Grand Arena scoring
Change GAC scoring to award the territory points in territories not cleared to the defender, for preventing a full clear.
GAC does not take defensive prowess into consideration and players with streamlined rosters have an advantage over those with robust rosters. As a result, weak defenses that yield massive points are rewarded because their offense yields even more points. But this is almost always because streamlined rosters face relatively weaker opponents, on average, that allow them to amass many more points than thicker rosters that they would have almost no chance of beating head to head. This makes no sense.
At the top of the division, the defenses are harder because a 7.7M roster has a lot more relics than a 7M GP roster, so even against a “weak” D, you still can’t likely get as many points, even if both defenses are relatively weak.
I propose a simple change: if the defending territory does not get conquered, award those points to the defender. The result would be that winning via full clear v full clear would result in fewer overall points than with a full clear and holding a section on D, which is clearly a more impressive win.
The result would be that players who consistently set weak defenses and go for efficient offensive clears will get fewer points than players who full clear and prevent their opponents from clearing, which seems much more consistent with the values of growing ones roster.
GAC does not take defensive prowess into consideration and players with streamlined rosters have an advantage over those with robust rosters. As a result, weak defenses that yield massive points are rewarded because their offense yields even more points. But this is almost always because streamlined rosters face relatively weaker opponents, on average, that allow them to amass many more points than thicker rosters that they would have almost no chance of beating head to head. This makes no sense.
At the top of the division, the defenses are harder because a 7.7M roster has a lot more relics than a 7M GP roster, so even against a “weak” D, you still can’t likely get as many points, even if both defenses are relatively weak.
I propose a simple change: if the defending territory does not get conquered, award those points to the defender. The result would be that winning via full clear v full clear would result in fewer overall points than with a full clear and holding a section on D, which is clearly a more impressive win.
The result would be that players who consistently set weak defenses and go for efficient offensive clears will get fewer points than players who full clear and prevent their opponents from clearing, which seems much more consistent with the values of growing ones roster.
