Alliance War Experiences and Feedback

@Petri everybody talking about Prizes. how about 150 gems for the winning Alliance and 50 for the losing alliance for each member. that will make them stop complaining about the war and the revenge bar. What can those additional prize do? make them participate in the war and get gems so they will try to summon and get a good/bad summon and will incentivize them to maybe buy gems and try to summon more. Small Giant Games will be rolling in Dough with more gems prize incentives. and fix the summon rate in every other game after a bad summon the rates of pulling a 5* increases.: learn from other great mobile games.

3 Likes

I’d rather they did that on diamond chests and kill cup dropping basically once and for all, but it’s a nice incentive for winning a war as well as right now not many people are seeing the loot as being worthwhile at all for something that only happens twice a week.

5 Likes

Is there anything in place to prevent or de-incentivize alliances from tanking their raid scores to get easier opponents in the alliance wars?

My alliance has decided that the tiered raid chest rewards don’t actually mean anything and has decided to tank after talking to another high ranking alliance who has found success in doing the same. If this is something that a lot of alliances decide to do, it would ruin the entire experience.

Perhaps the alliance war rewards for both the winners and losers needs to be tiered based upon your alliance score?
The argument against it might be that it would be unfair for weaker alliances, but it’s no different than the titan rewards or the raid chest rewards.

Has anyone else encountered alliances that obviously tanked for the war?

Yes, lots of people have notice. And the only way is to NOT use alliance score.

Use either just the titan portion or something more sophisticated that’s been advocated in other threads (aggregate hero power of top 30 heroes from each member of alliance).

Don’t agree that you need a revenge bar to make Alliance war a team effort. There is nothing in what I posted that suggests that my desire is to remove the team work effort or in any way make it ‘easier’ for the attacker.

Making it need a team effort to take down individual teams really just boils down to balance of defender vs attacker. If you give the defending team sufficient boost it would require team-work to take down individual teams. There are ways you can boost the defending team that doesn’t involve a Deus Ex Machina type intervention that arbitrarily reduces the attacking team without any way to defend against it.

What I don’t like about the revenge aspect is that it limits your strategic choices (or more directs your strategic choices down a more limited path) and makes your encounter artificially shorter, thereby reducing the fun.

I can see the reasoning for it to be there, but I feel it’s too much of an influence as it’s currently implemented.
I posted in the other thread an idea to maybe vary the effect or extent of the revenge bar to depend on the discrepancy between defending and attacking team power… I’d prefer that to the current system. It means you need to make smarter choices in your defence team. If you just field healers and defense buffers, you’d be vulnerable to players closer to your team’s power as revenge would not be the dominating damage dealer in the encounter. This would make things more interesting and boost the team-play aspect.

Whatever. Will still play with the revenge bar there, but really I think it would play better without it and rather look at less of a ham-fisted way of imposing a challenge. If not remove it entirely, at least tweak to make it more background annoyance than the foreground dominating aspect it is now.

3 Likes

Just posted another poll for the Revenge concept - check it out and register your vote.

3 Likes

Awesome! Tried getting teammates to piggy back an attack with me during our first war. They didn’t quite understand. Especially second half bench sitters. You get enough nerds together they can still whip a bully good! Love AW

1 Like

Glad to see people stirring the pot, whether I agree with you or not. I checked out your poll and thought there just wasn’t enough choices. Devs are incredibly smart people who can’t be limited so easily. It’s awesome to watch the changes they make and how interesting they have kept the game. The forum is where they can farm ideas if they so choose but I think it’s early to call an action as drastic as eliminating. Watch and tweak. They’ve done it already. Actually thought the revenge bar was neat, maybe harsh when you’re down to 2* heroes but hey, another thing to farm!

Why did we need a second poll?

The number of one-shot one-kills when fighting an equivalent alliance is still pretty frequent in the first two flags and that will increase over time as people develop more heroes.

No revenge bar would make it 4 one shot one kills if not more today, and yes that absolutely reduces teamwork requirements and therefore socialization, and imo therefore sucks.

Why make AW easy mode and devolve it back into the individual affair that is the rest of the game? There’s already content for that, leave something for those of us that want an alliance to mean something more than show up and collect loot, and that’s AW these days.

4 Likes

I think the concept of AW is wrong. Currently it is always better to attack, even if it is suicidal. This severely limits the strategy.

From my point of view every battle should give points to the attacker and the defender (
based on life drawn to the opponent). This would make each player have to think if it is better to attack or not and reward defensive teams that hold one attack after another.

Of course, with this system the revenge bar would no longer be necessary

I think that would kill it for lower level players who do not have a good bench. Now everyone gets to participate and have fun.
Also that would mean that a bad board punishes you too much.

The lower level players would attack others lower level players,
just like they do with raids

I made another poll because I thought the 1st wasn’t sufficiently representative in its choices.
Did you read the poll before posting your response? I specifically made it to be as neutral as I could. The 1st had obvious bias against the Revenge bar and didn’t sufficiently represent the wishes of those who actually like the concept. Mine does… by offering the choices to keep the status quo, or to tweak it in the direction of MORE influence on the outcome rather than less, along with the ‘lessen influence’ options.

