Alliance War Changes - Open Defences

The forum is becoming a hostile place. I would encourage you to try and monitor more often, or get some help please (ask the devs).

There are people whose solely purpose is to diminish others (or their posts), with every post and every chance they get. They aren’t even trying to be civil.

If you want to keep the rest of the people active, someone has to deal with this. I have been spending less and less time in the forums, because even on importand topics, most of it trashtalk by specific people. And I lose the valueable input of the people that do care and have good ideas/posts

@CaptainMorgan

1 Like

Yeah it’s sad … This time I really, like really, tried to pull it back to the track. Giving out my most honest opinion. Never felt in sarcasme and arguments. Trying to pull the discussions back again. To no avail. I was bashed every single time I wrote something. @HADESv2 knows, as I wrote to him in PM, I gave up. That’s it!

2 Likes

The forums are being read every day. If people continue to be aggressive or insulting we will ban or suspend them for longer periods. That said, it is also important to us not to censor people’s opinions just because they disagree with us, or we may not agree with them.

Sometimes it can be difficult to find the line between insulting and critical, especially with difficult topics like this one.

It definitely sucks that you are spending less time in the forums because they feel hostile, but we do have to give people a fair chance and a fair say before we bring the hammer down.

If you are feeling personally attacked or witness it for others, please go ahead and report them, and we will consider the reports on a case-by-case basis.

4 Likes

Of course, I completely agree. I want them to speak up, they can disagree with everything if they want. But insulting our intelligence or even worst, the people specifically, makes the forum hostile and the people that try to help day in day out, not respected by the forum it’s self.

The whole “top guys” thing is ridiculous. They actually want these guys not to voice themselves, they feel you listen to them more. Instead of thinking that both top guys and devs have BRAINS, they think you favor them. Thats even insulting to the devs. But they dont seem to care.

may i ask also a question of how you would like the intrusion map to be played - if 2 allies of about equal strength (or also maybe not) meet each other?

imho as from the name itself it is about fighting from the lowest skull upwards as far as we can get.

now the “problem” with this map is, that often allieances can/do fight on the 1 skull islands, multiple times as they cannot proceed. (thats why i said of about equal strength).

so they only have some disadvantages on this map it they fight this way:

  • the worst possible VP gains
  • maybe also not able to get last war chest due to this
  • worst war enhancement: maybe 0 or 1 singular (as they have to fight same island again and again), not important ones and also the % itself is low as they maybe divide fury equal between def/off islands
  • but still maybe very hard and demanding fights
  • lowest possible torch score, maybe both just +1 from extra torch
    -> frustration

on the other hand, what happens if they fight from the other hand and each alliance just fights the own offensive ones and does not defend the ones beeing attacked:.

  • the best possible VP gains
  • therefore last war chest absolutely possible
  • best war enhancements in game from highst skulls. multiple ones (as they take 5,4,…), high % due to VP multipliers from skulls
  • even if you lock now defenses, no stress (as others dont fight back) - players just fight for own chests and buffs. before the change: all totally easy peasy if opened defenses.
  • even a better torch score possible compared to the above scenario bc of +2 extra torches.
    -> happy players, IF THEY DO HAVE CONTACT FROM OUT OF GAME COMMUNICATIONS TO THE OTHER ALLIANCE (and they agree to this, but on this map it would be most likely a win-win situation…)

what do you think about it? as long as you allow attacks on this map on the 5 skull island it will most likely be played this way unless a very strong alliance meets a very week one compared to them (and both alliances know how to play or know each other)…

2 Likes

@CaptainMorgan what’s up? Long time! Oh man I miss the old days. Say hello to my favorite intern lol.

Okay! The war defence - excellent idea. Adding the ability to rotate the towers too would be better, than just upgrading them, imo. Yes, lock the gk too. I have a few more suggestions that may be helpful:

  1. bring back fury regeneration bonus. The way it was back then. Copy paste.

  2. stop the 3 team map and replace it with 4 team. Repetitive I know, but why 3? You try to spoon feed the team ups by default? Maybe the fury regeneration bonus can make a difference here?

  3. stop the clock wise 1vs1. Come up with something new here. I suggest 1vs1 2+ day war with one team for the first 24h and if VP difference is too big then switch the weaker team with a stronger one. All this within the 2+ day 1vs1.

