 4 months). Like you say, there's not many people playing on Kongregate and there's certainly not many who can beat many of the old players, even a couple people outside SP like Sham and some old KBF guys. For me it has nothing to do with points per survivors it's just a case of, I'm very unlikely to beat them. If I could, I would but it's unlikely so I'd rather be smart about raiding as opposed to showing big my d... is.

 

Honestly, don't take this the wrong way I mean nothing by it but I've never seen SP complain this much about it since TED got first. I've even had people complain in PM to me, seen it on Kong chat, 1 salty forum post by CasualRace who I believe is Expat? not sure, can't keep up with alts I don't use them myself ^.^

 

I can't speak for other TED members but I don't care displaying or saying my statistics for the week. This week I lost 2 flags, defended 4 and even the 2 loses were close.

 

Also, not you specifically but as I was talking to someone in SP as they were complaining about the topic of your post, I saw them ticking daily for the exact same kind of compounds so...yh. lol

 

A couple were complaining about it in public chat too as the same people were ticking for the same 40 point bases someone else accused TED of only raiding, hence why I then tried DKK

 

Anyway, I hope nothing I said annoys you or anyone else but that's just what I think lol.

 

"The above picture shows how many flags have been lost in an alliance that is 2nd in the war 4 hours before the round end."

 

That's not how it's won though, it's about getting flags so if it was alliance vs alliance let's say, nobody is going to beat SP so what would be the point?

 

Also, if some of your members are going to keep complaining about this, try not to do it when the same members are ticking for those 20-40 point bases, not a good look lol.


Edited by tingadabopper, 02 July 2017 - 09:16 PM.

  • 3

#3
Ivan

Ivan
  • 570 posts

I appreciate your response. I will try to clarify.

 

Honestly, don't take this the wrong way I mean nothing by it but I've never seen SP complain this much about it since TED got first.

 

Reason why I posted this is as I have said..first time we see an alliance winning the war without taking the flags from direct opposition. Last two weeks TED took 1st place,before that SP was winning by raiding both active and inactive players.

 

Yes you took Sp flags several times by raiding two different players. You alone,and its less than 5 flags, so obviously that wasnt what won you the war. Lets say its about 1% of your alliance total points.

 

I am not saying that you cant, just saying that you arent, and some of us dont like the state of the war. It is sad if an alliance can win based off of 99% points from inactive trashed compounds.

 

Also, not you specifically but as I was talking to someone in SP as they were complaining about the topic of your post, I saw them ticking daily for the exact same kind of compounds so...yh. lol

 

A couple were complaining about it in public chat too as the same people were ticking for the same 40 point bases someone else accused TED of only raiding

 

Most of our raiders raid both active and inactive targets, this is not the point I was trying to make, problem is when you ONLY do that and as a collective you are able to take a win. A simple logic should be applied to realise thats not ideal. And what you said not having a past experience, believe me tables have turned completely. In the past alliance war points were over 80% scored from very active raiders from top3 alliances.


  • 5

#4
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

I appreciate your response. I will try to clarify.

 

 

Reason why I posted this is as I have said..first time we see an alliance winning the war without taking the flags from direct opposition. Last two weeks TED took 1st place,before that SP was winning by raiding both active and inactive players.

 

Yes you took Sp flags several times by raiding two different players. You alone,and its less than 5 flags, so obviously that wasnt what won you the war. Lets say its about 1% of your alliance total points.

 

I am not saying that you cant, just saying that you arent, and some of us dont like the state of the war. 

 

Most of our raiders raid both active and inactive targets, this is not the point I was trying to make, problem is when you ONLY do that and as a collective you are able to take a win. A simple logic should be applied to realise thats not ideal. And what you said not having a past experience, believe me tables have turned completely. In the past alliance war points were over 80% scored from very active raiders from top3 alliances.

 

Ah ok, yh I've got NO idea how it was before I got here lol.

 

Yh we probably raid similar targets in terms of 55 excluding each other, ARA, some of the totally random +80s that show up sometimes. We don't ONLY do that as a collective, big was 1-manning nightwing whoever that is lol. Alts were raiding each other as well, just not the 55s so it seems to be a problem more with the level 55s.

 

And believe me, not sure where you got 99% of our points coming from trashed compounds, I'm sure 99% is an exaggeration (I do that too lol) but I assure you it wasn't lol


Edited by tingadabopper, 02 July 2017 - 11:15 PM.

  • 2

#5
Ivan

Ivan
  • 570 posts

Well this is turning into a live chat now :P

 

Again I think the things you are mentioning cover very little of your total score. Majority of your raiders do not even dream about attacking active players, not the best or hardest, but they completely avoid anything that looks healthy at all. Majority,not all.

