Battle Arena Discussion

hmmmm I think that is gonna be my strategy in the next arena, this way I don't waste my precious stamina, good deal

 

I am keen to understand how the starting position for health was calculated. If it is a refection of your health position in the main game then there will only ever be one winner. I understand about the perks and how that helps to boost your stats, but a level 5000 with average health is always going to last longer than a level 2000, no matter how your stats are balanced. Perhaps there should be a starting value of 10T health which gets modified by your % Skill point allocation and then boosted by your loadout. Or maybe that's kinda how it works already...??

I finished in the middle 200's which i was quite pleased with seeing as i hardly participated, due to time constaints over the weekend. (126 attacks, 166 wins 818 losses; 750 odd of these were consecutive from Nino to kill me off, ha ha ) Anyway, it looks like the people who stay quiet and do not participate are less likely to be attacked and will end up finishing up the rankings, whilst the ones who participate are more likely to be retaliated upon and end up losing out faster.... and the ones with the big level positions like Nino, Susie, Phil, Sean and Donna will always get to the top.

Perhaps your attack strength could increase with the number of attacks you make (this might stop the non-participants from rising to the top)

I do like the feature, the nicknames are a good idea, IMO, and I will sign up for the next one.

Just my thoughts, anyway, feel free to shoot me down. LOL.
ATB

Jason

 

One of our members John Diamond came 60th and he only just reached level 1000, its all about how strategic you are, a lot of the top players were working in teams to co-ordinate attacks and who should get the kill, i saw quite a few spending a tone on refills which pretty much you do not need to do, i didn't spend 1 gf point on that and i feel my reward was worth it, my health was just under 900,bill to start off with but i could see many people who are lower then me and having more health then me, as i said its how strategic you are, get a game plan and stick to it.
Anyway congrats on your rank dude hope you have more time do better next time

 

It will be interesting to see how or even if Kano deals with what many have deemed an issue of inactive players finishing high in the rankings. Ive been thinking about it quite a bit and I really dont see an easy and fair solution. There is also an argument that its a perfectly legitimate strategy.

I think that most of us including Kano would like to see more of the active players get higher in the rankings and the corresponding rewards as I believe the arenas target audience was the more aggressive/active player and when most of us envision a battle arena we picture everyone just going at it in a massive bloodbath.


But how do u go about this without penalizing a bunch of players that simply cant be there or dont have the stamina refill capacity of others? This has been partially addressed by Kano in that they have stated they will be alternating starts by time zones once the arena is a bit more stable in an effort to give all those across the globe a realistic chance at getiing to the arena on time giving them at least a chance to play.

All the arenas Ive been a part of (3) have pretty much been what most of us envisioned....pure chaos and an all out blood bath with most of its players being killed within just a few hours of the start. It would be interesting to know what average percentage of players were actually there and actively playing at or near the start times.

Obviously there is an abundance of strategy that can be utilized in the arena, multiple different strategies that are largely dependent on ones level or more accurately their arena stats/numbers such as health, attack etc etc.. I realize the arena is new and everyone is anxious to get in there as mix it up and because of this I dont think there is a whole lot of strategy being employed at this time. Maybe it would be more accurate to say there is just a lot of incorrect strategy being employed? Until one has experienced the arena a few times and has had some successes and failures its gonna be tough to figure out a strategy that works for them.

With all that said....theres also the random luck of the draw factor, Its very likely that at some point your gonna end up in the sights of a more powerful opponent right off the get go, If this happens its most likely your not gonna make it to far, sure that sucks.....buts its just the way it is. Those with lower heath need to be a bit more selective with who they continue to attack, One could argue that they should hang low in effort to fly under the radar and hope to advance in the rankings by pure chance/luck but thats not gonna get u any of the uber important health your gonna need at some point if u want to go much further. My thoughts would be that a player with less impressive stats should be playing the "lurker/poacher" role and be out there stealing kills gaining health while maintaining as low a profile as possible. With that said though.....be prepared to have hit the wrong player b4 u have strengthened your own account.