  4. Increase the gems earned in God’s league by 1000.

  5. Reduce the torch bonus, but also consider doing this: if one team wins 2/3 of the torches out of the max torches it can earn AND there are no attacks on that team for 2-3 strike periods, there is obviously a team up and therefore should not earn any of the blessings from the islands it conquers going forward but can keep the blessings from the 2/3. Island swapping may cancel this effect out, assuming everyone strikes clockwise, so in that case if all teams on the map stay at the same torches, there are no blessings earned from islands for any team. Start thinking like that and you will eliminate most of the team ups. I am the founder after all lol.

  6. Alternative to The War Defence: Try reducing the VP that can be earned by taking out towers and units. If the attacker goes after an empty defense make him earn only 10% of the VP he would have earned if he attacked a full layout (10% is what the gk worth). Therefore the attacker will earn no chests if they choose to attack empty layouts.

  7. you will love this! Usually we take screenshots to evaluate our members based on performance. We have to track their VP over time etc. Why don’t we do this…have a built-in calculation for us that will show a member’s average performance or even better, the performance of a member over the whole season. That shouldn’t be hard to make. Right?

  8. I’m tired of seeing Perseus as the only gk…can you please make the other heroes more useful when they are chosen as gk? There can’t be a monopoly here. Maybe give reflection to other heroes too?

  9. when a team randomly meets 2-3 times another specific team on a 4 team map within 2 war seasons and there is no attack or no more than 1 attack to each other, then that’s a team up and should be punished.

  10. my final idea for now is to give an ingame voting system that can be used in each league. 2/3 of the teams or all teams in a league vote that if one particular team cheats or plays unethically, then that unwanted team will be downgraded to a lower league. The votes can be visible by all players next to the name of the team in the scoreboard in the form of markers or numbers. This cannot be used toward the end of the war season to downgrade a team being up upgraded to another league. This system could possibly be used once every 2-3 war seasons? I don’t know, you get the idea.

And these are Kort’s 10 commandments. Cheers!

6 Likes

That makes the whole point of locking defenses useless.
It is being made because teams fix matches by weakening their own defenses.
Letting one turn towers in the wrong way can be almost as effective as taking the towers away. So whole point of it would be nullified.

While keeping improving a tower won’t make the defence any weaker, so that part is not a problem.

About your 7… I remember asking long ago to the Captain if there was any way to fetch that kind of data in a json/xml way … i’d love that even more than seeing it on screen actually. Obviously only related to your own alliance, and perhaps only if you have a certain rank … say, for example, if officer+ you get a link inside the game that will let you download said data (last war data, info on current rooster … level, uranus, thropies, odyssey, last war score, donations).
That’d be great :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Point 6 is excellent, a much better solution than locked defs. It’ll still be possible to turn towers but I see no solution to this.
Last point about voting, would be a problem in TL since the Texas cartel is 75% of the league.

7 Likes

Really?

Because I’d exploit it to its core. Everybody switches to open bases. The other team can’t score much and lose!

Be patient. A new generation of GK is coming. Even some players with one of the best Perseus GKs are considering/preparing to replace him with a better option!

Say the so-called “cartel” will all vote against GoW. How would you counter that?

4 Likes

I agree with M. If it was that easy, it would have been done already… that way, I get a huge lead (which happens usually, especially in 2v1), then switch, and the other team is doomed.

Switching towers away from the road, is what makes a defense good or bad, depending on circumstances. If you are allowed to do that, then it’s basically exploitable again. Upgrades of towers/items, is a natural progression process, always better, so it should be allowed. But like I said in the past, not being able to have 2 setups or 2 GK’s for me, is limiting… and there are nice things you can do to confuse opponents. I should be able to use 2-3 setups, THOSE should be locked, I got no problem about that, you should not be able to change your path/GK mid war, you got the whole week to do that… but switching path/GK (same level of difficulty between 3 options) is actually a great tactic… I am disappointing in these talks, which is why I haven’t been commenting… I guess will see what will come out of it.

Oh yeah, and “I want, 2k less gems for TL”

Penalize bad defenses. Make them not wanting to do it. There is currently no real penalty.

Having a real player attack and/or defense evaluation of a player (which affects everything he does - loot, gems, titans, VP and so on), is the best thing that could happen to this game. In all aspects. Literally all… But it must be really hard to do.

But how one can penalize bad defense or open defense?
CM said they won’t punish players for it.
And please don’t ask them reduce gems for Titan league. I use those gems to buy item packs or speed up forge process.

3 Likes

Well this is dangerous if not tuned properly, but …
If your own score would go up and down and not only up … that would penalize a bad defence…
As in, when A attacks B and gets 1500 points, B loses a % of that … dunno, say 10% from his personal score. That wouldn’t change fixing matches but could be tuned so to not make it possible to get titans chests from the war if your defense loses all the time.
Not really sure if it’s a good idea tho, has lots of bad sides as well.

