Alliance Wars Feedback Wanted!

Indeed…if we follow at letters all those rules, 90% of forum members should be already banned…

@Jack taking 4 days to make a poll or something up is unacceptable as you can see by the responses. Yes, maybe 1 or 2 days but we are now going on 4 and have heard nothing and the weekend is here and I assume you guys still don’t work on weekends meaning this will not get updated for at least another 3 days!

You guys want feedback for the alliance war? Then is this a joke?

 

 

 

 

! Hello Korea !           rank 11    60/60 members

Deutschland          rank 14    58/60 members

iNtEnSe                     rank 42    52/52 members

Españoles                 rank 58    41/41 members

! Hello World !           rank 76    37/60 members

Héroes de México     rank 80    38/40 members

 

Rank 11 and 80 on the same war map?!?! 

They have to ensure the way they word the choices they offer to developers from our suggestions will make them even more money. Even though they are bathing in it now.

Someone getting 3rd with 3 fiefdoms and without fighting? :wink:

 

I can show you another one: 3rd with 2 fiefdoms, without fighting, while some top alliances ended up with 800k skulls but zero fiefdoms… and on top of that, according to “match making by fiefdom counts”, that war map would never even have been able to exist (I got screenshots of all top36 alliances at the time of that war season with fiefdom counts). 

Take a look: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxbD4lpMurWhRENnaEhYVndzWU0/view?usp=sharing

The Alliance Wars maps should look more like maps from the game Risk. 

It’s more fitting in the fantasy world.

Also 90% of the games if you beat another alliance in one offensive you’ll beat him in every following offensive this take the surprise and fun out of the game. 

I think on these maps certain fiefdoms should have advantages and disadvantages, so that you might be able to beat one of their fiefdoms in one region, but in another they can hold out.

Further, playing it like Risk would add a lot more tactics.  I believe that each alliance member should be deployed in a particular fiefdom like pieces in the game of Risk.  This would also add more variation to the combat.  Let’s say every player can attack in every offensive, but the defenders are only those deployed in that fiefdom.  Therefore you could protect your weaklings inside your boarders. 

Finally, I think the alliance wars happen too frequently and too briefly.  I’d rather have a war last 10 days, and get 4 days off for a total of a 2 week span.

 

I like the idea of a more complex system with more variety and some more interesting gameplay. 

 

Though, if you now think war happens to frequently - which I can definitely agree to - then I think a “10 of 14 days war” ratio won’t make it better. Wars are exhausing and the breaks to short already now… I’d rather see (if at all) something like a 7 day war (with bigger and more “surprising”/varying maps than currently) and then a 7 day break, if you want a 14 days cycle. 

 

 

Very true… 

 

Honestly, I’d be much happier with the 7 day war and 7 day break.  I thought I’d get a lot of resistance if I said that.  So I was pre-compromising.  I shouldn’t have.  I agree with you. 

7 days on and 7 days off!

Is there going to be a poll?

yeah where is the poll? seriously this game become more frustrating because the alliance wars time and more bug very tired with this. 

even i dont know should i install this game again or not after i buy new phone for now my lvl 76 king still inactive.

but maybe lucky.clown will be retired if there is no update for the wars time and no new event  

please fix the game because many player leave this game one by one

 

I agree.

They need to continue putting in more content to keep us excited!

Here’s my ideas for the new content on the normal game play:

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/5354-re-update-185-social-features-war-champions-and-shields/

And here’s my ideas for the new content on the Alliance Wars:

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/5550-alliance-wars-map-risk-board-game/

During the long patient waiting time for the improvements of this game, I have written a song…

It goes like this:

 

 

I was given a role

to take part in a poll

Cause the Flares care so much for the players

Have no money to scroll

Wrote a post for this goal

Hoping someone will hear for my prayers

 

          Flares are sleeping so deeply

          Granny dance with Mummy, Wolf is playing Guitar

          I’m behaving so cheaply

          Never funding gems, cause better buying a car

 

No coupons to redeem

Weeks are passing like dream

Seasons flying away in the distance

Players quitting the team

From Alliance regime

Maybe Flares do not need my assistance…

 

          Flares are sleeping so deeply

          Granny dance with Mummy, Wolf is playing Guitar

          I’m behaving so cheaply

          Never funding gems, cause better buying a car

 

 

Lyrics and melody - by the Crazy Ed. All rights reserved.

 

This post is just for checking whether flares even bother to read the forums…

This song will definitely make the Flares to ban the author… :slight_smile:

 

Cheers,

 

Edward

yes i hope they listen it

 

hahha yeah lets sing a song, its a nice lyric

 

btw pete said the next update will be rolling out soon in here 

 

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/5364-everyone-lets-try-and-save-rr2-from-current-state/page-3

 

i hope they test it first and ask veteran player before throwing to market app

not like annoying update like yesterday

and make this game easier to play i mean not to make stress

I have found that the time between Wars is way too short and the Wars last way TOO long.  As I have been leveling up buildings, structures, etc. the amount of time it takes increases.  2 1/2 days between Wars, a 4 day War yet some of my buildings can take 3 or 4 days?  And I have not even reached 2000 trophies, or level 10 for them.  If you gave us 4 days between every 4 day war that would be better.  Better give us the option for our alliance to compete in a war, just like the leagues.

 

Pitting alliances just based on their fiefdoms seems to be off balance.  My alliance (sometimes 14 sometimes 10 players) has been placed in a few wars with Alliances that have more than 20 players, with more than half those players being over 2k, and we have only 2 or 3 teammates who are over 2k.  Not all my teammates are on the same platform either, hence they don’t have to sit thru videos and ads to get bread to do battle.  The algorithm used for deciding the alliances can take more into consideration, considering the food and gold restraints that are placed on some of us, to where it is more competitive and not an entire blood bath!!!  We are not at the Red Wedding!!!

 

I’ll also await for the latest updated that occurred, as our alliance will be in War Season in less than 12 hours, would like to see how that equals out, as we have been in some and came in 4th, but had more skulls that 1, 2 or 3rd place.

First, I very much like the individual award system for several different reasons but primarily it rewards players for working & trying harder.  However, the matchmaking really has to be fixed.  The war we are in now consist of the following: 

 

Alliance level      Rank       Max. # of members

 

50                        27            55

50                        34            55

43                        37            48

35                        74            40

30                        153          35

29                        204          34

 

Obviously, rank means nothing as it can be manipulated by the alliance but basing it primarily on fiefdoms actually creates unfair mismatches.  This has the opposite affect of the new individual award system.   The wars become boring for the higher alliances and disheartening for weaker ones.  Having this disparity, forces alliances/players to become “bullies” (some are like that anyway play down to competition and not up) and pick on the weakest and thereby losing the spirit of the completion. 

 

While it makes perfect sense strategically to attack the weakest and there will always be weaker teams, the teams should determine who is weaker or stronger not the programming.  Not every baseball team can be the New York Yankees :slight_smile:

 

Regardless the alliance level should be  a primary factor into matchmaking, it would be okay for a alliance within a level or two to be matched up against each other but a 21 player discrepancy is a bit much.  The only issue that would have to be watched is a strong lower level alliance with a lot of fiefdoms could rack up fiefdoms and have stronger elite boost than higher alliance.  Number of fiefdoms would have to be factored in as well.   Thus a strong lower level alliance with a lot of fiefdoms would move up to face higher, stronger alliances.  Is that similar to the way team competitions work anyway?

maybe I’ll play guitar?

I definitely have a good name for your band:

Crazy Eddie’s Revolt

*patent pending