It seems incredibly strange that Alliance Wars, which are the only way alliances actually compete with one another, does not affect alliance score rankings at all. Perhaps devs will implement this once wars are finalized, but wars should really be a component of alliance scores along with trophy score and titan score.
2 Likes
Except for the top 100: who cares?
2 Likes
Alliance wars is a step away from intelligent game play and will loose more players. Head to head competition is overwhelming to new players since they won’t have near enough leveled hero to use “particularly since you are always having 2 or more waiting on ascension items!!!”. The programs failed to include side missions in the Providences as you advance through them to gain such items so your hero’s advance as you accomplish each providence! Get some kind of cohesion to balance power with success please.
1 Like
True. Its like an endurance battle, not a battle of strength and strategy.
I could do 2 battles before I had to switch over to 1/2* feeders.
2 Likes
Very fair. I think they should let alliances opt out of wars if they want to.
1 Like
Let me offer an idea to address both the OP and the complaints about rewards: tourneys.
At the beginning of a cycle (month?), SG would assign every alliance into a bracket. Keep the bracket size small, e.g. 30, and include similarly ranked alliances, those who are likely to be battling each other,
Each round of war, an alliance’s bracket score goes up by the points earned.
At the end of the cycle, the top teams in each bracket are awarded some nice prizes. Brackets are redrawn, point count reset to zero, repeat.
This mechanism helps on several fronts:
- encourages broad participation within an alliance. More fighters yield more points.
- creates a competitive arc that’s longer than 48 hours
- offers the prospect of substantive rewards at ALL levels of alliances. Your alliance doesn’t have to beat 7DD to win the top prize, only the 29 other, similar alliances in your bracket.
2 Likes