🧪 Early Information on War of the Three Kingdoms [Part of The Beta Beat V45]

Good to know it will be truly opt-in.

Of course, given the information so far, other than “I’m curious and have time to kill,” I’m not quite sure… why… I should opt in, at this point, given that the event design sounds like a schmozzle and the rewards nigh-nonexistent.

Lmfao, and that is if you win?! :rofl: Oh well, I’ll give it a shot anyway. It doesn’t require items nor much time, and wars are fun. Either it goes smoothly and I’ll enjoy victory, or it doesn’t and I’ll enjoy the utter chaos it’s likely to become. I win either way. These sweet common herbs and minor healing potions are just a bonus.

If rewards don’t improve I’m afraid I’ll be playing alone though. :joy:

These rewards are “placeholders” based on Staff’s announcement.
We will see what they will adjust on them later, when this feature is no longer in Global Beta phase.

1 Like

I agree. But player engagement is a key metric for Zynga and the likes. And with all the stuff that came into the game lately, player engagement just got more expensive for SGG.

If loot ist not significantly better then farming, people just skip the new content. See mTitan, see the Towers, see Alliance Quest.

It’s time for SGG to up the ante. A. Lo(o)t.

5 Likes

I just feel like “placeholder” rewards are a really bad incentive to get players to engage with new content. “Hi, come try this cool, or maybe screwed up, new thing, and we’ll give you basically nothing!”

I also feel like responding to “placeholder” rewards is in itself sending a bad message. “Hey look, my fellow MBA dudes, we gave our playerbase practically nothing for this new event and they STILL engaged, why should we give them anything more ever?”

2 Likes

Do you know if the assignment to a particular war and kingdom has any relation to when a person opts into the event?

I was wondering if we posted a specific time for our alliance members to opt-in if that would increase the likelihood that some of us would be participating in the same war, even if not for the same kingdom.

2 Likes

There are typically over a million active daily players in this game. If it’s truly random the odds of you getting paired with someone you know are incredibly small.

2 Likes

Yes, as @Aboisso27 has written it is highly unlikely that you will be in the same Warband as anyone you know.

But we do not know what are the match making rules exactly.

3 Likes

I’d imagine they will probably tweak the matchmaking as a result of global beta and probably the first few iterations in live. It wasn’t so long ago they were still adjusting war matchmaking so I’d imagine it will be an ongoing process before it’s correct for equal opponent strength. But hopefully they can take some of what they’ve learned from war to help it.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see some uneven number wars etc taking place though as it’s unlikely it will be an exact even number of 100s that sign up.

2 Likes

Is it possible to get rid of individual performance rewards? Or change the scoring? The way it is currently set -up is a problem.

It is entirely possible to be the highest scoring player after attacking six enemy teams that only have a single character left left per team becuase of previous attacks.

Players are just waiting for other players to attack and then jump in to finish off the weakened team.

Well said. My alliance only hit the M-ttian once and we do one floor of the towers so that we get something but no one in my alliance waste time on them any more. The events are too repeatitive and with POV added it’s like doing the same thing thousands of times a month. It quite boring. We only play war because we can chat and have fun with it but that’s it.

My view on this is it’s not worth having. There isn’t any team/band/alliance motivation. My roommate said in a nutshell what I’m seeing. TFB as I’m not cleaning a dang thing. A ton of people who are interested in thier individual score over the possibility of winning the clash. Rewards might be nice but not sure this concept is a good 1

I like the idea of this event, however I think there are some serious issues with it… Cleanups… No on wants to do them and yes I’m guilty of it as well. I hurried in and got my hits in when lots of targets where available so I wouldn’t get stuck doing cleanups.

No one wants to do them since it will lower their score and therefore their loot. Would probably be better if the team isn’t taken out that it just resets to a full team worth full points. The attacking team gets their reduced points and then someone else can try and take it out and get full points for it.

In Alliance wars, I go for teams 200 - 600 above my attack team and average about 4 OHK’s. Doesn’t maximize my points but it helps my alliance the most.

In W3K I chose two teams to OHK that were about 200-300 above my attack team and then went for 4 high-value clean-ups because my OHK’s were worth 30 and 31 points and my clean-ups were worth 25-27 points so I welcomed the opportunity get slightly fewer points then I potentially could have but have them all be virtually guaranteed points. For me, the risk/reward factor favored doing high-value clean-ups.

That being said, I saw people taking the lower value clean-ups and I had no interest in those. Good if somebody didn’t have sufficient depth in their bench to field six solid teams I suppose.

I shouldn’t have included everyone in my statement. There are some out there that do not mind doing cleanups.
I was in a War Group where pretty much everyone was over 5k, saw a few top 100 alliances and other Big roster people. Majority of the cleanups that were done were people cleaning up their own messes, because they do it that way in their own alliance. I saw a couple of teams do a bunch of hits and not get a one shot, left the messes for others to clean up. A few good Samaritans did those cleanups and complained about it and stated in chat how they did not like this event and wouldn’t do it again.

Cleanups and and people not using their flags are the two big things I see causing issues with this Event. Just my opinion.

1 Like

@Dalton7234
I get what you are saying. But on my battlefield most of the opponents were in the same strength range 4800+/5000+. So rosters would have been reasonably good for all involved.
And when I got in, there were only cleanups to be had.
It’s not a role I normally take on, but these wars are so different so I thought what the heck, it has to be done and took down six part teams to help reset the board for my temporary alliance.
That still put me in the top 25% scores

2 Likes

Just my personal view, I saw a number of monster defenses on my end and I did clean up my own messes, but it wasn’t because of altruism. It’s because clean-ups have a higher point to team ratio than in normal wars. What I mean is that I can use a significantly lower powered rainbow team to get rid of a 5000 team without a tank and get 25+ points out of it, whereas I would have to stack and hope I get a good board to take out the same intact team to get 30 points. Depending on your roster depth, clean-ups provide a disproportionate amount of points. That’s just my opinion.

3 Likes

I have made a new topic in the General Discussion area about language in chat.
Check it out. Post your comments. Thx.

Precautions should be taken for those who do not exercise their rights.

can’t chat and strategize everyone speaks a different language

Please see: 🐼 War of Three Kingdoms (W3K) Feedback Polls

or: 🐼 [Master] -- War of 3 Kingdoms GLOBAL BETA -- Discussion & Information Thread

or: [Master] War of Three Kingdoms Loot SUCKED