Battle Arena Discussion

Thanks all for the continued discussion, please keep all posts related to your battle arena experiences feedback and suggestions.

XP: we are fine tuning the xp payout formula and the rewards should be more aligned in the next arena
Start times: unfortunately we cannot have different start times for different people, what we are planning on once the feature is stable is scheduled start times weekly or bi-weekly which willl hopefully give everyone an optimal start opportunity in an arena
Help: this is on the list to update, currently the help was available in your profile when clicking the perk learn more, we'll update the links so they're more visible during gameplay as well the language for better clarity.
Global Feed / Spectator View: it was mentioned that there was nothing to do while people were in the arena except stare at a blank leaderboard. We do have a spectator view with global feed developed but exposing this information could affect the outcome in the arena. This is up for discussion. Another idea is to populate the leaderboard as people leave. Note that our priority right now is getting the gameplay solid.
Trophies and better final rewards: we're working on it!

 

People in top 100 that did not take part

Is possible, but also I like the suggestions about initial health or .... how about that if you win battles you get some health (i.e. you take a proportion of the health you kicked off your battle partner). Not too much of course ... but .... it would mean that there is an incentive to battle. Or .... an automatic decrement to health over time if you have not taken part. For example, the game last 3 days..... if you do not battle in a 12 hour period you lose 25% of your health. 12 hours is probably OK, ... longer than sleep time and would not penalize people that play before and after they go to work but would hurt those that do not play. Or make it 18 hours and 33% health loss. No automatic death .... set it up so someone who has not played is week after a day in to the game so they are naturally killed off by the active players. Essentially ... someone that does not play .... should not make the top 100.... they should be fodder for those that do play.

Getting kills was tough ..... lots of lurkers ..... I saw many people being beat down and they would have say 20 battle per minute ... but when they got down to sub 100M ..... it would jump. I know that is a feature and it is understandable .... but maybe add to someones attack strength some delta for how many attacks they have had against this particular viking. More attacks ... more beat down strength against that opponent.... if you decide to hit at the end ... with say sub 10 attacks ... you have weak (or relativity weak) strength so less likely to get the kill.... if you do the work ... at least have more chance of getting the reward.

Also .... in the battle list ... why not rank people by the time they last interacted in the game. The active people then ... early on probably would not get attacked too much ... but those that sit outside .... would be. Again an incentive to play and would probably mean that irrespective of changes to initial health ... someone that signs up and never plays will not make it to to last 100. Those that attack, will probably get attacked back from who they attack. Point is to find a way to hurt those that are not active. If you spend the time ... you should be in it for a while. I saw people in my guild that are pretty strong but dead in few hours because "they played", but people in the top 100 that did not play at all. THIS DOES NOT FEEL RIGHT. Find a way to value those that play. Keep active people in the game longer. Kill of the non-players quicker (even the strong ones).

Anyway ... a good idea to have the arena.... above are ideas, some are probably mutually exclusive or should not all be implemented together. BASE REQUEST: I do think that you should get a benefit from taking part and being active ..... reduce the value of lurking and find a way to kill off those that sign up and do not play .... IRRESPECTIVE of how strong they are in the base game. Thanks for creating the Arena.

 

Just wondering: what the f... those two last places do? Its been like 2-3 days there... and no result.

 

I agree with Lawskar but I do not think he goes far enough. KANO/APPS need to think outside the box on this. I know I'll be considered a heretic for saying this but sometimes you just have to say stuff that may upset people in order to advance. My first suggestion is, as sub level 1240 players are excluded because things would have to be skewed too much in order to accommodate them, why not exclude very high level players (VHL) because their inclusion gives them quite an advantage when measured on the current scale. Having them around is like have Usain Bolt take part in a grade/primary school race. Yes he may not win but only a fool would bet on this outcome

My second suggestion would be that since the Arena is set outside of the main game there is no reason why it should not be as fair as possible. Yes I know that once again I am advocating heresy by suggesting fairness but I play this game for fun, not to get battered by some player 4 - 5 times my size. So, to start with, forget about actual stats. give each player stats in proportion to the way they have allocated their skill points.

Eg. For a Skill Point distribution of: Energy 13%, Health 22%, Stamina 21%, Attack 24%, Defence 20% this would be worked out work out as say:

(Initial) Health = max_poss_health x 0.22

(Initial) Tokens = max_initial_tokens x 0.2 (stamina)

Base Attack = max_poss_base_attack x .24

Base Defense = max_poss_base_defense x 0.20

also

Token Regen Time = base_token_regen_time x 0.22 (health)


for

max_poss_health of 5,000,000 Initial Health = 1,100,000

max_poss_tokens of 1,000 Tokens = 200

max_poss_base_attack of 5,000 Base Attack = 1,200

max_poss_base_defense of 5,000 Base Defence = 1,000

token_regen_time of 180 secs Token Regen Time = 39.6= 40 seconds (max tokens holdable is 1.5 x initial value)

Attack = Base Attack + personal loadout total for attack

Defence = Base Defense+ personal loadout total for defence

Winning attack gives fixed .5% XP required to level (plus the chance of battle drop), losing .1% of level XP.

