Alliance war imbalance, a new level of ridiculousness.

I believe this map is funny enough to warrant it’s own post. no comments needed. And yeah, Best is my alliance.






36 or 39, not a big difference


alliances are matched by fiefdom (except top 5/6 tiers) and I don’t see a better way to match up alliances , live with it Sorin sometimes you lose sometimes you win , unless of course you gang up in top tier and beat the hell out of the other non ally alliances lmao 


hard to win without abusing the system right ?  :grinning:

I can say the same thing, the max alliance have 47 allowed members…we are max allowed 39, not so good however we expeted this because we won the 2 last wars at first place

You can argue whether pure fiefdom-based match making is good or not, but - at least according to experience and available information from flaregames (which is too few sadly) or other players - match making (except at the top) still is only fiefdom-based, so if you face alliances with different fiefdom counts, then most likely you either are approaching the “40 fiefs mark” where the messed-up top-lvl match-making begins, or the difference in fiefdom counts is very small (e.g. 1 fiefdom), which is of course always possible: If there are 11 alliances with each 20 fiefdoms, and 1 alliance with 19 fiefdoms, obviously the 19-fief-alliance will face 20-fief-alliances, as you can’t fill two 6-alliance-maps (= 12 spots in total) with the 11 20-fief-alliances only. 

Imagine that you’re an alliance with players skewed toward the weaker range. You have 40 members. You’re matched up by number of members along with a few other factors. You’ll find yourself in wars against other alliances with 37-43 members–which will be essentially the same alliances over and over again unless they level up (there’s only so much differentiation in player number near the top.) Now let’s say that an alliance with 37 members is STACKED with tough players with only a few medium-strength players. None of your weaker players will taste victory against them. And with no way to break out of your bracket of alliances with 37-43 members, you will NEVER win a war because your members will have to spend an exorbitant amount of gems/food to get enough skulls. Even if you level up your alliance, you’re just going to meet the same thing again and again. So one alliance is a permanent loser and another alliance can just continuously get fiefdoms and boosts and never lose. Is that what you want? Is that what you want for the whole RR2 universe? Maybe you’re skewed towards having players in the top 1000 continuously, but those of us who have built relationships with lower-level players would like a chance to combat weaker alliances every once in a while. And I’d hate to see high level players collude and camp out in the low ranges just to monopolize all the boosts and get them continuously.  

There is no perfect system, friend. Nothing will ever work for everyone all the time. We just have to play the game and hope for the best. I think this is better than fighting the same people over and over again, with the top maps being monopolized. Sacrifices have to be made for the majority to enjoy the game. Who knows, next season you may get someone who feels the same way about your alliance. :grinning:


I hope this doesn’t drive you away from the game, I have a strange feeling things will start to get better for us very soon, and I would love for everyone to stick around to enjoy it.