W3K alliance mate on enemy team, why?

I could understand if we were put on the same team. That would be great but why put alliance team mates on opposite teams? Is this common?
Mods, can you please not put this in another thread. It would be nice to see how common this is because I think it’s totally wrong.

1 Like

I’d say it’s not all that common, but happens frequently enough that people have posted about it in the past. It’s random. Don’t sweat it.

I never look at the enemy names enough to notice (or even my own).

But what’s the issue? I guess you would know what defense they would use ahead of time and you could target them from the start. I’m not worried about that.

2 Likes

Because we’re in the same alliance we’re trying to work together. Otherwise why be in an alliance at all? Why don’t they make every war 30 vs. 30 random players instead?
Because the whole purpose is to try coordinate with team mates so you can get a better outcome.
Then we can get better loot and grow.
How can this be hard to understand?

1 Like

3 Kingdoms is not an Alliance Quest, it’s completely randomized. How is that hard to understand?

3 Likes

So? Alliance wars are for alliances. W3K is an open event and warbands are filled based on criteria that has nothing to do with the alliance you’re in or who happens to be in your alliance. Has absolutely nothing to do with alliances.

As you said…

4 Likes

You make it look like you betrayed each other or someone is trying to make you kill each other
What are you 12? Its a game…cpu asigns and generates the warbands according to roster power etc
It doesnt even need all these “why”… You made it sound like a tragedy :joy:

3 Likes

Smash them then dunk on them in alliance chat?

2 Likes

If you don’t want to hit your alliance mate, you still have 99 other targets.

Usually a few in my alliance are in the same and / or opposing warbands and I am always a bit jealous

1 Like

What? WHY??? This entire event is exceedingly stupid. Having an ally mate on the other side would be the most fun thing I can think of!

Now it´s 100 random people, you want 30 random people? Really? What is that supposed to improve?
BTW it´s not totally random, it´s based on your roster strength, but for all intents and purposes it´s random.

Well it may be for you, but SG has decided it is not. They have designed the feature to NOT cooperate. If you are interested in solutions how to make this feature better, read the millions of posts out there with good suggestions, but be prepared, it´s book sized…

2 Likes

Actually, id like an event where Alliance mates are deliberately matched against each other

This sounds like a great idea. Id love to beat on some of my buds and see them revel in thrashing me. Team events dont always have to be co-op.

They are the people i know best in the game and my banter with them is fun as a result. Trading meaningless in-house battles to test defences isnt much fun. Make an event with tables/rewards and let us beat up on each other in a competitive event.

2 Likes

I never even notice the names of other players on 3 kingdoms, anyway

I’m just focused on scanning the enemy teams to see which ones I think I can take out

I’ve been on the other side of some forum friends before, and thought it was cool!

Wow, apparently there’s no loyalty around here. No wonder the game is getting like this.
All for yourself and “who cares” about anyone else.
And to the person who said you can battle your alliance mates, you can already do that.
We do that a lot. Either testing out new heroes or new war teams.
Then again, we try to work together.
Sounds like you all couldn’t care less.

1 Like

:rofl:

W3K is not a format that is intended to have everyone work together. The battle is even called a skirmish - Basically chaos! Which is what it is when 100 people with different time zones, languages, playstyles and activity levels are thrown together on a battlefield and don’t communicate.

I would venture to suspect that most people responding here to you were not talking about alliance wars (as that’s off topic) and would further suspect that most DO work together in that format as it’s actually possible and brings better results for the alliance.

I love the idea of inter-alliance wars. And no, we do not already have this in the game. A friendly battle is just that, a friendly battle and not a contest

2 Likes

No, it doesnt sound like that.

That’s just how you have decided to hear it.

Alliances work together in a number of different areas in this game: wars, AQs, Titans, Mythics etc (Monster Island too, back when that was a thing).

Being able to fight each other in W3k is something of a unique experience, because its a fight with something rìding on the outcome (unlike the test-fights you mentioned).

This isnt a question of betrayal and loyalty. In w3k you could just message your friend and say “lets not fight each other”.

Problem solved.

Or you could stop being a pair of babies :baby: and smash each other’s heads in and laugh about the results.

Did you ever play Street Fighter II? Literally the whole franchise is built on that premise. Its been working great for 30 years.

HADOUKEN!!

5 Likes

Anyone who likes the idea of pounding on your alliance mates, go vote/comment here

Might be a fun new thing to do instead of this stupid Dragons thing thats coming…

2 Likes

Inter-alliance wars would work well with some alliances, but ours is way too lopsided to be fun. About half of our alliance is still in their first year of play… the other half just enjoys playing more casually than competitively. It would be a waste of resourses to develop one. When thinking of things like this you have to take a broader picture of what the player base is. I’m sure that’s why many of the game choices made by the company don’t make sense to the players.

Having an alliance member on the other side of W3K? That would be AWESOME!! You can ask if his war band is as much of a :poop:show as yours is.

3 Likes

So opt in or opt out, like every other element of the game. Those who want to take part, can.

It doesnt have to look like regular Wars or w3k.

Actually, it would be fun if it didnt.

And there are lots of ways they can vary the battles, as Ive said elsewhere. The current war type rotation is just the tip of a potentially huge iceberg.

Matches could be balanced using a handicap system based on your roster depth.

2 Likes

My alliance mate was apologizing to me in alliance chat about the many failures on myside who think finishing the W3K battle with 12 flags not used is a badge of honor.
We need to be allowed to post a wall of shame for W3K members who don’t even try.