SG, go back to work!

Disagree completely on it needing to not be based on performance. Especially since wars are decided purely on point totals and theres not many scenarios where it makes sense to sacrifice points.

9 times out of 10, if you maximize your points, youre helping your team the best you can.

Its basic psychology anyway. Positive reinforcement is typically more enjoyable and encourages us to repeat a behavior. Getting rewarded for scoring more encourages us to work to maximize our score in the future and makes it more satisfying to do so.

It doesnt have to be a giant increase or anything like that. A modest reward for top scorers would improve the experience.

I think @Fledoble’s point is that maximising the points you score as a players is usually against your team’s interests. For example, I have four pretty strong teams and two that are rubbish. I can easily use my four strong teams to one-hit opponents and my two weak teams to score clean-up bonuses, collecting 360-400 points. Yay! I got the best score in my team!

But that’s a really stupid way to use my power, that will probably lead to us losing. Far better for me to construct six teams that are pretty good, maybe score no one-shot victories, but leave only rats and mice for the weaker teams in my alliance to clean up. So maybe I score half the points, but do a much better job for my alliance.

Hence, rewarding high individual scores is a bad idea, because it doesn’t reflect a player’s true contribution.

7 Likes

With the introduction of the vip pass and revenue it brings, I agree.

I disagree, while the way it is coded now is pretty much a dead end (ie there’s no way for it to evolve into a more interesting feature), and while there’s room to improve what is there - alliance wars is not a failure but a good feature.

I think the root problem is that until the wars came around, there wasn’t a point to the alliance mechanic. Being able to merc titans is a clear example of this… Because being in a top 10 alliance just meant you were with a bunch of other people that did a great job solo as well. The wars helped bring a reason to the entire alliance concept for this game - so naturally there’s just no decent measurement system of an alliance performance yet.

And with regards to the rewards discussion, I feel that the rewards for alliance wars are just fine for the time being. If alliances can be ranked like the raid arena system, and earn better loot as a result, then more strategy and rewards would naturally come. As wars are currently, it’s just a time filler meant to help people hoard heroes. In looking forward to seeing what the devs decide for the future of alliance wars.

2 Likes

And I disagree completely with your opinion in this matter.

Exactly what @Brobb wrote.

If I maximize my points, I can pick off 5-6 teams worth around 70 points. Leaving the tougher targets to others. Because I want better, safe points. Selfish. Its basic psychology.

If I go after tougher targets, I might not get great points, but other weaker teams can do clean ups.

Also your strayegy doesnt work towards maximizing your alliance points. It works towards maximizing your personal points.

And it sort of sounds like you’re the top scorer in your alliance and you want more loot.

2 Likes

I agree with this take. I could easily just pick the low hanging fruit and boost my personal score in AW, but instead I choose to take my teams in against the toughest opponents or very strong teams where I have a great match with the remaining heroes against the design of their defensive team.

AW is not about personal points or being the “Top Hitter.” It is about a unified effort by your Alliance to overcome difficulties (arrows) and the design of your opponents set defensive team. Personal points do not matter in the least to a team player.

Even doing things the way I described above, I tend to get in the 200 to 300 range of points nearly all the time. This does not matter to me. What matters to me is that I managed to contribute strongly toward the Alliance goals of overcoming the opposition. Even if we do not win, I will have done my best to bring about a Victory. That is what it is about.

The probable reason for the lack of enjoyment or satisfaction with AW is the misunderstanding with the actual goals of the event.

2 Likes

A me le guerre e il gioco di per sé piace molto,unica cosa che secondo me dovrebbero aggiungere qualche premio in più e più frequenti. Soprattutto quando ti trovi 4 eroi 5* bloccati da molto tempo,i miei compagni ottengono oggetti di ogni tipo ma altri non ottengo nulla. Non so da cosa sia dovuto però sarei felice se dessero più premi…per il resto non cambierei nulla…ma aspettiamo per vedere come svilupperanno la tanto aspettata seconda mappa e non vedo l’ora che esca…buon gioco a tutti

Great to hear that you are enjoying the game. I like it too. Try to be patient with the rewards. The game has several ways that you can receive rewards and it is not meant to be a “Shoot right to the top” kind of game. It is meant to be a game with a longer view and that involves more of a grind. I’ve been playing for nearly a year now and am just now finally finishing the development of my keep with only 2 forges less than lvl 20, 1 level left to get on my Barracks and 2 Traning compounds to get to Lvl 20 to have everything maxed out.

