"Faction" war | Forums

[ZoB.Raymond]

Okay so I just want to know, who, for the love of war, in the meetings you've done, bring the idea to matchmake everyone with everyone ?

What's the point of making a faction war feature, if you make everyone playing with everyone, and not against ? We are not playing against vikings and samourai's (yes, I'm knights), we are just helping them beating us. And they help us beating them. WTF is this ?

This is so absurd, useless and idiotic there is no word for it. That's the very first time I see that. "Hey guys, play our game there is a faction war ! But you will actually not compete against other you will compete with them !" .... Wut ? Really ?

And, for the oncoming people saying that this is for matchmaking efficiency purpose, no, please don't say that. This is also stupid. You pick a faction, you play with your friends not your ennemies. And this is in any other game.

There is less players in a faction ? Then what ? Is thy my fault ? Should I be helping my ennemies because they are fewers ? Well hell ****ing no ! Never have I seen this before ...

Lock the matchmaking. This is beyond ridiculous. Even if it's just for three poor crates and god knows what in the end.

[Stoges McDillin]

Tired of not winning because your a Knight or Samurai? Join Viking Faction, ITS NEVER TOO LATE! And when you do, Check out Viking Faction on Instagram! Send in vids, pics, and stats. Show off your skills fellow Raiders!

[Valtaya]

Tired of not winning because your a Knight or Samurai? Join Viking Faction, ITS NEVER TOO LATE! And when you do, Check out Viking Faction on Instagram! Send in vids, pics, and stats. Show off your skills fellow Raiders!

vikings are winning because the faction war is rigged
if you are proud of that
and if you think the vikings are so much better then samurai or knights
then I am realy happy for you
you will keep winning, because knights are incopetent, unskilled pussies
who joined the faction but actualy never play, and if they do, they are so bad, vikings and samurai have 10x higher scores and war assets to deploy
yah
thats it
definitely
.
.
.
not

In my games, at least 50% but mostly 62,5%+ are knights, and although they rank the worst per match, they also rank the best, vikings and samura being in the middle, all the time. And although I am not everyone, the number of matches I finished gives a rough estimate statistics. I do not know your math, but in my book knights should be winning, but they are not. Either A) they are too stupid to deplo war assets, or B) the faction thing is rigged.

Whatever, enjoy the faction war, whether you are winning or losing. Maybe one day the faction war will mean something.

Edit: I do not even know why I reply to threads like this, by now everyone should know this faction war is a total nonsense and rigged, be it the knights whining because of losing or vikings boasting because they are winning. Talking to this people is just as fruitful as talking to someone who thinks 60bucks initial cost will pay for dedicated servers (lol).

[Jobsalot]

So if I get OP's complaint right the issue is that the faction members should be strictly fighting for their faction, meaning knights only for knights, vikings only for vikings, samurai only for samurai.

That is actually a logical approach but on the other hand it only allows for a very very limited number of match-up scenarios because ultimately you will always face the same constellation of warriors being pitted against each other. That gets absolutely stale after one or two weeks tops and would just put the nail in the coffin of this very young game.

Of course it pains me to sometimes see a match where the opposing side is losing to my team and I am the only knight in a horde of vikings yet the enemy team is entirely based on members of "my" faction. It seems unfair. But ultimately I try to see it like this: the winner gets the benefit of more points and the right to decide where to put them on the war table.

(That the faction war is flawed in itself and the loser side still earns war resources to spend for themselves is an entirely different issue).

[RicWalker525]

So if I get OP's complaint right the issue is that the faction members should be strictly fighting for their faction, meaning knights only for knights, vikings only for vikings, samurai only for samurai.

That is actually a logical approach but on the other hand it only allows for a very very limited number of match-up scenarios because ultimately you will always face the same constellation of warriors being pitted against each other. That gets absolutely stale after one or two weeks tops and would just put the nail in the coffin of this very young game.

Of course it pains me to sometimes see a match where the opposing side is losing to my team and I am the only knight in a horde of vikings yet the enemy team is entirely based on members of "my" faction. It seems unfair. But ultimately I try to see it like this: the winner gets the benefit of more points and the right to decide where to put them on the war table.

