D section on the new map

Billbam

@Fluxxx is the D section on the new map open from the start or does it require the other three to be closed first?

ATLAS-Z

Hope this helps

euchid

D is only good for sniping KAW.

Billbam

I you have 12 attacks left over you are better completing the section rather than KAW due to the higher section bonuses.

Billbam

@ATLAS-Z thanks totally skipped right over that.

brucewayne007

Time to put on your old man glasses when you go for a night time pee and kill some zed’s

Gothgul

It looks like to get max VP, teams of 5 or 7 allow you to complete 2 extra D maps, which seems better than kaws since bonuses are increased, at least according to some scenarios I ran. 

ATLAS-Z

Team of 6 can close exactly 3 islands and 1 stray. No room for fail tho 

WellyLuga

It will be interesting to see the new match ups and what team selections guilds go for. It was previously very predictable with most people either going with 10 or with teams of 5-7 to maximize points but I think it will change a little! Considering the vast increase in levels of maps I don't think too many guilds will be able to split their team up across 6 days of 5-7 and push for max points without spreading themselves too thin.

9 is a possibility too as it is enough for 5 islands with 2 spares.

Billbam

I was thinking 8 is the idea team...maximizes C closures with only 4 spare attacks left for loses or single maps at the end.

Billbam

If you can run clean yes 9 is very good but you can't run only teams of 9

WellyLuga

Yeah, 8 is 4 islands, a solo sector and 4 spares. You could run 4 days with 9 and end with a 4.

ATLAS-Z

Hey! I'm running 8 so that means you whales gotta do something else man. Haha

[Deleted User]

ATLAS-Z said:

Team of 6 can close exactly 3 islands and 1 stray. No room for fail tho 

or go on 3 kaz mission in island #19-20

xbamfx

im trying to find the island of zamunda, I hear there are lots of walkers there for me to kill! Let’s go 

Paste

WellyLuga said:

Yeah, 8 is 4 islands, a solo sector and 4 spares. You could run 4 days with 9 and end with a 4.

I also thought 9 might be a smart option, which means my guild has to avoid it, not to run into guilds like yours :P

Billbam

9 is a great option max islands and not extra sections but you need to run perfect battle with only 2 spare attacks.  Need to run some numbers and see if 9 at a slightly lower level is better than 8 at max level

Paste

How about 7? 

7 * 18 - (12 + 12 + 8) * 3 = 3 Islands and 30 spares

Must be the worst option, and hence the best one to avoid matching guilds playing smart.

Billbam

Could be an option....especially for mid levels where coordination is harder to achieve since it has more room for error.

Billbam

Here is a chart with the Islands and extra sectons that can be closed per team size.

Billbam

I labeled the 3rd column completed D sections but that is actually any section that can be worked.

Gothgul

I ran a bunch of scenarios, for what my guild typically did in old map, and translated to new map. 
Originally I just considered the VP bonus before the new calculator was released, and always got the same result for max VP/attack and that was 3, 5, and 7.
After I included all the individual attacks plus the bonus, things changed a bit.
This scenario below is for a guild who worked within these 5 triads/islands:
16abc(d), 5abc, 10abc, 17abc(d), 11abc
I don't think it matters too much as it just scales up and down the map.
I don't think teams of 3 or 4 are really feasible for most guilds, or even 5 for that matter, just in terms of planning/organizing.

Assumptions:

• When they could do an extra single map (or 2) it was 16d or 16d+17d.
• assuming no drops, if they had extra attacks they did KAWs worth on average 50VP.
• with less than10 member teams and could do less than 5 islands, they did the hardest in those 5 listed above (4 hardest for 8 person, etc.)
• Then just add up all the points and average over # of players

6 edges out the others, IF you don't drop an attack.
4 and 5 are next, but maybe not feasible for teams to run routinely.
7, 8, 9 are about equal
10 is worse.
Hopefully I got the math right.

Billbam

@Gothgul thanks for the info

Burmeliinis

Nice work @Gothgul ! No real surprises there. 6 players is obviously the best for max score, but also the riskiest as even one loss means a huge VP loss. I would say NG did a good job here, it’s not so much running some optimal amount of players but rather running teams where everyone gets to play at their limit - that will be give you the most points.

Btw, my calculator has that optimal amount of islands + solo islands included to help with the planning.

WellyLuga

Really cool, nice work!

I think it's no surprise that 6/7 still yields the highest score potential but it was much easier to do previously when one player could do all of the toughest maps on their own. I don't think any guild can maintain playing nearly max with that team 6 days per week for the whole season.

Paste said:

WellyLuga said:

Yeah, 8 is 4 islands, a solo sector and 4 spares. You could run 4 days with 9 and end with a 4.

I also thought 9 might be a smart option, which means my guild has to avoid it, not to run into guilds like yours :P

We did run a team of 9 quite a bit during the first half of the season

Paste

Really nice Gothgul! I verified part of your math (mostly comparing 9 vs 10). My numbers weren't identical (which could be an error on my side), but the difference was insignificant.

Gothgul

@paste thanks for checking my math, you are correct the 10755 value should be 10775, and also correct it doesn't change the outcome. |-]

@Fluxxx
With the higher VP scores, it looks like overall scores will be about 25% higher than with the old map. This will allow many guilds who were borderline getting into master tier to be able to do it, but at the cost that now they will be grouped with all the master tier guilds when the next reset occurs, which may work against them.
It seems the whole tier reset thing was meant to make matchups more fair for those guilds, but this could be seen as an unintended consequence, getting punished through no fault of their own.
On the positive side, starting from a higher tier means getting back to master is much easier (I think you can lose every match and still make it), so they should be able to manage even with a lot of loses. Some guilds may be back to where they were before getting matched up with top ranked guilds more often than they would like...

WellyLuga

I think there should be a lot more tiers between bronze and master tier. Most guilds near the top hit master tier after 2/3 weeks and it was even sooner with the new headstart we all get! I think the rewards could be given a small bump for the time and effort put in. Plus like you say it will prevent some guilds from being mismatched!

Gothgul

I think more tiers would help. I also hope the RP are also increased like the VP are, with purchase limits increased for things like conponents, tokens, tools. That would be a step in the right direction to fix "meh" rewards. Even if no great gear, most people need those consumabes.

avelardez

Here is some of the DoomSlayer’s “D” section. 

https://youtu.be/d3njsQf2bU8

ricroe1959

Perhaps they will allow 24 member to a Guild.  That would allow 4 teams of 6 for each GW.  If everyone played all out the numbers would be great.  If the teams formed and stayed together whenever then play GW they could build and awesome team.  Just my opinion.