Just keep plugging away and try to enjoy the game itself. There are things that you can do to speed up your rewards like skipping the timer on the monster chests for 20 gems. You can involve yourself in Raids to achieve goals and join an alliance to fight titans in order to win more rewards.

1 Like

I am the leader of an alliance, I would like to receive some more awards because I still have many heroes to grow and I would like to be able to make more teams … but I enjoy the game, sometimes I get angry a bit but all in all I am almost a year that I play and I am passionate about the game … I am also concentrating on making my buildings go up but it will take some more time … but I am confident and I will commit myself to making them all go up …

(edited using internet translator)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Sono il leader di un alleanza,mi piacerebbe ricevere qualche premio in più perché ho ancora molti eroi da far crescere e mi piacerebbe riuscire a fare piu squadre di gioco…però mi godo il gioco,alle volte mi arrabbio un po’ ma tutto sommato sono quasi un anno che gioco e mi appassiono al gioco…anche io mi sto concentrando a fare salire i miei edifici ma ci vorrà ancora un po’ di tempo😁ma sono fiducioso e mi impegnerò a farli salire tutti…

1 Like

Really? That’s what you’ve got? I’ve been dissed harder by the squirrel that steals nuts from my bird feeder.

What type of birds do you feed? Most of us use seeds rather than nuts. And don’t ask about the time I tried putting cayenne pepper in the feeder and the wind blew …

3 Likes

Lol im no where near the top scorer.

The scenarios your both describing are very specific, but youre treating them as norms. In order for that strategy to be correct you need a few things to line up:

  1. Your weaker alliance teams need to be strong enough to actually do the clean up work

  2. When they do the clean up the total points they achieved cleaning up has to surpass what you could have done on your own. For example, if you can achieve 400 on your own, but you sacrifice points to help your teammate achieving only 200, and they only score 150, thats a loss of 50 points.

My first team is only moderately strong and my other teams are weak. Theres been plenty of times where my “cleanup” amounts to 5 points. If the stronger guys in my alliance are sacrificing team wipe bonus points for that, theyre not doing our alliance any favors

1 Like

When fighting in AW, Someone who scores a single attack full team knockout on a significantly weaker team is negatively affecting the overall points the alliance as a whole can score. Defense teams can only be defeated 3 times total, usually.

When played this way. The stronger alliance members are making the weaker alliance member attack stronger enemies. Thus bringing down the average points per flag. There are 180 attacks in a full alliance. You should save the weaker opponents for the weaker alliance members and your weaker teams to maximize points won and to go for full wipe outs to respawn all opposing teams. When used properly you will gain more opportunities, above the 3, for some one to attack a weaker team.

7 Likes

That’s a great explanation. Would have taken me about 500 words to say the same thing, because I am verbose.

Thats probably true, and you have a point same as @Brobb and @Fledoble.

I don’t think that what they mean is “score less to do your comrades a favor” but rather take risks and do what others can’t do for sure.

For taking risks i mean aiming for the tough teams if your mates aren’t strong enough (even if you risk to not win for your own) or split your own best heroes to cover a wider area of interest and help some others that has only few good heroes in their deck.
The right choice is always talk to your team and take decisions togheter rather then “i just go and wipe out everyone!”.
Sometimes it may be the right choice, but i’m pretty sure sometimes not.

As you say, it depends on many factors (type of alliance, heroes left, luck, team strategy) and you can’t know for sure.
So in a very unclear scenario where there’s not a single “right” choice, better planning before hand and use different approaches.

If you do always the same thing, you can’t know for sure if there’s something better :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

Basically the best contributers to AW are the players that work on their full bench of 30 heroes the hardest, imho. That is the foundation, that is where your true contribution to the team sits, right there. Whether you pick easy targets or not, your potential is all determined by your bench.

How you employ that capacity, is just a nuance of how the final point distribution plays out: a bit more to you, or a bit more to others. Full one hit wipes are very efficient in terms of flags spent. Actually underdeveloped teams won’t put a dent in partly destroyed teams as well.