 

I know i had at least 4 from TED in my target list worth over 100 wp, names I have never seen or heard anyone at all mentioning that they raided anyone, which means what it means.

 

I am not trying to accuse TED of anything,simply show the faults in the system,that is really all there is.

No salt, not angry demanding change, really nothing like that.

 

To you I can only say congrats, after only a few months of raiding you are able to deal with some of the harder targets out there. Hope you will be example for your alliance.


  • 2

#6
ChrisHitchens

ChrisHitchens
  • 89 posts

Got to second what Ivan said, heck I am not blaming anyone or trying to take away from anyone's win.

I completely understand the sentiment and I'd raid free flags all day just to be effective too.

The thing I think we are talking about is wether we want it that way or not. Recent wars just put the finger on the issue.

 

Congrats TED on the win, it was clear from day one that you were winning that one and nothing is to say that you wouldn't have done so even without free flags available to either side. I don't want this to be some kind of crying thread :P or to take away from the fact that you won fair and square.

 

As for the scores, yeah you know we can do better and we know you can too :)


  • 3

#7
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

Jack, my average was 45-ish. Other TED members at 55 higher but they're far more experienced than I am I'm still not too good. ^.^ also, it doesn't matter what the average per raid is lol. Personally, like I said, I'd rather be smart what about I do as opposed to showing how big my di.. is. But if you think the average points for 55 raiders in TED goes to as low as 20, you're extremely wrong.

 

I'm the wrong person to ask those questions to Jack, I'm far too new, I'm not into the game enough and don't think my opinion would hold any real merit. 

 

I never said I could beat any alt of any old player, I don't even use an alt at the moment lol. I'm just saying it's far easier on an alt to beat high pointers, on my alt when LOM were going for third I was hitting +100 all the time. Level 55s you don't know how far that level 55 extends, they may of got it 3-4 years ago and be totally stacked or just got it and be using 417s or something.

 

Yh I've checked some videos on youtube about raiding but I don't understand a lot of it. I've been trying the smoke thing a lot like head on.. to block barricades and isolate watchtowers but i throw it in the wrong place, noob. :')

 

"Lets try to change this point system by attracting con attention on this thread. so we can participate in real fair and challanging alliance war."

 

Sorry man, that just seems like you want it to change so nobody can compete with you lol.

 

A few people have come across like that, alliance raiding alliance etc cos in that case, then nobody could really compete with ya lol.

 

 

Chris, I just don't appreciate the fact a couple people assume all TED do is free flags and complain about it as they're ticking for the EXACT same compounds. I don't care about the fact they're chatting rubbish about TED, that's just an excuse, but it's the hypocrisy. All you got to do is look at Jacks post, none of you guys complained nearly as much when you were first, in fact, I never saw anyone complaining lol so you can see why I'm trying to tell you lot you're making yourself look bad, I've even had people PM me saying so.

 

I'm not trying to be a douche, but if some of your members are gonna talk to/about TED members the way they are they're gonna get it back if I can see it lol. And the only way to have a normal discussion is be honest on how you see things, whether you're right or not. 

 

Oh yeh, I know you guys could of scored more lol. Hence why I carried on all week until the last 5 minutes lol


Edited by tingadabopper, 03 July 2017 - 07:09 AM.

  • 0

#8
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

Speaking for myself, I don't care too much for praise or a pat on the back, as I'm sure you know, as long as I'm in a top 3 alliance earning fuel weekly + war box I'm happy lol. And I doubt most people in TED do.

 

Plus you guys can still raid the 'hard' compounds, not that there's many difficult ones for you I imagine, the easier compounds are not stopping you.

 

Yh I understand you're not trying to take anything away from us BUT you must be able to see how it looks to people outside SP, the whole server can see it and it looks really bad. I bet other alliances who were first but then someone else came along done the same thing, so obviously not just you guys I'm referring too ^^


  • 0

#9
KW_RAIDER

KW_RAIDER
  • 12 posts

Speaking for myself, I don't care too much for praise or a pat on the back, as I'm sure you know, as long as I'm in a top 3 alliance earning fuel weekly + war box I'm happy lol. And I doubt most people in TED do.

 

Plus you guys can still raid the 'hard' compounds, not that there's many difficult ones for you I imagine, the easier compounds are not stopping you.

