PDA

View Full Version : Vikings...



zesilo
02-13-2017, 03:54 AM
Seriously c'mon guys. Everyone notices your presence, and you guys play an insane game. That ****ing circle shield with shapes making a pokéball. Yeah that stuff is intense. We know losing sucks. Forget this season though, you think the beta rewards are cool? Imagine SEASON 1 rewards. Keep your rep, slay some newbs, keep that amazing presence of a true machine in combat and move forward.

Good luck everyone

WTWR_Zydrate
02-13-2017, 03:55 AM
Why isn't anyone talking about the Samurai which pushed us Knights back into like, two zones away from our home base. They must have been like 4 turns away from our doorstep.

bladesDNM
02-13-2017, 04:01 AM
why do you take this so personally. ubisoft conduct is under question dosnt realy have anything to do with what faction any player picked.

Grithios
02-13-2017, 04:04 AM
Well said.

well said in did !

tcs1991.ts
02-13-2017, 04:06 AM
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.