Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

General topics, questions, suggestions, bugs, or anything Star Wars Commander related.
User avatar
lukeskywalker
Commodore
Posts: 158

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#31 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:31 pm

I suspect a big part of medal dumping is not fear or being scared of competing. I know some people just enjoy pushing other peoples buttons, but I like to look at the logic aspect of decision making. For many It's a pragmatic solution, driven by those wanting to finish in the top 2% of conflicts, within a set amount of attacks (time constraints). More so when conflict rewards are non-linear, and it effectively becomes an all or nothing event. This last conflict, the rewards were more linear, which I think gives more incentive for casual players to participate and less insane volume at the top. In essence, overall volume may possibly drop, but more players are participating. I also think it's a way for new players to ease into higher levels. They have come on board after the guard reserve and jet/jump skins were introduced. They are playing behind. Sandbagging allows them to catch up in a short period of time, and then fully level up when the playing field is a little more level. And the reality is, the playing field is almost never level. The armory ensures that, not to mention the special units that are unlocked. Let's face it, the game is geared toward placing high value on conflict frags and unlocks to drive crystal purchases. Logically, players will take paths that allow them the quickest avenue to conflict crates, preferably UC crates. The game provides very little reward for medals, except to the extent medals can impact conflict points, and that is mitigated by the negative aspects like matchmaking issues.

Here's the pragmatic part. Assuming in rounded numbers, that a Prestige base gets 1000 conflict points or less for an attack win and a level 6 gets 300 conflict points or less on an attack win. Here's the floor:

Conflict Points Needed Max points per attack Minimum attacks needed
Prestige
35000 .................................. 1000 .................................. 35+ total or 6 per day
50000 .................................. 1000 .................................. 116+ total or 19 per day
90000 ................................... 1000 .................................. 90+ total or 15 per day

Level 6
35000 .................................. 300 .................................. 116+ total or 19 per day
50000 .................................. 300 .................................. 166+ total or 28 per day
90000 ................................... 300 .................................. 300+ total or 50 per day

So a Prestige level player needs a minimum of 6 wins a day for one UC and 22-29 for 3 UC's. The numbers are more likely higher. A level 6 would require a minimum of 19 attacks per day for one UC and 75-97 for three UC's. Those are bare minimum numbers, and most likely the reality is much higher. I'm sorry, but during a conflict, I'm doing the bare minimum that I can get away with. I spend enough time as is, without adding to it by attacking a max level base in an attack that is meaningless other than the conflict points it gives me. I'm not going to get into an ego trip, especially if it's not my ego involved. Also, armory levels have as much to do with wins as skill. Not saying skill is not important, but turn your armory off and attack someone and tell me that it's not like going into a gun fight with a knife. The armory levels are just as important as skill, hence the value of conflicts.

I also have 5 bases now that I play with (main, 2 test rebel bases, 2 test imp bases). I am not going to spend more than 30-40 attacks worth of time on my main base (max level), not when I do another 40-80 on the other bases. I also want to spend the bare minimum attacks on the other bases during conflicts, so I am keeping them as mini bases. Down the road, I may push one from each faction up to a max level base. The two spare rebel bases are there solely to help either during wars or help donate units when no one else is on. The two imp bases are test bases. Suppressing or dumping medals for those 4 secondary bases is a no brainer. Keep the matchups easy, to churn and burn, and accumulate specialty units and frags, test different units, etc.

Between conflicts, I will attack any base, work on objectives, win or face plant while testing new attack strategies, etc. Since I don't care about medals, why would I care if I face plant against a max level base? What is there to fear ... I am not going into a ring with the best UFC fighter in the world or going to some real life war zone, it's just a game! Especially true if I'm testing new ideas, where I expect a high probability of a face plant. During conflicts or events, my sole goal is just to hit the thresholds in the minimum attacks possible. Given how tough defenses have become, I rarely get attacked anymore, so I can't rely on defensive conflict points. Even as a rebel on a green planet, the attacks on my base have dropped to a dribble vs a few months ago. I think dev bases are more at fault than medal dumping in this regard.

Setting aside the beliefs people want to project on others, here's what I have done with my bases (some shared with my brother).