As long as you employ teams that are -suitable- in strength towards the target and the goal of your attack, you’re doing the best for your alliance. Suitable as in: not too weak (will probably fail) and not too strong (overkill is wasteful). So if you become best scorer because there was a good match between your bench and the available targets at the times you came in looking for some fights, then that’s just good play.

I have 6 teams that are capable (> 2.400 team strength). I’ll typically use 3 for full wipes, and the other 3 to either sweep up partly destroyed teams or to take out the center (and preferably more) to soften the target for others. Sometimes an intended softening up turns into a full wipe, or a full wipe turns into a mere softening up.

What you don’t want happening is a softening up turning into a botch: no hero kills. So sometimes you need to keep your powder dry because at that time there’s no suitable target.

Another point about timing: at what point in time of the war am I playing? Saving partly destroyed teams for others to “harvest” isn’t the smartest idea when there’s only a mere few hours left in the war and most others are spent. I have been known to “keep my powder dry” and tip the scales even more in our favour near war’s ending.

1 Like

I’m not sure if you’re agreeing, dissagreeing or just selected me to reply haha!

Either way, sure, it comes down to nuances. But after a while you get to know your alliance members, their login habits and can act accordingly.

There is some good sense in this, but I don’t think it’s quite right. I’ll explain.

I’ve got s pretty good lineup of heroes under the current dynamic. I can bring to the battlefield either four teams that can one-shot enemies, and two pretty weak teams, or six reasonably strong teams.

For the sake of our alliance I am far wiser to field the latter. Because me reliably crippling six opponents (my teams are strong and flexible enough for this) then leaving them to be finished off by weaker players will produce six total wipeouts for us with near certainty. By contrast, if I one-shot four opponents with my dominant teams then send my weak teams to be slaughtered (though hopefully doing a little damage first) I’ve produced only four total wipeouts. The other two are now at risk.

This doesn’t apply if you can one-shot your six toughest opponents, of course. But in any other circumstances, the strongest players in an alliance should cooperate with weaker players to maximise the alliance’s points.

1 Like

I’m pretty certain I’d agree with you if I knew your exact perspective. And that includes more than just your hero bench, it also includes your alliance’s playstyles/hero benches, and what kind of opponents you go up against. And yet I stand with what I’ve written for my own perspective. It’s very likely impossible to word this in a way that is right for all given circumstances. Just saying.

What it boils down to is how you get the most point for all your alliance’s flags combined. In that respect one hit wipes are very efficient. And seeing your members waste 8 flags on one opponent really is the pits.

So why did that just happen? Those wasted 8 flags? Are they because you chose to fully wipe a team while you could have taken out 3 heroes of the harder team? Or are they because your teammates are fielding << 2k strength teams because that’s all they’ve gotten and they’d have gone to waste anyway?

I’ve seen plenty of attacks against one/two standing hero(es) fail bitterly simply because while such a battle looks easy, it’s bound to fail with an underlevel team and the intense revenge bar with just 1 or 2 hero(es) standing. Which is why I’ve put the emphasis on best team contribution on “getting a full bench of 30 heroes”, because once you’ve got at least all 3-star maxes, you won’t be wasting flags that often anymore.

Also it’s no use paving the way for a vastly underlevelled team, I’m talking undeveloped 3-stars. Perhaps your perspective is an alliance that doesn’t have those vastly underlevelled teams?

3 Likes

I’m presuming this is a discussion rather than a debate. Where one person’s opinion provokes thought and the response is building upon the thoughts provoked, rather than simply seeking to validate/invalidate it. I’m seeking to understand where opinions come from, and what I can learn from them, and sharing that so others may learn as well, and thus we can all benefit. The “win” for me is an increased body of knowledge.

edit: Also, one of the best things that could happen is being proven wrong. That is where things get interesting!

I know, I’m weird that way :wink: :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

That’s a good point. You’re absolutely right that the optimal strategy will depend entirely on a player and alliance’s unique circumstances.

1 Like

On every topic you act like a good dog bringing the stick back to your boss.

Bingo!

Well said.

2 Likes