It might be interesting to have a war variant where the defender must use a certain color in the middle. Or a war variant where only 3* are allowed or must keep defense and attack team under 3000… lots of options to make things more interesting and keep changing things up. It’s a lot more work on SGG’s part, I get it, but keeping things changing in a game where everything is mostly the same all the time would be interesting, at least to me.
1 Like
In the beginning the wars were the most fun aspect of the game but now they are really quite tedious. Besides constantly being matched to overly strong alliances and getting slaughtered each time, it’s now just become a healers war.
With everyone fielding so many healers and us attacking with so many healers, the battles can go on and on but it’s become quite boring.
By the second round, we’ve all lost interest since now we are fighting those strong teams with our ever weaker teams.
We voted to fight the wars because we’re fighters, but we are really just going through the motions.
6 Likes
Let’s suppose I accept your premise, that wars should be retooled to require multiple defensive squads (an idea that has been kicked around several times). How does it follow from that premise that 24 hour war prep is needed? It would take me ten, perhaps even twenty minutes to initially set defensive squads One through Six, but there’s no information I could get from knowing who the opponent is that would inform that decision. Nor would I be likely to change the squads much from war to war–certainly not based on the team I was facing, but rather based on a hero I’d finally trained up to a useable level.
The only really solid arguments I see against a shortened prep phase are about RL schedules and time zones. SGG has promised to address one aspect of this by allowing us to change our war defense at any time, so if my alliance decides to go with blue tanks instead of yellow, we can still have 24 hours to make sure everyone’s gotten the memo about that shift.
@mhalttu I think the poll is a very good idea, but it is not easy to find in a thread like this. I would like polls to be posted in a new topic.
Even though I have been following this thread from time to time I only noticed the poll because a teammate linked to it.
1 Like
I would still disagree that it would be useful. You have a number of top alliances out there that are very organized, very social, and it would be much easier for them to get representation to vote than say someone like me who is part of an alliance where only 7 of 30 of us are in a group on facebook where I can post the link and they can cut/paste (but still have to register for the forums), vs if I posted in the game, they aren’t able to cut the link and would have to type it in manually and register for the forums and can’t be bothered, Heck we have 6 or 7 players that don’t even read the alliance messages ever. I would say most alliances have 0 people participating in the forums.
The very competitive groups I think are highly interested in keeping things as is while they can spreadsheet out their opponent and map out attacks and plan. They are going to be much more likely to vote IMO than the casual players out there and would skew the results.
In any case assuming 2M players, you have 156 votes or 0.0078% of the players in the game voting, and the voters IMO are skewed toward the more advanced, competitive players (the more casual players generally aren’t going to participate in the forums, or stumble upon this vote post), so I’m surprised ‘keep things as they are’ isn’t even higher than the 42% that it currently is. I suspect these top groups will try to rally to get their other members to come and vote to push that number higher.
I am the founder of a local park advocacy group, this reminds me of the time we looked into banning dogs in the park. The dog owners all communicated with each other and turned out in droves, completely overwhelming our small group. They aren’t representative of the community, they’re representative of the dog community. The dog ban failed though because they are organized and vocal. The majority of people had no idea this was even going on and don’t pay attention to local events so never voiced their opinion. I equate this vote to a similar situation. 99.99% of players have zero clue a vote was posted.
I could be completely off the mark of course.
1 Like
OK, fine, cut the prep time. Just shake up the defenses. I’m sick of fighting 20 teams that all have Gravemaker in the front. It’s boring and tedious.
1 Like
At this point the three options in the poll are so close that we players aren’t showing much of a preference for any one of the options. So I expect they’ll do what they think is best, which is why I’m trying to raise points for my view rather than quibbling about the validity of drawing inferences from the poll.
1 Like
Well it’s great to see that the war matchmaking still sucks. I’ve been so hopeful that you guys are actually fixing it but it seems nothing at all is being done. We got smashed again. We have only won 1 war since your war updating so how can you possibly even think it is close to working? My whole clan is screaming for it to go back to the old matchmaking as as least they won every 2nd war then.
Do the developers have any idea of the morale they are destroying of the players. If you want to just continue to have more players quit or stop spending money then you are on the right track. To be honest, I’m over trying to pump up the morale of my clan only for us to get smashed again and again. I used to login every hour or so now I login a couple of times a day because all I want to do is see a war win in our favour to restore my faith in the game again. Such a shame.
3 Likes
I want to propose starting a 24 hour countdown before the war begins without announcing the enemy. The enemy will be determined only at the beginning of the war. But the type of support in the war must be indicated in advance.
It will enable alliances to get themselves missing players during the countdown, and the walkers may have time to return before the war begins
1 Like
Wanted to say that AW still sucks for my alliance. It has gotten better in that we’ve won a couple and we have come close in others but when you are only winning 10% of the time, it just plain sucks.
We haven’t won a war all summer. We haven’t been CLOSE to winning a war all summer. Whatever metric they are using thinks our alliance is way, way stronger than it actually is. It’s certainly not considering past war performance, I can assure you of that.
3 Likes
Posted edited due to beimg off topic
1 Like
Posted edited due to being off topoc
likewise , since the 1st change our alliance hasnt even come close to a fair match, yet alone a fair fight , we used to win about 50%
the most recent match … worse than even , new update … pfft a joke.
with players now opting out as soon as they see the numbers its even worse. players should be able to opt out before the numbers are crunched on matching but they are done prior to match , result even worse for those still “in it”
3 Likes
Our last one was 1405-3754.
I hope that the person(s) working on matchmaking are actually seeing the data and noticing that, apart from dodgy hero power ratings and excluding people that have removed their teams from the matchmaking, things like troop levels might need to be considered as well.
This last war our enemies were top heavy, and with up to level 18 4* troops their strongest hitters were completely out of range for our strongest. Add to that the points for each team, and that we were fielding fewer teams, our hits were worth considerably less and they had the advantage of resets.
It was so bad, it’s comical 
2 Likes
I’m not sure why I’m still commenting on the bad match ups since I don’t think it helps, but I guess I figure if I become quiet it may be taken as I’m pleased now?
I don’t expect us to win every war but before the first two updates we were winning 85% of them. Since the updates NOT ONE WAR!
If we lost every raid or every titan why would we bother playing this game? All we are asking for is a fair chance. When we lose a war, we would like to fight a less strong alliance. When (If ever) we win a war, we would expect to fight a stronger opponent.
The lack of common sense in the match ups in these wars is what makes it so FRUSTRATING!
4 Likes
Just catching up after vacation! I’m going to post this thread/poll in the Line community. Maybe someone could do that for the discord community?
So, instead of a Preparation Phase, we’ll have a timer that lets us know when matchmaking and war begins. (War teams can be modified at any time so long as we are not at war.)
I vote yes.
5 Likes
I agree with what is said above. Implementing a soft countdown timer and starting the War right at match will lead to more accurate matches.
The downside of not knowing your opponent ahead of time seems minimal to me. It could make Alliance vs Alliance group chats more difficult to organize. Also those extreme data collectors will feel a time crunch, but they can still do it after the War starts. So I don’t believe that would stop them from doing what they do.
2 Likes
can anyone answer, when starting exactly matchmaking to alians war, and how long is it going on?