• amort3k

    Option 2 sounds the best as option 1 is just more band aid and doesn't solve the true problems.

    It's the only true way to make this new league system work if you plan on having seasons. As you noted in above you have to assure all teams have equal chance to complete the same amount of wars in a season. That said, I am not a fan of 'seasons' unless option 2 is applied. There is no way to assure teams are matching with close ranked teams and thus seasons will just be the art of dodging opponents. You also have to assure that teams get an equal chance of wars that potentially pay out the same amount of trophies - option 2 can solve this.

    If you go option 1 you have to do away with seasons and incorporate penalties for sitting idle. Yes you fall behind in trophies but that is not enough to prevent teams from waiting for a few hours here and there to assure a win.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    I agree regarding the rank restrictions - team wars should not be rank limited. One of the best parts of wars is using good strategy to use lower level/rank monsters. The best is even using a Common/UC/Rare to beat Warmasters and Nemesis for fun.


    I have 130 light monsters but I chose to use lower level for fun - why limit this?

    Its just senseless - either you have the monsters or you don't. I will completely stop buying monsters if this is the case as I frequently use lower level monsters in elite war scenarios to exploit their traits/niche skills. If I'm forced to rank them up just because SP says i need to in order to use them in war - I'm done.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @Ekto-Gamat Ah ok thanks. My point was I just hate seeing a preferred first move list even used. If my Llum Metal is going I want her to check if enemies have positive effects. If they do I want her to clear positive, if they don't I want her to run Vein-boiler. If all enemies are immune to Possess I dont want my Baba Yaga to run aoe possess I rather her run aoe blind. Etc etc

    I'll check that link though as the new Ai way too predictable now - find it's worse than before. I'll this thread alone 😉


    posted in Monster Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    Tested my favorite monster Al Canine and he ran Unpaid Loan 0/20 times in friendly battle - he just ran his aoe stun. Firstly the randomness seems to be gone making the Ai even dumber and far too predictable imo and these new 'Single Target Area Effect' moves which usually the better moves for deniers especially are not being favored at all. Again, if then next enemy in the turn order is immune don't run that skill - its an easy check from a programming perspective. I would just abuse him with a Kassia like I do Llum Magic.

    posted in Monster Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    The Ai is severely flawed if we can predict the moves this easy.

    Monsters need to be aware of the environmental variables:

    • Traits
    • Status of allies and enemies
    • Turn order
    • Health of allies and enemies

    Here is a study I did on Demise as I know she was previously unusable on defence and still would not recommend using her even just due to her trait but wanted to see how the 'improved' Ai handles her:

    Test case: Demise

    I spent some time testing Demise this prep day during Light Light Fire restrictions. Normally we would never use Demise on defense as she never does strength from beyond to the right monster (plus she has a bad trait). It turns out now she is indeed running Strength from Beyond and giving turn to ally but is still not properly aware of the monster with the most strength.

    At the end of the day the monsters need to be more aware of their environment. Prior to running SFB she should be checking if enemy has 2/3 monsters with postive effects and if so run her clear positive move Endless Celebration (if equipped)). If not, then run SFB to strongest monster (checking for state of that monster first so if ally is not controlled then give turn if so give turn to other ally, if both controlled run clean negative)


    • Demise is transferring turns much better now but should be aware of the ally monster stats (post rune) and buffing highest strength monster.

    • Prior to running a skill she should be checking in this order:

      • If allies are controlled - clear negative
      • else If allies have torture effects and health is below 50% - clear negative
      • else if enemies have mass positive effects - clear positive
      • else run turn transfer to strongest monster (post rune)

    You will notice the bolded text above is how i'm proposing that moves just be labelled so the monster doesn't need to know the exact move but just the type of move to use in the scenario. This can start to apply to all monsters not just her - I'll work on building a big case statement that would ideally be executed at the start of every turn.

    I also made a youtube video up on the Think Tank channel with actual analysis. In the video I use gakora and run evasion and she still just gives turn to Llum and Llum does Veinboiler instead of clearing positive. Both monsters had a chance to clear positive and didnt.

    I think we are moving in the wrong direction if we are just preprogramming preferred skills for first moves or using a certain skill 95%+ of the time. It's not hard to just build a global case statement that applies to all monsters that checks certain variables before running a move. I am seeing the new ai trying to single target possess a possess immune monsters, not favoring kill shots, new single target area effect moves (like the Xiron explosions and Al Canine Unpaid Loan ) not being run.

    We need to build a system that uses labels for TYPE of move (Mass Control, Single Control, Area Attack, Single Attack, Mass Heal, Mass Cleanse etc) then Ai runs through a series of check and balances and favors the appropriate skill and if multiple skills are available then 50% chance of using either one so we still keep some randomness in the battles.

    posted in Monster Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @David-Mei Those are actually nice breakdowns and agree with you and Armor now that leaving at 60 does allow for more strategy and i like the 2 time use (1 cooldown) idea.

    I actually didn't mind the @ArmorGaming idea of 1 time use as well as I (Power of Fun) would love to battle someone like RV only being able to use the monsters 1 time so gems are not really a factor. But i think this would limit many people without big rosters. Again maybe if rarities were in play this would work so we could use epics and rares to attack and for even more strategy and spread out available options.