Main base (Max level)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Started as a base for my nephew during Christmas of 2016, and we would only play at family get togethers. He lost interest after the first 6 months once the game became too difficult due to guard reserve and I took over after that, about mid 2017, when I got hooked! The base operated as a max level base, since we really didn't think about other options or how the game was designed. We built and attacked when we could in the first six months, but we were basically once or twice a week players. Casual. When I took over mid 2017, we were dealing with the guard reserve. Timeline may be a bit off, but going off memory. Totally unprepared as a newbie, but prompted me to do some research, and just fought through it. It was difficult for me, so I could clearly see how this would turn off an 8 year old. This experience though, did prompt me to help other players as much as I could, understanding that everyone plays the game for different reasons. I just try to help that player find fun, based on their goal for the game and their playing frequency. What's feasible for them based on playing time constraints? The high level and highly activity players will always get their's. Just looking out for the little guy, especially when that little guy might be like my nephew.

Now, I still operate my main base as a max level base. Didn't really care about medals then and never have. I realize medals may have had meaning at one point in time, but during my time, I have not seen a strong correlation between skill and medals. At least not for 98% of the player population. I get that it takes some combination of skill and effort to reach 100K, but given the complaints I have seen from players above the 100K threshold, I'm not sure what value there is in going above it. Medals in the 5K to 20K range are especially meaningless and don't tell you a thing about a player's skill. Like the example I gave earlier, we have two players with the same number of wins and medals and one is vastly superior to the other. If an expert level player starts a new base and has under 1000 medals, are they really a newbie or a bad player? Too many variables to consider. It's like assuming an all Prestige base war opponent can't be beat by a squad with 6 Prestige bases and the rest between level 6-9, without looking at their other statistics like war record.

For my main base, any medal dumping was strictly unintentional up until this month. For example, I didn't see any point of wins/losses/medals when I'm doing a pathfinder objective. I just cooked the pathfinders and dumped them on a base, kept my time and energy to a minimum on those. To the extent an objective provided a chance to experiment with units that I not usually use, I would think more about a legitimate attack. When I think about it, wars drive a lot of the desire to compete for conflict UC crates. The special units help in wars, the frags earned for jets, special units and guard reserve help in getting to UC crates in the most efficient manner. Seeing the complaints from those above the 100K threshold, I have kept my medal count at around 90K. I have enough options at 90K where it seems like a good spot. I still see max level bases, so I can take those on when I want, I see enough dev bases or other bases that I know can be 3 starred for conflicts or events. I mix and match based on goals.

Mini Bases (2 rebel 2 imperial - Shared between my brother and I)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not medal dumping, since we are rebuilding the 2 rebel bases and just added the two imp bases to experiment and see where those go. Most likely will pick our spots in terms of getting UC crates. We will most likely medal dump down the road to keep the threshold just under 15K, since those bases have a very specific purpose. Cranking out 50 to 100 wins a day, split between my brother and I, and also my niece and nephew (his kids), as quickly as possible or for as much fun as we can make it for the kids. We may push one base from each faction to higher levels at a later date, but that's down the road. We are not dumping medals because we are scared of competition. We just don't see the point of running a marathon, when these bases were designed to sprint.

At some point, Zynga may change the rules. Medals could gain value. If that time, we will adjust. Until then, balance the needs of the now vs. the possible needs of the future.
lukeskywalker
Leader
Squad: onewiththeforce
Squad Level: 50


User avatar
Midge
Grand Admiral
Posts: 1115

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#32 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:37 pm

OMG ... I can only assume that is a really long post to explain why some people are afraid to compete ... No worries ... keep on keeping on.
Leader of The Mob Syndicate

Home of TheMidnightMob, TheMorningMob, TheMiddayMob and TheMobWantsYou

Level X Rebel : Medal Maxed


User avatar
lukeskywalker
Commodore
Posts: 158

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#33 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:35 pm

Midge, just not going to change my approach because other people think I should be doing it there way.
lukeskywalker
Leader
Squad: onewiththeforce
Squad Level: 50


User avatar
CoolGuy
Major General
Posts: 312

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#34 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:48 pm

Midge wrote:
CoolGuy wrote:Hey I've got an idea, instead of match making being based on a complicated equation of medal count and base strength, why not just make it on HQ level? How about just one up and one down - that is you can attack one above and one below your HQ level?