(That the faction war is flawed in itself and the loser side still earns war resources to spend for themselves is an entirely different issue).

No, you missunderstood and i try to clarify:

Let's take a dominion game as example:

Attackers and defenders are seperated by joined Faction.

So attackers are only players that joined the Samurai and the defenders are only Vikings. What characters the attackers and defenders can play in that game is not restricted.

That way players of other factions wont gain war assets if you win the match as it currently is.

For example my last dominion game was on my attackers side 2 vikings, 1 knight and 1Samurai (me) funny thing was: we played as 2 wardens, 1 valkyrie and 1 orochi (me). thanks to the equipment imbalance i was able to carry that game with scoring 16-1 KD and such the 3 other factioned players got the war points for my hard work. it would have felt more like a victory if that war points would have distributed to players of my own faction.

[Mothsinger]

Thats really the smallest issue I have with all this. Why did we fight for over two weeks, when only the results of the last hours decide who wins the round?!

[Valtaya]

Thats really the smallest issue I have with all this. Why did we fight for over two weeks, when only the results of the last hours decide who wins the round?!

Why do you think only the last 2 hours were important?
If I got it right, with the last territory update (round end), samurai had more terrotories then knights, but still ended 3rd. Whether the game counts terrotories aftert each update or war assets deployed is irrelevant, if you do nothing for 2 weeks, do you think you will make up in the last 2 hours? If so, think again.

Btw I do not think a "true" faction war where a team is setup only by one faction (with all heroes available, I get that) will work. From my observation: during CET day mostly knights play, during CET night mostly vikings play, during CET morning mostly samurai play... there is a huge dicrepancy between faction members playing at all and during diferent hours of day. With that in mind, there will always be a faction that will actualy get no matches or play vs bots. And although lvl 2/3 bots are annoying, they can not replace a good player. So during day we get 4 knights vs 2 vikings + 2 bots or 2 samurai + 2 bots, during night we get 4 vikings vs 2 knights + 2 bots or 2 samurai or 2 bots and during the morning hours we get 4 samura vs 3 knights + 1 bot or 3 vikings + 1 bot... look who is at an disadvantage here. Unless you find a way how Ubisoft can balance this out, there is no "true faction war" going to happen.

[Mothsinger]

So, you think the territories shown at the end were only the average cut of the entire round? If it is like that, I take back what I said. Problem is we don't get any official info from Ubi how stuff actually works.

[Gray360UK]

Not sure where all the confusion about how the round ended is coming from.

This is how it was looking in the final turn:



and so this is how it ended:



At one point about an hour before the end of the turn the Vikings were -6, then closer to the end they were -3, then -4, then back to -3
In other words it was very nearly a Viking / Knight tie.
It is literally what happened in the final turn that decided it.
But of course the territories you started with in the final turn were based on the previous turn or two.

[CaptainLeowtha]

vikings are winning because the faction war is rigged
if you are proud of that
and if you think the vikings are so much better then samurai or knights
then I am realy happy for you
you will keep winning, because knights are incopetent, unskilled pussies
who joined the faction but actualy never play, and if they do, they are so bad, vikings and samurai have 10x higher scores and war assets to deploy
yah
thats it
definitely
.
.
.
not

In my games, at least 50% but mostly 62,5%+ are knights, and although they rank the worst per match, they also rank the best, vikings and samura being in the middle, all the time. And although I am not everyone, the number of matches I finished gives a rough estimate statistics. I do not know your math, but in my book knights should be winning, but they are not. Either A) they are too stupid to deplo war assets, or B) the faction thing is rigged.

Whatever, enjoy the faction war, whether you are winning or losing. Maybe one day the faction war will mean something.

Edit: I do not even know why I reply to threads like this, by now everyone should know this faction war is a total nonsense and rigged, be it the knights whining because of losing or vikings boasting because they are winning. Talking to this people is just as fruitful as talking to someone who thinks 60bucks initial cost will pay for dedicated servers (lol).

Do you have any proof of this so called 'rigged faction war', or are you just upsetti spaghetti that Vikings are winning over the cancerjaps and knights?