So I’ve now participated in at least one alliance war with each of the new war rules active. When I first read about them in the release notes, I thought that they would provide a nice bit of variety over the same arrows over and over, and they do. However, now that I’ve seen them in action…
- Enemy Aid is just a 20% heal, which isn’t much. I hardly noticed it when the defending team was full, and even when down to 1 or 2 defenders I could simply ghost to make up for the extra heals. The healing might as well not even exist.
- Enemy Boost is probably the most potent, increasing defenders’ attack power by an undispellable 10% every few turns. Even then, though, it wasn’t really noticeable at all until the late stages of a battle. By then, it’s largely too late for the boost to be effective anyway because I can ghost to quickly blow away the remaining defenders. The boost might as well not even exist.
- Enemy arrows is by far the weakest of the rules now that the arrows have been nerfed. Instead of dealing a flat percentage of max HP in damage, they use current HP instead. That means that it is nearly impossible for the arrows to kill (the one exception perhaps being a 1-HP hero), and that means I have no reason to fear them at all. I’m now free to ghost all I like without consequences. The arrows might as well not even exist.
There’s a pattern there: I feel that the war rules are too weak to affect the outcome of any particular war battle. The old style of arrows were indeed annoying to deal with, but they did successfully address ghosting, one of the major advantages that attackers have. Now, ghosting is feasible again, and it’s making war battles too easy and too similar to raids for me.
Anyone else feel the same way? Should the war rules be buffed, nerfed, or neither?
- Buff the rules. They’re too weak.
- Leave the rules as they are. They’re fine.
- Nerf the rules. They’re too strong.
- Remove the rules. They’re ruining wars.