 

Yh I understand you're not trying to take anything away from us BUT you must be able to see how it looks to people outside SP, the whole server can see it and it looks really bad. I bet other alliances who were first but then someone else came along done the same thing, so obviously not just you guys I'm referring too ^^

Well mate seems u guys really dint wanna see things, so let it be, if u enjoying in taking part in such dummy alliance war without real challange and fun, than i am out of discussion now.

Congrats for upcoming round, but i really cant waste my time in such non sense alliance war, i have other Imp things to do in my life, as its not question of win or loose to me, more imp to me is it worth spending time in that, and if its a dummy war. i quit PVP from now on. I was investing time here cos i was having some fun here, but in recent time that fun part of game was completely died honestly, may be u are not agree with it cos all u care about winning round either by just dummy wars but i discussed some of guys who think that this free flag shit making DZ worst and it should be stopped and i will not like to mentioned that at some point some of you guys have accepted it. 

Are we guys really taking part in so called alliance wars ?? 

Gd lk with u mate :) hope u guys will continue this so called dummy alliance war. 

I am out from this post, and sorry it was nothing personal, for me its a game only whr i came to spend some time to relax and some fun. and if that part is dead there is no point wasting time.

Have fun.


Edited by KW_RAIDER, 03 July 2017 - 07:47 AM.

  • 0

#10
ChrisHitchens

ChrisHitchens
  • 89 posts

I think the points have been made. And yeah I know it looks like pure salt coming from SP, and perhaps there is some salt in there too (can you really blame them?).

It would have been much better if the topic had been raised before or by TED now but just like we had no reason to then, you have no reason to now. So the only option is that we raise the topic and come off as salty mofos :P There is no way to do it without looking like cry babies though.

 

SP has been toppled before, we generally don't raise a stink. We could just accept that this is the state of the game and be done with it :)


  • 0

#11
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

You're all missing my main point as well but touching on the smaller ones, I've been here 4-5 months yh?  PvP has been the same since I started playing but I never saw any of you guys complain when you were first lol.

 

That's why it looks bad. Maybe the odd "This is boring" here and there, or "Arch Angels get third from free flags" but never this much lol.

 

Don't get me wrong though, if say ARA one day overtake us or the Almighty Gods Of The Dead Zone, Full Scale-Assault LOM YA BOY CHEF JACOES. I'm sure some people here will do the same thing lol.

 

Take what I'm saying you like though, hate me or continue to like me if you did in the first place, but that's how it looks to me and apparently most the server. 


Edited by tingadabopper, 03 July 2017 - 08:38 AM.

  • 0

#12
tingadabopper

tingadabopper
  • 25 posts

Also, show how many flags your alts lost. I know they lost some. or just other members in general. it's just a problem between the 'top' raiders within each alliance and even then it's not an issue lol


Edited by tingadabopper, 03 July 2017 - 09:02 AM.

  • 0

#13
Ivan

Ivan
  • 570 posts

You're all missing my main point as well but touching on the smaller ones, I've been here 4-5 months yh?  PvP has been the same since I started playing but I never saw any of you guys complain when you were first lol.

 

That's why it looks bad. Maybe the odd "This is boring" here and there, or "Arch Angels get third from free flags" but never this much lol.

 

Don't get me wrong though, if say ARA one day overtake us or the Almighty Gods Of The Dead Zone, Full Scale-Assault LOM YA BOY CHEF JACOES. I'm sure some people here will do the same thing lol.

 

Take what I'm saying you like though, hate me or continue to like me if you did in the first place, but that's how it looks to me and apparently most the server. 

 

Also last thing from me.

 

I already gave an answer to the question "why bring this up now?", its both in my original post and my first response to you. First time an alliance won the war without taking flags from direct opposition. Provided the picture to prove it to some extent although you spent all the time here trying to deny that fact. All of us here trying to state what is obvious, that the prevailing majority of points comes from compounds that look like the one in the picture that i showed in my OP.

 

We can just agree to disagree on that one then.


  • 1

#14
TanaG

TanaG
  • 161 posts

I want to show to anyone interested how recent (or not so recent) changes related to war points/protection and raid lockout affect the war on Kongregate.

 

This is the first time I see something like this happening in my 4 years of play (was away for the better part of this and last year though). An alliance winning the war without needing to take the flags from their direct opposition.

 

Instead,winning the war by raiding targets like this :

 

vzvqkl.jpg

 

Which are worth 20-40 war points. Those compounds are abandoned,trashed, with injured survivors, and most of them with bad defensive setups even while their owner was still playing the game.

And this is the game winning raiding atm. Harder targets are mathematically not viable at all,even if you have the skill,experience and gear to raid them. 1 survivor earning 20-40 wp is better than 3-5 survivors earning 80-120 wp per raid,and in the latter case,only if succesful.

