You only get the extra chance at rare loot from rare titans if you were in the alliance when it spawned. How would a merc know when an alliance is going to spawn a rarw titan? Read the update notes that sg has released to address the concerns you have, you’ll find they were resolved before the rare titans or war chests were even released
Are there special notes other than the public ones? Didn’t see either issue addressed in them. Did it say rare titan loot bonus rolls are only if you were there before it spawned? I must have missed it
Edit: I stand corrected! So rare titan bonus loot is resolved
1 Like
So the strength of their benches and troops reset when they make a new alliance? That is the biggest part of matchmaking so even if players may be trying this tactic, it’s not a very profitable one since they’ll pretty much just get matched with another alliance that has relatively the same strength anyways. Roster strength plays a bigger role in War Score and matchmaking than past record does, and no other stats like titan score, cup score, or alliance score play a role
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying but unfortunately I don’t know how much weight is given to the previous results.
How have we landed 2 opponents back to back that happen to join their alliance 8 or 41 days ago. That’s very very rare
Are the war scores close?
Almost identical 20 characters
But… the defence teams they are showing are made up of maxed 80 event and seasonal heroes. I’m guessing they might have the tc heroes on the bench also. Many in our alliance are still building benches
A player can set any defense team and show literally nothing about the strength of their bench. I have over 40 maxed 4* and 5* but if i put an all 3* defense would anyone expect me to have that much depth? Same works in reverse, for some or most of those players those could be the only maxed heros on their entire roster for all you know. Without seeing rosters and benches of both teams it’s hard to say that you’re heavily outmatched.
I do plan on running some tests starting tomorrow to figure out exactly how much each maxed 3* or 4* or 5* contribute to an alliance’s war score, then will also see how much an alliance’s record contributes to that score as well.
Won’t be instant overnight results, but could be a start down thw right path of figuring out how accurate an alliances war score really is
1 Like
They have 25 of 26 players with over 3k defence. We have 22/29 over 3k with probably 4-5 of those being a single team at that power and bench teams 2k
Thanks man. I agree it’s early days but our last war was crazy. They almost didn’t miss a full team kill out of those that attacked. That’s what made me check their age in the alliance and start thinking of this.
I’ll see how this war goes and update. I’m sceptical which I hope you appreciate why but I’ll take your advice and see how it pans out. Cheers
1 Like
They could be using some loophole I’m not seeing, i think I’d rather just hope not for the sake of the game honestly. If there is some loophole related to the age of an alliance and their war matchups then it could definitely be a big problem and send devs back to the drawing board for matchmaking and pull their attention away from other game improvements
1 Like
Isn’t there a non-trivial gem cost to start a new alliance? If not, there probably should be to deter both this and short-lived alliances. If so, it seems like a waste of money to do something like this over the long term.
1 Like
Yeah, no one wants that which is why I jumped on general to see what players think too.
Hopefully it’s just random and not a loophole. Just is bizarre as we’ve been loving the latest release and having really close and enjoyable wars (won some, list some) but that thrashing last war was really incredible.
I’ve got a really good roster so scored top of all with all full kills but they just kept killing everyone. Including an outright kill on myself and our other heavy hitting defence in the final round.
Let’s see and pray:)
Yeah, it’s 50 gems I think our perhaps 150 but for guaranteed chests it’d be worth it once every few weeks.
Good spot though as if that is the case and there is a loophole, they could raise the cost based on the frequency you setup new alliances from scratch instead of more complex dev
It was 50 gems when I did it. I guess trivial or not trivial determination would be dependent on who is looking at it.
50 gems isnt much if all 30 take turns doing it and only do it every 5 wars. That’s roughly 50 gems each player but it’ll take 30 months for the same player to spend 50 gems twice
If they were part of the alliance prior to matchmaking, then their power is counted towards the match up. If they weren’t then they wouldn’t go to war, unless there is some oddity like using the same player name somehow confuses the system…but that would be a really odd way to code it.
I don’t know, is creating new alliance again and again good idea, since you probably would lose much items in titan loots thay way. Since you would start with 1* titans. I have seen many alliances, which leader and many members has joined two days ago. It just probably means, that they have sister alliance or merc, when they skip titan. War chest makes, that just very hard to do now days. 
But if there are any way to manipulate war opponents with winning and losing, that really isn’t fair.
50 gems seems like way too little to me, especially considering that a simple name change is 500. I’d be in favor of increasing the cost of creating a new alliance to between 500 - 1000.
The only way I see to outsmart the system is to use multiple accounts and to merc with some of them. This looks like a lot of work to me but could help to push a certain alliance and it’s core accounts.