For me it makes perfect sense with the high number of inactive players that so many end up ranking pretty well. Like I said previously....I think many who shouldnt be as aggressive as the are in the early stages are out there killing each other off or at least putting a significant dent in ones health which makes them an obvious target for those looking to save on stamina and/or their health. Then u have playesr like me (depending on the game)who in addition to looking for the easy kill and corresponding health reward is also looking for the players with uber high health or ultra active players so as to take them out early in effort to keep them becoming an even tougher opponent down the road. Leaving nothing but mostly inactives that have luckily flown under the radar and pose no real threat toward the end because they havent amassed any additional health.


So do we penalize players who dont participate as much or not at all? There accounts are sitting there as vulnerable as anyone else to being picked off and dont offer any type of retaliation, doesnt this help the little guy who has lesser numbers to begin with? Where do we draw the line of whats strategic and whats not? How many offensive attacks need there be to be considered "active" and eligible for rewards? Or do we leave it as it is and leave it up to the players that are actively participating to weed them out? Personally I think if better strategy was utilized by some of the less powerful players than the inactives would actually be a benefit for many players and we would see far less of them appearing in the top ranks.



Its ironic that we see many players complaining because they are killed off early due to inactivity because they simply couldnt be there on time, yet on the other hand we have a large number of players complaining that to many "inactives" are making it to the higher ranks. It seems we just have way to many inactive players (once again it would be nice to know the percentage of idle players). I guess that leaves the question....how do we get more players to participate more than just signing up? Obviously we will always have some idle players due to start times, but that has/will be addressed to some extent. But even with that.....I will imagine there will be some arenas that will have many more inactive players depending on which time zone gets the start and which timezone contains the most players.

So the question is....how do we get players that are available to participate to do so? Especially when weve already seen that many idle players can be very successful. I guess the obvious answer would be to give them more of incentive as it seems a large portion of players actually feel they have no real shot or a better shot if they do nothing. Yes, we have battle drops and the XP has been increased so hopefully that will have a positive affect, but I have a feeling its not gonna be enough.

There has been talk of achievements and leader boards and perhaps thats the answer. The achievements would need to have much smaller spacing between them then regular in-game achievements so as to spur players on to keep actively playing, not only in the current arena but future arenas as well. Obviously a large increase in achievements might send the game outta whack if skill points were involved but there are many other things that could be rewarded for them that Im sure players would love to have and may very well spur them forward such as ...gold, FP, limited items etc etc. Make achievements frequent but small and ever increasing in value. Have them carry over from one arena to the next to promote continued participation.

I think in the end we dont need to penalize those that cant show up on time or those that choose purposefully to fly under the radar. Rather give them a reason to keep joinng and to make an extra effort to be there and to participate more. Even with this there will still be players that simply cant show upon time due to more important things and unfortunately many will be killed off before they log on, but instead of a leaving completely sour taste in there mouth....maybe they will be pleasantly surprised to find that it took a 1k hits to kill them and that they still managed to survive a couple hours which netted them a couple of achievements for the wins they did manage and their time survived. Maybe then they would be willing to keep coming back, win or lose.

 

For the next arena:
-after 10 hours from arena start, if you don't have at least 100 attacks, your health will drop by half
-if the arena ends, or you are killed and you don't have at least 100 attacks you will not be ranked

Feel free to discuss!

 

100 attacks isnt alot i think after 10 hrs more like 250 attacks

 

This a great move. TY! with that said...100 does seems be a bit low...especially if it the arena lasts the full 3 days. perhaps a 100 or a lil more per day? That way if it ends like it did in MS VC it would be more likely the truly active would rank higher and there wouldnt be a bunch of friends who got there 100 hits off each other and then went inactive who rank among the highest

 

The original specification called for at least 200 attacks every 10 hours for the duration of the entire arena. The plan is to slowly introduce this and monitor the stats and outcome, this is why we've halved it and will only be doing the first check at 10 hours. We're essentially going from nothing to something, so we'd like to see some data and get some feedback after this next arena.

 

Thats makes perfect sense. Its almost as if youve done this before...lol. Ty for addressing the issue and the reply.