An attack locks out other players from attacking the same target for 2 second.

Attack token can be purchased at 1 for 10 stamina or 100 for 5 FP

Defensive stance as per original system. All players start a new Battle Arena in Defensive Stance which lasts for 2 hours unless, of course, you switch it off.

So the only real stats used are the personal loadout values which gives a nod the VHL players.


For my next trick I will be solving the banking crisis.

 

Speaking as tweedle dumb, lol, I hope you have read all the posts here to help answer your question about being attacked and you being clueless. Too, you could have just read up on the arena before you entered and saved all your insults and whining and had your answer. You dropped the ball. We ALL had the same information available to us, just have to learn how to operate your pc. There's a little thing called a scroll bar that allows us all to scroll down, hit the refresh button and see if we are being attacked. But perhaps that was too much high tech for you? Now you need a banner to spell it out for you? LOL

As for fair, how is that even part of the equation in a battle arena? ALL is fair. The only goal is to win. This isn't Parcheesi where we all take turns.....it's a fight to the death.

As for having kills "stolen" at the last second, (mentioned in other posts) whoever said for one to think of it as a bounty kill was using an apt comparison. When a bounty is put up, you can be on it all the way down and someone else gets it on the last hit. Same thing in the arena. I had MANY taken that way too. We all did. Stop crying about it and figure a way to improve your odds. I did.

Instead of complaining about the arena, which, btw, was a noble effort on Kano's part, why not learn and adapt? That is how you should be playing both in and out of the arena. That's how I got where I am.....not by insulting and crying.
That is what losers do. Winners adapt. And if you can't do that, maybe change your name to Olaf the Mediocre?

 

If I look at the results of the 1st Battle Arena on MS, I can say that having a strategy as everybody says you need, is totally worthless. Proof is that 12 players in the Top 20 did not even play (0 attacks). What strategy is that, unless they told the #1 & 2 of this battle their nick name, so they would spare them and kill them last.
Maybe the best strategy is ----> having NO strategy---<
XP (86-100) is so bad, it is not worth to attack anybody at all (I get 250-530 XP from attacking players in regular game) I saw they have addressed it somewhat, but have to see what it will be in the next arena (if I decide to join)

 

If the Battle Arena is a rockn....dont bother knockn! lol The result was awesome!

 

I totally disagree. Since when has strategy every insured success? Whos to say one strategy is better than another ...until it plays out? Because a strategy works one time does it mean it will work the next? I also think that no one strategy is going to work for all players, there are way to many variables....obviously a level 1240 is going to need a diff strategy than a level 5k, just as players of the same level but totally diff builds will need differing strategies.

As far as your comments about the top 20....yes, we did know who many of them were and left them alone. Good strategy on their part ...I would say. Perhaps Im wrong....but my guess would be that if u new who certain players were...u would not of attacked them either. In the last 150 or so players....we purposefully hunted down those who were the least active...this proved daunting as most had never swung their ax and it boiled down to either who gave the best XP or we simply didnt like their name as much as another one.

Strategy abounds in the arena.....the #1 player by nearly 2k levels fared very badly as well as many of the other top players. JJ and I went in with a very specific strategy and contingency plans had the original not worked out. We have no idea whether we will compete again but I assure u our strategy will be modified if we do. Just like in the main game.....predictable usually ends badly

 

Ty for deleting all the crappy posts including mine.

Glad to hear the rewards are being worked on. My rewards were 25fp, 190t and a levels worth of XP. It took approx 100 FP to get the job done and could have easily been more had we chosen to battle one another. It could have also taken much less due to the lack of activity.......but we kinda liked the idea of only two left standing so we were willing to spend the FP. I could spend less FP and get more money from the lottery, get more XP outside the arena for less FP. It almost seemed the battle drops had a better drop rate than usual but Im yet to go over the numbers in detail. Even if the drop rate was better......I only saw one that was of much use to us at our level. Even when battling each other there was 4 diff drops but only one that was of any real help. 1 good drop outta the 4 available at that drop rate did not make up for the lack of XP ,stam usage or time.

Love the idea of populating the leader board. Still wary of a feed but look forward to it on a trial basis.

 

I like the idea of being penalized health for inactivity. i would go even further and say it should happen more often then the increments u mentioned but in smaller amounts of health lost. I think many will take issue with this as there already seems to be a lot of controversy over start times and whether some can make it on time. Personally I have no issue with the start times....if u sign up.....then its on the player whether they can or cant show up. Its a fine line to be walked here...we want player participation but it does suck that those who do nothing in many cases do better than those that actively participate. But with that said....there are those that did participate early on who simply had a poor strategy and it was the reason they were knocked out early, I myself was one of them in the PC battle arena.