If it makes you feel any better, same thing happened on AG. When I raised the issues, certain people got upset. You are 110% correct!

These changes are what allowed for fuel wars to escalate to an unprecedented scale. And while all the fuel burning for really shit targets by those who afforded it might have looked nice for developers (and I don't blame them), it damaged the overall competition standards. Even if I could/wanted to spend that much money on fuel as to deploy in semi-trashed pounds and score 20 pts every few seconds and thus score much more than others would with a hard raid in 7 mins, I can't see how that's fun and frankly I cannot see how that's a competition at all.


Edited by TanaG, 03 July 2017 - 03:12 PM.

  • 5

#15
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,173 posts

It's the same problem that war has had from day one, nothing really new/shocking here.

 

If you prioritize/force players to target active "high value targets" players complain that there are "too few targets".

 

If you open up the targets list so that there are a lot more targets players complain that other alliances are winning too easily/unfairly because of all the "soft targets".

 

It's a tricky balance, one that I don't have the answer to.


  • 2

#16
TanaG

TanaG
  • 161 posts

It's the same problem that war has had from day one, nothing really new/shocking here.

 

If you prioritize/force players to target active "high value targets" players complain that there are "too few targets".

 

If you open up the targets list so that there are a lot more targets players complain that other alliances are winning too easily/unfairly because of all the "soft targets".

 

It's a tricky balance, one that I don't have the answer to.

 

Agreed, it's a vicious circle. Hard to find a balance there. But I think both I and Ivan were just stating the obvious lol

 

The main problem with this one system is that it opened the door for the alliance war to be won exclusively by burning fuel. While the alliances war always required fuel burning (am not going to say it didn't), it now came to the point where that's what it's all about. Now, when I started playing this game I wasn't looking to join a shopping competition, if you get my drift :)


Edited by TanaG, 03 July 2017 - 08:54 PM.

  • 2

#17
morsmagnes3

morsmagnes3
  • 63 posts

It's the same problem that war has had from day one, nothing really new/shocking here.

 

If you prioritize/force players to target active "high value targets" players complain that there are "too few targets".

 

If you open up the targets list so that there are a lot more targets players complain that other alliances are winning too easily/unfairly because of all the "soft targets".

 

It's a tricky balance, one that I don't have the answer to.

With the old system, we were only able to score from competitive alliance, lower ranked alliances gave 0-1 points since it was based off of the alliance rank.

Now, the rank doesn't matter and the wars are won by scoring free flags, rather than competing alliances vs alliances.

That's the issue were referring to.


  • 0

#18
chris327

chris327
  • 76 posts
Just putting it out there that old system required more fuel burning I feel. As targets were gone so fast u had to speed up if nobody home to get another target. Also on kong there's not an issue of speeding to win. TED simply has more active raiders and can score more in the current system.
  • 1

#19
Ivan

Ivan
  • 570 posts

Just putting it out there that old system required more fuel burning I feel. As targets were gone so fast u had to speed up if nobody home to get another target. Also on kong there's not an issue of speeding to win. TED simply has more active raiders and can score more in the current system.

 

Thats 100% true. This is why I repeatedly said that what we are pointing out here was not about us being salty because we undeservingly are 2nd instead of 1st. We have fewer raiders and even some of those we have are fed up with farming inactive compounds so they refuse to do it, myself included.

TED deserve the win due to their numbers and the fact they dont mind farming such compounds.

 

Issue of speeding to win is not there atm, agree with that as well, but is potential in the future,always there as a possibility. Not for me though, I share oppinion with TanaG on that matter...wholeheartedly.


  • 1

#20
TanaG

TanaG
  • 161 posts

Just putting it out there that old system required more fuel burning I feel. As targets were gone so fast u had to speed up if nobody home to get another target. Also on kong there's not an issue of speeding to win. TED simply has more active raiders and can score more in the current system.

Hmm no, it didn't. Simply  because there weren't that many targets to speed for. Now, if you can afford it you basically just speed up every few seconds! When I started raiding, years ago, the target system only allowed one to maybe burn 500 to at most 2k fuel a week (if he was 24/7 in game). Now we're talking about 15k to overt 30k fuel a week and there are players who do that on several accounts. The multiple alts system is also something that should be addressed. The game should allow a reset of levels and a maximum number of accounts per person in my opinion.

Also, TED may have more active raiders but I don't think this was the issue raised by Ivan or makes the problem that he raised less real.


Edited by TanaG, 04 July 2017 - 08:24 AM.

  • 1