 

I agree completely on the attacks. I noticed in the arena of my respective game there were a bunch of players that never made one single attack but made it all the way down to the bottom of the arena and almost won it but glad they did not. It may have been strategy but it is called battle arena for a reason not hide and go seek.

 

I agree that there must be a minimum number of attacks, but we must remember about the staggered start times. Lets take this first one as an example: Uk start time Friday 10.00 pm. if i was out, lets say with the family, i would miss the initial 10 hour period because the chances of me playing before 8.00am the next morning would be slim. So what about a minimum level in the first 24 hours, reducing and reducing (to no less than 8 hours) till the end of the Arena battle time?

 

14


Im all for staggering the start times and what not but lets not get carried away, its simply not going to be possible to appease everyone. Your example of spending time with your family, its nice that you want to spend time with your family and all.....but should that really be a consideration on how Kano determines a start time? Regardless of time zone....everybody has different schedules and obligations.....Kano obviously cant appease everyone unless they started each arena 1 hr later each time for 24 times....basically that way every one should have an optimal start time once every 24 arenas, and every one would complain about the other 23 start times....lol.


Honestly....I think Kano should just have 4 different start times 6 hrs apart, that will give everbody in the world an opportunity to get on and play well within the 10 hr window. No.....its not gonna be optimal for everyone but it still gives a legitimate shotif you really want to be on right when it starts. Its important to remember that its just a game and Kano can only do so much. If u like the game and want to play the game its up to u to make time for the game....not the other way around.

I wish they would play the Superbowl at a different time because i have to work late and will miss the first quarter......Somehow I dont see that happening just for lil ole me.

 

I enjoyed the Battle Arena. I had some "kills" stolen, but simply killed the persons that stole it. The BA is a stamina "Hog".. Hey, I'm not one to throw rocks, just stating a fact. Nino got me when I had to get some sleep, Shhhhhhh, it happens. Congrats "big Guy", kinda figured it would come out with you on top.. All in all, A "thumbs up" from me.

 

When is the next Battle Arena going to be?

 

The only issue that I experienced that has not really been mentioned already is that there is absolutely no defence against being ganged up on by three or more players. I was doing reasonably well until suddenly 3 players simultaneously attacked me over 1500 times in a few minutes. Going into defensive mode for this was useless, and only added a minute or two to how long it took them to get the kill. To help prevent a single player being ganged up on by a pre-arranged team, why not think about including a "fully inactive mode" that might last say one hour, during which time you are totally out of the game - you cannot attack or be attacked. That would force such tag teams to find other targets, and they might forget about you giving you a chance to continue on. You could have the option to terminate the mode early, but not re-enable it for at least 30 minutes once ended.

It could be an option that only becomes available when you have already been attacked by multiple players, say at least 25 times each in a short space of time and is not otherwise available. That way it could not be used by people simply to hide out, but only to terminate serious multiple attacks.

I can see that any players that get ganged up on like this are unlikely to want to play again, and to make it work you need more active players, not fewer.

 

Has to be a better option than playing with health at the start of an Arena.
Well done, whoever came up with that idea.

 

I just checked the arena to see what was going on and noticed that in really really really small letters that something has been added.

For 1st -3rd place: 2x XP, 6x Strength in battles

4th -5th: 1.8x XP, 4.5x Strength in battles
6th - 10th: 1.6x XP, 2.5x Strength in battles

etc.

What is this, how does it work?

 

I agree that the defense thing could use a little tinkering but not necessarily for all the same reasons. Even if one has substantial Defense that equates to a decent amount of time in "defensive stance". once they time out they are sitting ducks. Personally...every player that used their D-stance on me went to my save list and I checked them regularly, as soon as they popped their heads up they were totally defenseless and they were next to be killed.


I would prefer that we could turn our defense off and on at will. How ever much time we used while it was on could be subtracted from our total. This would add much more strategy and really get ion some players nerves while offering the little guy a bit more of a chance. Perhaps include a way to earn little bits of extra defense time while playing in the arena, this might also help with getting players to be more active if they could actually earn extra defense which would give them a better shot at moving up the ranks.

 

When can we expect the next arena?

 

Tuesday 10am PDT.