View Full Version : faction war just rng of who did the worst on the second to last round?

02-12-2017, 10:47 PM
alright so first things first, despite conflicting answers the current thing i am seeing is that here in13 minutes the server will go down and this current round will give out the points and the winner will be decided, which in this case means that vikings win by a landslide.

my problem is this, why did the vikings start with such a headstart over the knights? the territory to defend started off 45% for the knights and 55 for the vikings, with a 2 hour period of time, how were the knights supposed to defend? it feels like the victory was just handed to the vikings for no reason with them going from last to first in the matter of minutes with no chance at the knights OR the samurai to make a comeback.

as for the percent gap, the only thing i can think of is its suppose to stop a faction from just being pushed out of the running all-together, but that means that when all the factions are close like they were the round before this, then the winning strategy is to lose the second to last round and then zerg the final 6 hour period and abuse the headstart you got off of your "loss"

either way whats done is done, this whole faction war system is pretty stupid, at best its a popularity contest, at worst its all going to come down to when in the day the round ends and who lost the second to last round....

02-13-2017, 04:46 AM
Judge the numbers for yourself http://imgur.com/mkF0VSY

02-13-2017, 04:47 AM
Judge the numbers for yourself http://imgur.com/mkF0VSY

It appears there are two issues at play: A misunderstanding of victory conditions and a dispute over where to mark the finish line.

First, lets tackle the most important going forward.

Many of you appear to be getting hung up on War Assets, believing that a poorly worded info-graphic proves Vikings should have won because they had a small lead (e.g. http://i.imgur.com/AN9Ugfy.jpg). In that same picture, it also says that War Assets "are given to distribute to your Faction to control territories." They are essentially equivalent to the Popular Vote in the US Presidential election system in determining the outcome of the Electoral College. You get so many votes based on how well and how often you perform. You then use those votes in specific territories with the hopes that enough like-minded individuals also vote in those same territories to out-perform the other teams. There is another forum post which also explains this a little more simply: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...ow-Knights-won

Anybody who truly believes the outcome should be based on total overall War Assets is naive, while everybody else is just being dishonest. If it were all about cumulative War Assets, what would be the point of fighting for territories to begin with, if not to hold the largest kingdom when the dust settles?

Second issue isn't as important as it only happened in a time-definite pre-release version.

Many of you alternately rely on an argument that the final decision should include a partial turn. I think this is a valid point, as it is perfectly reasonable to expect the gameplay to matter up to the last moments. However, in a Beta state you all agreed before every log-in that you understood this was not a final product. You even agreed that you understand the game might not work at all. The game mechanics are not designed to count a partial round, as for example there are bonuses that come into play before the closing of each which influences decision-making and War Asset placement. There may be other calculations that are not as obvious which are done in order to determine outcomes. It would have been just as valid to argue against counting a partial round had we seen an alternate conclusion method to the Open Beta.

This is not some great, botched massive failure of a Beta conclusion. It was actually very successful. No matter the timing, there had to be a cutoff and there is frankly not a lot of time before the real game goes live. It has already been manufactured and shipped. There is probably a lot of data that the developers collected during this Beta that they are using to tweak what they can within a pretty much 2-day window.

02-13-2017, 04:48 AM
The tears of the losers are delicious. Get over it. Not only are you crying about a video game, you are crying about an incredibly small, unimportant aspect of said game

02-13-2017, 05:08 AM
How can you say its an incredibly small unimportant part of the game when it is literately one of the selling points of the game. You know 3 factions pitted in an endless war? Let me rephrase your narcissistic post. "I don't care about the faction war, but I am happy the game is broken and my faction lucked out."

02-13-2017, 05:15 AM
Eh, let it go man. The Knights won a gaudy, dumb looking emblem outline. That's it.

02-13-2017, 05:20 AM

the people who chose a faction w/out any actual interest in the outcome won!!!!!!!

no one who chose knights (at least no one who chose the faction who had any prior knowledge of the closed beta outcome), had any expectation of winning

also means the reward (the awesome gold emblem outline of IDGAF) is a rarity so again i say to you