I dont agree with the lurking thing though. In the early stages I myself lost out on far more kills than I actually got, it was frustrating as heck.....but it was what it was. In the end I think it actually added to the excitment and to strategy. I think its actually a good thing for the lower levels as it gives them a fighting chance to gain health, not because of stamina (they can refill like anyone else) but because they tend to lose more battles, once they attack someone...theres a good chance they are gonna get taken down real quick. If I were a lower level....I would lurk all day until i built my health up and then when it got closer to the end hopefully i would have amassed enough health to withstand/outlast a more powerful player who began the arena with more health.

I also like something along the lines of ranking by activity. Once again this may not be liked by those who do not or can not show up on time.....but then again thats on them. I think that ducking and dodging is a legitimate strategy, but theres a big diff between that and doing absolutely nothing. After my partner in crime and I killed off most we deemed as a threat and gained what we felt was enough health we actually hunted the less active in hopes more active players would move up in the ranks. Not sure it worked all that well....by far the majority was inactive.

 

This is NOT a complaint, merely a comment: The Battle Arena opened when North Americans were at work or getting ready to leave for work. How many were dead already by the time they got home? May I suggest rotating start times? Some to favor the Europeans, the Aussies, and the North Americans.

 

I think your idea is well intended and you obviously put a lot of thought into it but in its current form I just cant get on board. I understand your intent is to make it "fair" and Im cool with that. At first glance it did seem that SP allocation percentage would be the way to go but then I realized that it really didnt take into consideration how ones level can dictate their skill point allocation. At the higher levels there is much more need for stamina than at the lower levels, basing things on percentage would in most cases would give the lower levels a distinct advantage over their higher leveled counterparts. I really like where your going with this but in my opinion needs a lil tweaking to make it truly fair.

As far as excluding higher levels ....thats just ridiculous. Yes, players less than level 1240 are ineligible but like many aspects of Kano games as well as most others nobody gets an "all access" pass from the get go, things need to be unlocked and earned, the promise of whats next is what keeps players moving forward. The highest of levels are the players that have been through the most....to exclude them from anything would be a slap in the face and should be a sign to every lower leveled player to not bother trying to advance. One of the things that always makes me laugh is when lower leveled players whine about new content for the highest of levels ....citing they should have new content instead. Do they not realize they still have a ton of content thats new to them that they havent gotten to yet? And that every bit of content that is added for the higher levels is actually added for them as well, all they gotta do is keep leveling and they to will eventually unlock it just like every high level had to when they were at that level.


Once again nice post.

 

once stable are you going to use the bot detecting math equation in the arena?

 

wow polishpimp you realy are a heretic lol how dare you sugests a kano game that is fair and stops high lvl players bullying low lvl players lol.

 

Hi Arena players and kano dev's
i like arena and im sure there will be more new stuff comming up there..
some players got more kills than player in 3rd place ( have 1 kill LOL) ...>
i would like to see arena leader board for kills /wins also... and rewards for them also
and how about arena axe slap you can do it once for each player and if you get axe kill that will give you some special drop ?

also i think if there is fight between two players, than other players cant attack them till they stop attacking each other for 10 seconds that way other players cant take away kill attack away from player that took his rivals health away 90% or less..

sorry i didnt have time to read this threads- all comments .. just my quick feedback here ..

 

Can agree with separate leaderboards.That would be nice.

 

I love the Battle Arena, but would change one thing if I could: I would start up the countdown to a new battle immediately after the last battle ended. This would give us about one battle per week, instead of wating around for the next battle to begin, whenever that will be.

 

Thanks for proving a point Pimp and JJ.Very wrong but if Kano doesn't change that,i believe we'll be seeing more of what you 2 did.

 

I like the idea of more leader boards and battle arena slaps. My question would be whether or not the additional leaderboard would be updated and visible during the arena battle itself? If it was visible and constantly updated it would almost work as a feed as a player could see who is doing what. I would think this combined with the search box is going to paint a target on the more active players back. The only issue I have with this is that there is already a lack of active players, it almost seems that this would promote hiding by more players.


Dont agree with only one player being allowed to attack another at a time. As it stands now lurking allows the lower levels a more realistic shot at gaining some health. Tag teaming also allows the opportunity for lower levels to band together and take down a more powerful opponent. Not sure I want to take away the lower levels best chances of moving up the ranks.

 

What was your point that we proved?

Are u implying that not killing each other off was somehow wrong? Are u saying that wasting a ton of stamina even though there was already a clear cut winner would have somehow made more sense? There was zero chance JJ could have beat me at that point....It would have been utterly pointless other than to pad stats. Considering that the battle arena is in beta I guess a player could also look at it as we did Kano and its players a favor by testing the scenario of time running out and there still being multiple players left.

Because of the massive inactivity of players the same scenario could have easily turned out the same way but on a much larger scale, there could have literally been dozens if not more left alive while still ending with the same result. If the issue of inactivity is not addressed Im positive u will see this same result time and time again. If more players arent out there eliminating more players you r gonna end up with the same thing every time....a couple of active players winning followed by a sea of inactive. If u have a solution to this I m sure we would all love to hear it. I myself would have preferred to have been battling it out for real right up to the end.

I would also remind you that I offered Kano here in the forums to go ahead and take JJ out if it would somehow make it better for them or the players