I really think you just need to go in knowing it’s a crap shoot. Occasionally, your team will win (we just had a “total dominance” war that was almost embarrassing — and probably just down to luck of the tiles), often, you will lose. Probably it will be close to 50:50, even though the losses feel so bad that you remember them longer. In our alliance, I don’t think anybody really loves rush wars, but I can’t see opting out.
Long before rush war, the boogeyman of wars was the field aid war. And that did get retired, so maybe your crusade has a chance.
If your alliance really hates the rush wars that much, the leader could always turn off wars for the alliance for the rush week, couldn’t he?
So the issue is more “I like to switch alliances, so can’t fill a war chest” than “rush war is a problem”. There I don’t think you speak for the majority at all.
Who said anything about Hippo? Veering waaaaaay off-topic in your own thread!
You just throw everything at the wall to see what sticks, eh?
On-topic, I do not think that war chests should be individual. My alliance for one likes opening it all at the same time, and that’s what alliance war is supposed to be about. Making the war chest individual lessens the community aspect of the war.
And that is all that matters here. Not Hippo, not rush wars, just that.
And this is why you can’t keep players in every alliance because its dump like the chest war at the end doesn’t worth the sacrifices of making every war if you have a life being the game