Another option perhaps could be having separate chests prizes for defending and not just for attacking …
I mean, now you score, and get chests according to your score at the end.
If there was another value that goes up as you win defenses and gives you prizes for that … or, to not punish the good defenses that never get hitted … do the opposite.

Say, you have for example 5 extra chests rewrads., one for each color and a 100% “defense value”.
Every time you get attacked you lose part of this 100% if they beat you and perhaps raise it if they don’t make it to the end. Then you will get those extra chests according to that …
so if you never get attacked, your defense value stays at max and you get all 5 rewards. If you lose a few you’ll get all up to yellow - you lost more, you get all up to purple …

Just an idea

1 Like

complex idea ( my opinion)

You know as well as I know that just because you have all towers on the path doesn’t make it a good defence. How would the system ‘judge’ out of your 2-3 defences which is better? I get your argument of changing layout to confuse weaker opponents, but by having one weak design and one normal design it gets us back to almost open defences.

2 Likes

If you are a good player, there is no reason for you to change your layout… other than a few minutes to make a change or something to test. If you are not competing, and you want to drop trophies, you should leave your alliance, to make it easier to drop. Alliances can even carry to war less players like 45/50 or 50/55 which will allow for some substitutions and free alongs to help each week (6 weeks is a long period to have the same 50 people, and be able to fight at war - even though I have never missed a war myself)

Having a system which evaluates players, based on how successful they are in raids, and defenses, will give a magic number, which will then indicate the true strength of a player. Thus having proof by that magic number, if he is capable or not, building a strong defense. Which will prove if he is intentionally making it open. High evaluation will mean higher rewards (in raids, in chests, in VP), which help in ALL aspects of the game. As it can also depend on level, it will be an incentive for people to be good at raids and defenses. It should already be, I don’t know anyone who raids to fail… and most people, try to have good defenses most of the time (unless they don’t know). That’s how you can see who is good bad presenting a bad defense.

The gems is a joke… I love it how people ask for more gems, in one league, without any explanation. I see a lot of interesting ideas, backed up with facts or explanations. I may not agree, but it’s good. But for gems, he just asked for more, I wonder what league he is in, lmao. :slight_smile: So I just ask for less :slight_smile: You think they will listen to either one of those requests?

Nope, you missed the point of tactical. The change would be 2 or 3 good ones. The system will know, as per my suggestion of evaluation of a player. There is no other way to do this properly as proven so far. So here is the story:

  • If you have to lock 1 defense and 1 GK setup, I am against it. I will respect it, I won’t whine about it, but I will disagree about it.
  • The way to use 3 layouts and 3 GK’s can be locked, which makes it possible for me to maneuver tactically if I want. 3 Hydras or 3 Orthias might be a switch I am willing to make, if I see a lot of Hercules beating my base. Just an example… because in all the alliances I’ve been, we always say WHICH hero beat a specific defense… messing it around, the last hour, could provide me with some more VP loss to opponents. They wont even know the change took place, they are too busy to get the VP in.
  • The system will know how your defenses perform. If you have a setup which generally does very good (with time and %), and now your layout is beaten easy, there is your first indication. You either LOSE a lot of points, or have some other kind of penalties. Losing points, means less VP for next of your attacks (or even next wars). Which means I don’t want my defense to do badly… you need to reward good defenses, in a way that players need it. 5-10 gems, I don’t need if its tough, which is why people open defenses, there is no downside.

That’s the general plan… it works nicely. If people disagree with it, that’s fine too!

The extra information that the system has ‘learned’ regarding you historical defence power lvl is good, and would be welcomed, and would make your proposal workable imo.
Issue really is, that despite it being a good idea, the extra additional work to create such background info may be not a short or even medium term possibility for the limited resources the devs are said to have.
We know a fix is needed now, is the only reason why I agree with the ‘crude’ fix of locked defence/GK. It’s the lesser evil.

1 Like

We are still discussing additional measures and their pros/cons. Could you please elaborate on which methods you think players will continue to use to fix matches (other than agreeing to attack a certain Alliance on the map), if it were the case that defenses were locked and bonus torches were limited?

It’s certainly the case that we cannot predict all the methods players will use so this would be a good help if you have additional information.

We do still have the idea of defence rewards under discussion. There are some obvious possible exploits, of course (agreeing to attack and lose to boost player scores), but we do like he idea of rewarding well designed defenses.

1 Like