Extra Spicy vs World warriors. They had a member leave their alliance and the top scorer list dropped to 58 (one member has not hit yet). I don’t know if team total reflects the loss of points or not, but at least score list does
Is this different from Beta?
I was wondering how Devs would prevent an alliance from cycling 120 alt accounts through a war. This seems like a deterrent. Especially with the revive timers getting longer with each team destroyed.
Though alt accounts could still be used to soften up a defense team before a main gets credit for the kill.
Edit 2: I wonder if the Devs have considered triple alliances. Three top 100 alliances rotating their top 3 accounts ( total of 9 accounts doing merc duty ) to increase the score for all 90 members. If the scoring and loot work just right, this would allow you …, mmm no, they are probably reusing the Elo math subroutine for matching which would make win trade matching almost impossible with a bi-weekly event.
In beta you couldn’t join and partake in war midway through. Easy enough to check when they open the beta back up.
Design wise you basically have to set a defense during the prep phase to opt into war at all; and those players in alliance at War start are basically the 30 hitters you have for the match.
Unlike titans that have been exploited in such a fashion in the past, I don’t think you can do this with AW.
That solves problem A with mercing in Empires. But problem B with mercing in Empires is being booted before rewards.
If you take part in AW, and the leader boots you from the alliance, do you get AW rewards? If yes, then the Devs may have left the total score is unchanged ( to reward the effort ), if no then the Devs may remove any score from an account that has lost the rewards ( as a deterrant ).
Do people really boot folks from alliances that frequently? Is this really a problem?
Virtually all the higher level alliances I know and higher level players I know all try to be overwhelmingly fair to both player and alliance: leave after titan / war so to minimize the impact to the alliance losing the player and to the player as well.
Look how quickly alliances that boot mercs before loot get blacklisted in the merc channels: alliances have a reputation to uphold and it wouldn’t be long before people would recognize there’s issues if that sort of thing goes on with regards to AW.
Can’t see why I’d rationally want to be a member down for AW either speaking from an alliance co-leader’s position.
From listening to other players, there is a problem with mercs not getting titan loot after they have spent all their alliance energy.
This is all hearsey ( I don’t merc in Empires exactly for this reason ) but the most common cause is making room for an alt account, new elder pressing the wrong button, or new elder taking offense at something the merc said or the merc’s current spot as a A/ A+ titan score.
In my “other” MMO, the Devs finally set a hard limit on players attacking a titans ( raids there ) of 30 players and if you boot a player that has already spent alliance energy fighting the current titan, they still get the loot and you cannot add another player in their place.
We had similar in WoW as I recall too; however, this issue is much less prevalent than you allude to and it’s probably going to be near zero for AW.
I’m not really worried about it as a result; the titan merc community has efficiently sorted this themselves, and AW is a different beast where you can only start with 30 and kicking any of them is a loss of point earners = bad mojo.
So it is probably a “programming bug” then, but after listening to us discuss it, the Devs might decide it is a “game play feature”.
The Devs appear to have answered this:
Continuing the discussion from Alliance Wars Approaching (Details & Information)! [Updated Mar 1]: