Differences in proportionate contributions in war by strong and weak players

Players with 36 strong heroes with strong troops to match will add more to an alliance’s war score which will result in facing stronger oppositions.
Players with weaker rosters will add less to war scores but will likely score less.
Obviously, a hope will be that players will always choose targets within their capabilities and even very weak players can prove valuable in cleanup.

All these things considered and, say your alliance already has some stronger and weaker players, what are your thoughts of the proportionate value players at different levels of strength?

1 Like

Very much depends on how well the individual player fits into the alliance.
A weak roster player can be invaluable if they can play intelligently and are a team player.
A strong roster player can be useless if they don’t know how to utilise their roster properly.

I myself am woefully inconsistent with respect to form. :laughing:

1 Like

As a weak player myself, I definitely feel this, and it makes wars very frustrating and not fun. Often by the time I log in the morning the war starts, all the opponents that are close to my level are already defeated and I’m left with a bunch of maxed 5* teams that I have no hope of even making a dent in. In those cases, I’m extremely lucky if I kill just one of their guys. I usually just do a little tile damage before being obliterated. And forget going a second round; my bench is not deep enough yet to go multiple rounds against really strong teams.

1 Like

It all depends on how well the alliance is run. In a mixed level alliance strong players shouldn’t be going for easy targets just to get themselves a weak score and shouldn’t be doing their own cleans either.

Weaker players should be hitting weaker or just doing clean.

Mid range should be hitting their own level, difficult cleans or weakening targets for the weaker players to take out.

Of course this can all change depending how late on in the war it is and what players still have flags.


This can be a problem especially in an alliance with few strong and several weak players.

I agree that:

With an enemy alliance with colour matched tanks it’s best for weak players to just do one kamikaze, attemptive tank hit with a compatible colour mono team and do clean up and targeting weak teams with the rest. All players except for perhaps the strongest might consider using off colours for attacks against teams whose tanks have been killed.

The issue isn’t mixed strengths really, it’s usually because of a super casual Free for all approach to the war itself.

That said it is hard to make a more casual alliance less so but even going as far as having 2 target times to hit will help.

We have 3 dedicated cleaners in our alliance. They have taken on this role because they don’t have the mega deep bench that others do.

So when we are getting to a smash time they will be around to mop up the misses. A lot of alliances at our level clean there own so already we are punching above our weight but for us it works really well and we win more than our fair share.

Those with smaller rosters will of course despair if all they have is 6 4800+ defences but if it’s done well that’s because no one has missed yet and they can just hang on to there hits for later.

I was in a super casual FFA alliance and we really would have people rock up, smash the 6 little opponents and then that’s them done. A massive waste of flags and frustration for all. In the end it got to the point where I couldn’t do it anymore and I moved up. I’m not advocating people to leave alliances but I am advocating for people to try and change the workings of an alliance if it’s a bit of a shambles.

My 2 cents anyways

If the group is organized and consistent then the boundaries of ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ players fade away.

Previously I was in a top 300 alliance with a majority of ‘strong’ players, with designated soft targets and waves until the final ffa.

Currently I’m in an alliance with mid to higher level players, and war is ffa from the get go. Win ratio is about 75% with no determined strategy but an understanding of our own strengths and weaknesses, which is impressive to me.

An don’t forget how invaluable cleaners are. With that said no matter the player level, everyone should be considered ‘strong’ and an asset…

What I’ve seen some alliance do and it makes sense to me why they do it, the weaker players put in really bad teams because and make then worth less points. Let the stronger teams be worth more points so the other alliance has to really work for the points. The weaker teams would get beat easily to begin with, make then as little points as possible

Cookie Settings