@Dome I don’t really see it as stirring the pot. It is meant to be an objective opportunity for interested respondents to record their opinion of the revenge concept, whether good or bad. It won’t be much pot stirring if the majority of people come in saying ‘keep it as it is’ now, would it? If not, it gives the Devs something to think about. They don’t have to take any of the choices on offer… but it could at least influence their decision making.

I don’t really see how I did miss choices - I wanted it generic and not too granular on all possibilities. Now that WOULD be constraining the devs. Instead I have a catch-all clause (#4) that is the ‘Other’. i.e.) If anyone feels the choices are not sufficiently representative and have an idea that they would have voted for, they’d vote #4 and then put their detail in a response.

If we find the majority of responses are #4 then the Devs know that the majority of respondees don’t like the existing mechanic.

In short… I made the poll to try settle the issue. If the majority vote options 1, 2 or 3, then I know that my feelings about it are in the minority. It moves from being an anecdotal debate about ‘feelings’ on the subject to a little more like ‘science’ without bias.

I feel, @Revelate you took your view of my position as implying some form of a bias on my subsequent poll post. Sure I get that you like the concept and probably want to keep it (or maybe tweak it), but if you do, I don’t know if your position is ‘Keep as is’, or ‘Keep and tweak harder’ or ‘Keep and tweak easier’. Instead you assume that my purpose of my poll is to get rid of the revenge bar. That is your assumption, and not my actual stated purpose in the poll. (The first poll the poster actually did state it as his purpose… hence biased, and hence I feel not fit for its purpose).

2 Likes

And what if the true majority doesn’t weigh in? Your poll can only provide answers for the people who are interested in taking your poll. Just saying, it’ll be hard to find almost 11,000 people who even like polls. So you are stirring pot. It’s not a bad thing! It’s bringing everything together so that it’s easier to see what needs to be added or amended. The forum itself is the objective opportunity. Please don’t be angry with me. I’m glad you took the time state your case and I’ve even read your weigh in. Mine…wait and see! Can’t bring myself to poll an issue most people have only seen once or twice.

1 Like

Hey, I don’t need to see a whack on the foot with a heavy hammer twice to know I don’t like it. Also don’t need to see a pile of gold twice to know I’ll like it. I think a couple experiences with it is probably sufficient to form an initial impression and start giving an indication.
(Granted I should have included a ‘Haven’t decided yet’ option. Didn’t think of it at the time, but too late now. Cannot be changed once people have started responding.)

Obviously the Devs would be silly to make sweeping changes on a poll with 38 respondents (so far) out of a player base of 1000s… but it does give some indication of how (those who were interested to vote) feel.

Yeh, it’s not an exact science, but as you say, it gives a talking point and an area to collate opinion and thoughts about this subject in 1 place.

I am finding the subject of alliance wars a complex one to deal with in just 1 thread… it could benefit from starting to separate out the main themes and exploring them separately.

Appreciate your thoughts - good feedback.

5 Likes

Our alliance has had a few wars now. We are a long time alliance, fringe top 100, so have some members with pretty deep benches. We won our first 2 handily, and lost the last one by 8 points, or something like that.

We enjoyed the last one to be sure, but found it interesting that the alliance was mostly made up of members that had been there for 1 day. So while we are more of a traditional group, many over or approaching 300 days of membership, we found it interesting that a team of “merc’s” could basically be put together like that the day before.

Made us want to beat them even more! LOL - guess this was more of an issue than we knew if there has to be a timeline requirement added for members to participate. I think it’s a good change, but wasn’t going to affect our opinion of AW either way, our group very much likes it.

Not really complaining one way or the other here, just posting an observation. merc’s are apparently a bigger part of the game than I realized…doesn’t affect us really though, our alliance is happy either way.

definitely would love to see some hams as loot though to help leveling up additional heroes!! Appreciate the continued improvements by SG.

2 Likes

yes it was mmediately noticed when the prep phase started that the opposing alliance had defense teams that did not match theirtime in game/ The trophies the team has are out of all proportion to the titan kill part of their aliance score…I cannot convience my alliance to participate…they intend to clear out alldefense teams and not participate with an againsst an alliance they feel is so obviously cheating. This is both a protestans an attempt to deny them any reward for such misbehavior

2 Likes

There is no more mercing for wars (unless they for outside of prep time). Currently you have no idea if your opponents war defense looks anything like their bmraid defence as they are not visible. There are many reasons why raid and war defenses will be different.

Hence matching on cups bleck.

I don’t have enough data from this new set of matchups to see if things changed, don’t appear to have but the Titan score is matching up in the 3 samples I have even if the alliance power seems to be different… have to see results I guess.

Tanking for AW is pretty stupid IMO.

2 Likes