Is that just pie in the sky, or a simple way to improve match making? It would certainly make the sandbaggers cry.


Well ... it is an OK thought, except ... I mean Level 9 is clearly much better than Level 8. And then you would just have people stay at Max 9 picking on new 8s.

Also, there are only like 21 players who account for the 100k active profiles. :D


And if you sit at level 9 then you get attacked by level 10s. So the incentive is to advance yourself always.
Windows refugee with the Rogue Ewok group. Killing the Empire since 2015.
Come and visit us at RogueEwokReturn


User avatar
lukeskywalker
Commodore
Posts: 158

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#35 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 5:42 pm

CoolGuy wrote:
Midge wrote:
CoolGuy wrote:Hey I've got an idea, instead of match making being based on a complicated equation of medal count and base strength, why not just make it on HQ level? How about just one up and one down - that is you can attack one above and one below your HQ level?

Is that just pie in the sky, or a simple way to improve match making? It would certainly make the sandbaggers cry.


Well ... it is an OK thought, except ... I mean Level 9 is clearly much better than Level 8. And then you would just have people stay at Max 9 picking on new 8s.

Also, there are only like 21 players who account for the 100k active profiles. :D


And if you sit at level 9 then you get attacked by level 10s. So the incentive is to advance yourself always.


I get where you are trying to get to. Have an incentive to improve, but try to keep the matchups reasonable, yet give some slight edge to players who have invested time and energy. Those are good goals. We would need to address the armory issue too. The armory is worth about 5 levels, so there are in effect 16 levels and not 11. A level 9 with max armory is a level 14, so facing a level 8 with no armory, is in effect a level 14 vs. an 8. The same issue you see with sandbagging.

I would suggest this:
OPTION #1
1) Keep the matchups to same level only. 8 vs. 8, etc.
2) Take away protection and dev bases, so there are always real bases to attack.
3) Set up protection for resources only after the first attack, so base resources are protected for 8 hours after attack. I never understood why you would penalize a base for good defense.
4) Nerf or get rid of the armory. Maybe a 1% buff for health and damage only per upgrade, so a player has a slight edge and not a massive edge. That plays up skill as an equalizer.

OPTION #2
1) Keep the matchup system as is, but just get the conflict points to accurately reflect the degree of difficulty.
2) If a sandbagger only get's 100 points for attacking a low base or a player gets only 100 points for attacking a dev base, they can then logically do the math.
3) Once it becomes mathematically better to attack a live base, where 50% to 67% is the breakeven point, I bet you will see players attacking live bases. It won't make sense to attack down, sandbag, or attack dev bases unless no other option exists at the time of your attack. i.e. better than a CNFO.
5) Still nerf or get rid of the armory. Maybe a 1% buff for health and damage only per upgrade, so a player has a slight edge and not a massive edge. The armory and frag chasing is why sandbagging exists. It's sandbagging in a different form.
lukeskywalker
Leader
Squad: onewiththeforce
Squad Level: 50


darthdoodie
Commodore
Posts: 223

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#36 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 5:59 pm

Medal dumping may be due to some people being scared to fight equal bases but I think that's probably the minority. I suspect the majority do it to place in conflicts. Nearly 2 years ago, I asked this forum why attackers got more conflict gears than I did when I attacked their base, or others. The answer was my medal count. Without any knowledge of getting easier opponents, and with the sole reason being increased conflict gear yields, I dropped medals and saw great results.

Now that I'm happy with my frag situation, I play to win all the time. Conflicts are much tougher now as I see mostly 680 - 710 gear bases to attack, even dev bases. I know others frequently see 990+ gear dev bases. They are getting ~50% bonus over me. If my medals were lower, I'd be seeing far more 750+ gear bases, as I did when I had low medals. Nothing to do with being scared, all about ROI.