    Good ideas all around.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @C0ntr1v3d Nice post and I agree the event has great potential.

    Here are my thoughts.

    I think the Survival mode suggestion for offense will likely create some problems making too easy for just a few players to wipe an entire battleground with good turn transfer combo that can heal and revive or team ohk.

    For example we ripped through the bottom area with Demise -> DBG, second zone Ingenica and Zyla, third NBG and DBG, 4th Sammy -> Barbatos or Ingenica Zyla and could have easily just wiped out nearly every base with only a few people attacking. We drafted up attack plans and knew exactly what monsters to reserve for offense and it worked very well.

    We had everyone plan on doing 2 atttacks per zone and it kept gem costs way down. I was still at 10 gems to refresh by the end but would have been too easy (even versus top 10 team) if we could just reuse those monsters freely (as they rarely even took a hit).

    I agree the current format for refreshing was not good but i think it needs to be a happy medium like:

    1. You pay to refresh monsters (for that specific battleground) - once you move to a new battleground your monsters all available again.
    2. Refresh costs are per monster (as you suggested)
    3. Refresh costs don't scale exponentially

    Other suggestions/enhancements:


    1. Individual points need to be divided by offensive and defensive so we can see who is attacking actively
    2. Overall team points should show a breakdown:
      • Defense (setting)
      • Defense (defends)
      • Offense (base wins)
      • Offense (Battleground destroys)

      Grand Total
    3. Battle log would be nice for each zone

    Defense Strategy:

    1. Allow for Leads/Coleads (strategist) to choose from an available pool of defensive monsters and place where needed. So at the start of event a strategy is formed and each player reserves their offensive monsters. All non reserved monsters are available for defense and a key strategist can place bases where they like.
      1a. If not above (as this is fairly big change) - Allow for leads and coleads to delete players bases from battlegrounds if someone sets up wrong somewhere or if one person decides to fill up 20 bases in one zone at least a lead can remove some to make room for others.
      1b. If not 1 as well then make it so we can see what monster are left over for offense. We ran in to issues with players near the end of defense not knowing what monsters were actually left over for offense and had to go in to each zone to see.
    2. Possibly limiting it down to 30 bases per zone may allow for more strategy so its essentially 10 miniwars


    1. Not a fan that smaller teams still have to work just as hard but get smaller rewards.
    2. Personally, i thought the rewards for top teams were great as we only spent a couple hundred gems per player
    3. Rewards should be tiered so a losing team with at least even average participation still gets something. And could do a middle tier reward that is fairly easy to attain points wise and then a top tier reward that teams can work really hard for (full defense and nearly full offensive wipe)


    1. The event should be Opt-in as its a very strategy and participation intensive event. Some teams may just choose its not the right style for their team and thus should not be included in the pools.
    2. Agree it should be MP based.


    1. Consider being able to use rarity monsters (at least epics but Epics and Rares could be fun) but you get lower points on defense if you set a rarity. Offense you can use them (maybe bonus points if you use them on offense (this motivated players NOT to put super easy rare / epic bases as they will get even more points for using lower monsters to attack you)

    Refer to Discord. This includes all the issues with teams qualifying as I would consider this a bug.

    As a more strategic player I look forward to seeing this event evolve and SP and team did a good job from a development perspective just too bad lots of the issues weren't worked out in alpha so it would have been received a little more openly from the community.


    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @annihilator well I have proof otherwise and was already discussed with ur lead so we can stop the team jabs. This has nothing to do with teams.

    I agree ppl are owed a VIP. They are owed an apology too. My statement stands for all chests released for $$. The diamond relic chest is the biggest joke of them all.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @annihilator - lol I see ur still butt-hurt about your own team - can't even find it in the rankings. No need to attack me on a public forum however. I guess i should go post the chats i have from your player on AMAB bribing our players (13 years old) on Metaphysical Mobsters (sub 100 rank team) for private spreadsheets and info for AMAB's gain on a public forum now too. Talk about a team stooping low....

    Obviously the only way to get good relics is to buy chests - the golden relic chests are about the only way to attain the relics needed to compete - however buying any of the chests for $$ has proven to be a scam. Either locked rune slots on nemesis or crappy monsters like Lotan or Rabies in the Xmas chests - if there were any other way to attain the relics needed to compete outside of chests I wouldn't buy those either.

    That said, this post is about the Xmas chest in which i am recommended to not buy these chests or any other of the chests for $$$.

    Not sure why the rest needed to be said but if it makes you feel better then sure.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • amort3k

    @Fox you all have to get rid of these chests. It's terrible for the game. Countries all over the world are cracking down on them. Look at all the disgruntled patrons you just made over Christmas. Do away with these bloody scams please. You and your team know that this is not good for business. Please.

    We have all proven over the years we will pay but we MUST know what we are getting. You have even isolated the top players as we would never buy a chest when we have maxed monsters. I would never buy this as I would fear i would get a Zyla. What do i do if I have a 130 Zyla already? I can't even donated the cells. So now everyone gets a nice xmas offer except for me? Not cool and it's a total scam.

    Please people DO NOT BUY CHESTS!

    posted in General Discussion read more

Looks like your connection to Socialpoint Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.