3 Way Maps

We are once again in a 3-way match up.  I suppose this is preferable to a potential mismatch.    There really should be a  Map for 3-way wars.   This seems to be common enough to be addressed.   

The map is not square but is rather elongated so one team seems to have a significant advantage.      I think I would rather be in a 5-way or 6-way war than a 3-way with this configuration.   

I agree. We got a map where 3 of us are 1,100 but one is Ranking 1,700. Poor them a little 20 points. We have already 140. This Conquest is small and boring. Nothing to do. No much building or else. We are in a 5 vs 2 again a 110 and 130. Boring match up 

i prefer the previous map. Big and large with a lots of stuffs to do. this one is boring.

Conquest can be more interesting if the map can be 3x large and big with 6 teams on it or why not 12 teams

Imagine the match making nightmare we would be talking about with 12 teams.  If its a struggle to get 4 teams close 12 will be impossible.   I think they need to implement things into Conquest that individual and out matched alliances can still do that will make them feel like its worth it.  For example, Place Hidden Dungeons on the map that you must find.  Inside the Dungeon you can fight for rewards or even conquest points.  So even if your alliance is getting killed by other alliances you can still have something to achieve. 

 

Good point. its one of the suggestion we have made since 4.0. Flare don’t want to add anything. Just boring Conquest like War Season. A Dungeon,Boss,mobs,etc… something to do. Please its only that we ask

What about if they just implement Pro League Dungeons on Conquest, change the rewards up but keep everything else the same.  Players would be able to practice the Pro League more which would give added incentive too

Staying on topic,  I agree 12 would be too many but 6 is not out of the question.   More maps give more flexibility to Matching.    The easiest fix is to create 2 maps for  3 teams and 4 teams    Regular wars are 6 teams so again a  6 team and 5 teams set up would be more dynamic.   

Not to go off track on my own thread,   The problem with matching is it relies too much on Rank.   Rank is a trophy count that has little to do with actual strength, we see this in wars and conquest.    I have seen strong teams with a low trophy count and weak teams with high trophy counts.    They are trophy’s won in the game so should count somewhere but not for match ups.  

I would rather it be done based on King Levels than Trophies.    It can be a weighted system too.     

I like the idea of 6 teams per map adds difficulty building towers on the middle part if map. bottom fight with odd number will be 5 teams makes it still interesting regardless of one less team. 

plus retaining the boost rewards.instead of only one team not earning gargoyle boost which is valued by most teams there will be 3 losers not getting it hence they will be forced to decline truce and fight for the boost even if its 3rd place ?

That was what I was thinking too,   5 teams being an odd number seems to have an appeal for some reason and the map could be Pentagon shaped.     Nonetheless, the 6 team matchup would be good too and it could go on a hexagon shape.      Actually, the Hexagon shape allows for better distribution or spacing of 3, 4, 5 or 6 teams.      You can generate a Triangle,  Square and Pentagon that fits inside the Hexagon and place the bases on those points or just use the native points if using 6 Teams.   

 

As expected the Team at the short side of the map by themselves won.