Incentive to advance is tempered by the ability to collect frags and MM. Think back to Events....HQ10 got far harder EP requirements than HQ9. I deliberately stayed at 9 through this period to load up on bonus crates, collecting 20+ bonus crates each event. I only advanced when it appeared Events were gone...and now I kinda wish they don't come back as I know the pain I'll have with the EP requirements.


strawman3125
Commodore
Posts: 216

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#37 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:10 pm

CoolGuy wrote:Hey I've got an idea, instead of match making being based on a complicated equation of medal count and base strength, why not just make it on HQ level? How about just one up and one down - that is you can attack one above and one below your HQ level?

Is that just pie in the sky, or a simple way to improve match making? It would certainly make the sandbaggers cry.


That would be awesome!

I think that is how it already works as far as attacking down goes. My HQ8 never got attacked by HQ10 or Prestige and my mini base never sees any HQs more than 1 level down.

If they changed it so that attacking up worked the same way, I would certainly love to start seeing some enemy bases that are only 1 level above my level rather than 2 or 3 levels!


User avatar
lukeskywalker
Commodore
Posts: 158

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#38 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:40 pm

darthdoodie wrote:Medal dumping may be due to some people being scared to fight equal bases but I think that's probably the minority. I suspect the majority do it to place in conflicts. Nearly 2 years ago, I asked this forum why attackers got more conflict gears than I did when I attacked their base, or others. The answer was my medal count. Without any knowledge of getting easier opponents, and with the sole reason being increased conflict gear yields, I dropped medals and saw great results.

Now that I'm happy with my frag situation, I play to win all the time. Conflicts are much tougher now as I see mostly 680 - 710 gear bases to attack, even dev bases. I know others frequently see 990+ gear dev bases. They are getting ~50% bonus over me. If my medals were lower, I'd be seeing far more 750+ gear bases, as I did when I had low medals. Nothing to do with being scared, all about ROI.

Incentive to advance is tempered by the ability to collect frags and MM. Think back to Events....HQ10 got far harder EP requirements than HQ9. I deliberately stayed at 9 through this period to load up on bonus crates, collecting 20+ bonus crates each event. I only advanced when it appeared Events were gone...and now I kinda wish they don't come back as I know the pain I'll have with the EP requirements.


Darth,

Agree. The math dictates the decision making. It is exactly ROI specific to conflicts and events. I also believe there are sweet spots. I see 990 through 1040 real bases and dev bases, with 90K medals. I like where I'm at. There's no mathematical point to add or dump medals for my main base, except to keep the status quo. When you look at the leader boards, you know 99% of the players are attacking dev bases a majority of the time. PvP challenges are for between conflicts and events. Players who sandbag to an extreme need to attack way more than a max level base, because the bases they attack have lower conflict points. However, the math still favors sandbagging to some degree in some situations. There's a sweet spot at level 8. Attack matchups on principle all you want, but that has nothing to do with bravery. It's putting emotions over math. Goading other players, just confirms that person knows it, but they don't want to budge off their spot. They want others to move into their shoes. Not happening. Redesign the system so the math works for maxing out, I'm all in.
lukeskywalker
Leader
Squad: onewiththeforce
Squad Level: 50


User avatar
lukeskywalker
Commodore
Posts: 158

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#39 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:33 pm

I think the best time to test yourself is in wars. Especially if there's no Tako or Tat. That's the most fun I have for PvP. The armory is stripped away. You take on the best players the other squad has to offer. You pay on defense if you have a mini base or bad defensive layout. Your squad members know who's good and who's not. They see who wins for them in wars, they see who needs squad center support on attacks and who doesn't. That should be more than enough validation if that's what you are looking for. Regular PvP is really as much about armory as anything else. Skills are involved, sure, but I suspect it's a lot less than many believe. I have seen attacks against me, from players with less than level 7-8 armory levels and those that have level 9-10 armory levels. You can see how significant the difference is. You also see it in wars when there's no Tako or Tat.
lukeskywalker
Leader
Squad: onewiththeforce
Squad Level: 50


User avatar
ImperialDeathStar
Commander
Posts: 34

Re: Medal Dumping - Discussion Topic

Post#40 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:39 pm

lukeskywalker wrote:Midge, just not going to change my approach because other people think I should be doing it there way.

You really do need to make your posts more concise.


Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Atonal, Facebook [Bot] and 37 guests