Stop Mercenaries in war...again

Just received the matchup. As such we see the other alliance with a Merc for 2 days in alliance. Maybe for the titan. I hope. But no matter. I want to make sure it is abundantly clear why a Merc is used in war:

If you have a single Merc with level 70 player stats and full tilt 5* plus leveled troops against a younger group. The score still comes in…but this SINgLE team has just created an imbalance in the fight as it is impossible to get the wipe reset feature in war against that team but that team can still wipe the other. It’s like an immovable object of war. Even if the Merc never fires a shot and just goes Ex-Member…the damage is done.

I will know in 24 hours what happened here, but very disappointed as a prior game designer that such a simple exploit is possible in what is probably the best part of this game. Excellent game and I hope to be proven incorrect and somehow SG prohibits this behavior.

Aurelius
Beyond Protocol.

So are you saying that a high-level player cannot join a lower level alliance?
How would you propose that they stop this?

What if it isn’t a merc, but a level 70 player who has come to hate the pace of a high-pressure alliance and wants to play at a slower pace? What if they just joined a day ago? What if they are valuable member teaching the low levels?

How do you differentiate?

14 Likes

BAH!

Rise up and crush the guy. Delight in the challenge of bringing down Goliath.

…or failing that, do what everyone else does, and keep resetting their small teams to outwork them.

To paraphrase the words of the great Patches O’Houlihan:

“Remember, that Empires and Puzzles (Like Dodgeball) is a sport of violence, exclusion and degradation. So, when you’re picking players from General, remember to pick the bigger, stronger ones for your alliance. That way you can gang up on the smaller, weaker ones, like [ex-player] here.”

7 Likes

Imma just link this here cause this person had the same gripe… Thread was ultimately closed cause the OP didn’t fully understand the war matchmaking & that it accounts for new additions…

3 Likes

Yes I saw the thread and hence opened my own. Call it whatever you want for excuses. Simply put you can appease the one person who joined 2d ago. Or you can appease the new alliance of 11 people who match up perfectly except for the single level 70

Want a proposed solution…your player level is the amount of delay you must wait to join a war. Yes too long?

Fine. Your player level minus the average level of those in your new alliance is the number of days you must wait.

It won’t fix everything but it will remove the large stone strategy of war flags to prevent the wipe

1 Like

Some redacted evidences

1 Like

Guy may be lvl70 but his defense and troops are very poor for that lvl.

He would not be able to stay with most top alliances if that’s his best heroes.

4 Likes

I totally understand you, in the last war, three such high-level players stormed and killed our entire team.

These three had points like all of us together because they lived on us.
But discussion is a pointless game has a lot of misses just look at how the ratings on Google Play drop and what people write in the comments!

How is this relevant to new members joining a team and fighting in war? As was explained the LAST time this topic was raised, people joining an alliance 1 day or 1 year prior to match making has NO BARING on how alliances are matched. They could have gone and merc-ed a titan and come back. OP… Understand the system before lodging a suggestion. :roll_eyes:

4 Likes

I understand the system. And I will not be deterred by your dismissive stance. Simply put, its exploitable and a strategy to adjust and change the game. If the team with the stone wipes twice, the team without the stone simply cannot win. Simple as that

Don’t see “time in alliance” as one of the factors… :thinking:

2 Likes

Yes, time in alliance is not. And I am not arguing about the matchmaking I am calling out an exploitive strategy that will drive away players who spend money. If that is not interesting to the company then fine.

I only comment on games I actually like. For all the others, I just abandon them and let the world of lemmings buy and do whatever.

Sure I am watching and make no mistake the war makes my friends (all real life) want to spend money. GameDev look is up…you will see one of the leaders has played this game for years and spent at most $3. In the past 60 days, the friends all came to play and we refuse to play games with exploits. I have no interest in bribing a level 70 to our alliance. You will find the spending went tremendously higher even with her as a result. Want to lose that?

Funny how all of this is trying to detract with statements about the rules of matchmaking etc. it makes for great television

For this, it is calling out an exploitive strategy. Wanna see how exploitive? Word can spread to take it to social media and show the world this little tactic and it will ruin it for all newer players trying to play in the game. The newer players will lose interest and play something else with less friction in the exploits.

Interesting thing about games: it’s discretionary spending and frankly the money can always walk

This is what you are not explaining… how is joining an alliance and fighting in the next war “exploitive” (using your spelling)? A new alliance all together…yes! A new high-level member? How? I’m listening and will give you one more shot…

Let’s put it like this. I will see the result. While intention of the individual could be good, the perception of the team facing it is not and in a digital world like this, you will face a drop in revenue. The intent to find a quieter alliance? Sure. Then turn off participate in war. The issue is you are claiming they could have the best intentions in the world…but the other team…entirely…walks away and finds something else.

The exploitive perception is the issue. The community managers of this game probably understand that and ultimately when it comes to revenue loss, it overrides all

Anyway…it’s fixable. Simply make the joining of alliances have a cooling off period of player level minus average level of all players in alliance who are above level 12. This keeps the Merc for NPC raiding and doesn’t upset other players who are left exploited in PvP

I am going to report back when the war is done the outcome. The loss is 1 pt versus 5 pts. Doesn’t really matter…no one is dying and frankly i can steer my friends to the next good game. This is a mature game and has plenty of potential we dreamed of a decade ago…but we learned some hard lessons about exploits and loss of new players. The new players is the lifeblood of the game. Lose it…and it goes into the wind.

So… your suggestion is to “fix” perception that is not reality by threatening a public smear campaign based on untruths. OK bored now… good luck in your war!

2 Likes

Not a threat. It’s an example of what could happen. As I said, I will simply move on because it is not conducive to the new player community. Obviously you are a vet player who doesn’t see the empathy of the players who observe it and make their own conclusions and say nothing. They just leave.

Funny the world is so powerful in the digital. I am bored with your contributions too so this too will be my last response to your statements.

Good thing this is a game and not US politics

1 Like

Lol yea not the way it works

I would do some reading before making another uninformed thread or i would ask questions instead of making assumptions

1 Like

It wouldn’t fix anything

Player level and strength can be pretty irrelevant if enough cash is spent. Simple as that.

You guys lost by 400 points

That was a simple loss, 1 alliance outperformed the other

You guys could have made up the difference with target selection and better 1 shot %s

Dropped the ball and lost; it happens…

This is 100% correct

There are ways to shift alliance score by substantial amounts to shift score enough for favorable matchmaking

Recruiting 1 high level player isn’t it…

2 Likes

Cookie Settings