Another boring war for many alliances - Reward system needs a change

Many mid alliances have adopted the “win one season lose one season” system because they don’t want to reach 60 fiefdom, lest they meet the top 10 alliances in war. These alliances almost always choose to win the “dracomancer/ arblaster” season, and lose the “gargoyle tower/ mummies” season.


This is becoming routinely boring.


The solution is simple, change all non special war boosts into elite boosts, and give alliance gold as reward instead. This will provide more incentives for alliances to win every season and change the boring routine.


The quantum to be considered is also very simple. Just convert the current system into the equivalent of gold. For example, if 1st place would get 3 war boost activated for 10 days, and 1 war boost cost about 6 million (all estimated amount here), then it would be:-


3 x 6 mil x 10 = 180 m


1st place would get 180 million as alliance gold reward.



* p.s. I am aware this would give lower level alliances a lot of alliance gold to level up, but hey, it is high time a system is created to push all lower level alliances to mid low level

Im agree with

  1. we need alliance awards and awards for players. For example, if u finished in top 10 of ur alliance totall scores- take awesome prizes. If top 30- some chests

  2. we need 4 boosts settings( now is 2- like arbs and frosters, will be 4)

  3. separate pyro and arbs from boosts


and will be better, i think.


alliances which skip wars- are dead alliances , they have no chances

Yes, I also agree.

Wars got really monotonous. Though in the past pyro/arb wars used to be skipped and no one cared about them, not anymore :wink:  

We would really need alliance gold as rewards  + some other changes.

Wars do get boring, especially as I’m more of a dragofroster and gargoyle nest fan.

However I don’t like the idea of giving alliance gold as rewards. If it were the same amount of gold, e.g. 180 million as said, lower level alliances would be able to afford a whole load of normal boosts for a long period of time (as elite boosts are cheaper at lower levels), however it would be less for higher levels. Besides, alliances may not use the boosts for war boosts - e.g. Who would want to activate doom gate when you could activate tempest tower for the same amount of money?

Maybe you could give another reward for 1st, 2nd or 3rd (pal chests for example) so that people are motivated to try and win every season; I’m not sure, but this issue needs to be dealt with.

In that case, I’d say we should have a base reward of 2 mil gold with fiefdom count as multiplier for first place.


For example, if you win first place and you have 60 fiefdom at the end of the war, the alliance will get 120 mil gold.


If you have 120 fiefdom and win first place, then you’ll get 240 mil gold.


This will give fiefdom so much more value and alliances will think twice before dropping them.


It will also balance out on lower level alliances on the amount earned at lower fiefdom war.


Second place can get a base reward of 1 mil while third place can get 500k as base reward.

Good call. But as some boosts are more valuable than the rest in war, you’d have to shuffle the prices to make it worthwhile.

I do think it would take away the ‘fun’ of war slightly, as if you make war boosts un-war, it loses the uniqueness of the boosts. It would no longer be having the most ‘strategy’ or ‘participation’ to win the boosts, it would just be the most money and gems. VL and Apocalypse etc. would be able to have all of the boosts activated at all times, knowing them.

How about a different currency?

War placing should determine number of boosts that can be activated, not which boosts, and alliance gold should be given as the reward.

Doom gate should be an elite boost, not a war boost, no one wants it enabled, and/or they should finally fix the gate towers strategy (exacerbated by the current war), made even more ridiculous with Basilisk towers.

Dragons should be available to all, it’s a great way to entice people into the game, but currently very inaccessible for new players.

Really, a lot of the elite boosts should now be the default, with a new set of elite boosts to replace them (obviously bomb tower range should increase with level up rather than the base tower having that range, to keep the starter game balanced).


There should be new war concept to attract players toward alliance war. There should be complete new boots and new amazing rewards on winning war season.Along with chests players should also be awarded gems/pearls/pal food according to the rank they achieve in their alliance score by scoring skulls.

Flare isn’t a charity company, so free gem rewards you can forget. We find some gems inside war chests and that’s fine. I would suggest to demote current war boosts to regular boosts and give the season boosts as rewards. Make them last only till start of next season with no options to prolong them. That makes next season more fair, every team starts with same amount of boosts and no advantage. Other teams can boost whatever they want.

From demotion of current war boosts, flare should already have enough profit. 

Flare give gems on monthly pro leaderboard, and the reward for first place is 50k gems . So flare can provide gems in war like in pro league.

There is a major difference. For participating and getting a serious chance on the monthly pro league, most players need to spend gems (2800 for a large pack). I don’t think a lot of free players will save 4 free tickets, wait till a new monthly pro league starts and then participate plus also get very far. 

War season is every two weeks and players need no gems for that. When flare would give gems as reward, the game can be called dead within a few months, nobody will spend cash any longer.

In war gems are used in COF & also scrolls and resurrection are used more often during wars. And i am not asking to give 50k gems for first position , just give 100 gems at rank 1 and 90 , 80 , …like for another ranks. For even a single gems i will fight with full interest.

I know that this is done by some players (scrolling, resurrecting and spending gems on chests), but not by all. Especially not in normal (read, non top maps) seasons.

What about using the skulls as currency and save them for later. Just like pro league, define a set of buyable items, that depend on the skulls you have collected so far. 

For example you can buy some nice rewards like items and some pals or war chests depending on your collected skulls. You now get war chests as reward based on your scored skulls, but it would be even more nice if those skulls also count for getting war rewards, similar like pro league. 

Make sets of items only earnable by participating during war seasons. That would already be enough for members not to skip seasons and help their team. Even when I would have collected all items, it is interesting for the team to get a lot of war pals just for donation. now lower teams have level 1-3 beasts in defense, but by earning them as a team, we could also get stronger war beasts in defense. Since you need to have at least one beast of that type, you are literally forced to participate in war seasons. 

Now a perfect idea , really it will be nice to exchange gears and pals. But the gears should be different and also skull perk gears.

Well I don’t know if I would go so far to say that it is “boring”. Boring for you maybe, but clearly they’re having fun (otherwise why would they be doing it?).

I do like this idea!!

WTF is a “mid alliance”??? I guess that make my alliance a lowly bottom dweller??? In any case, down here we TRY to win every war season: the reality is it’s not possible because the matchmaking system being poop-on-a-stick and an annoying flux of players (keep losing good players to inactivity… if every player that went inactive that could earn 2500+ skulls came back… I would need to take over a 2nd equally sized alliance to fit them all). I am totally jealous of any alliance that can simply decided to “win one season lose one season”.

Going down to only 40 scores counting was a good move. It reduces the entire alliance being penalized for inactive players, and almost all alliances struggle with inactive players. You kick your inactive players, only to probably replace them with our kicked inactive players. It also tended to make wars closer.

4 battles in the last war was great. It reduces the slog factor and gives a smaller margin for error, increasing the tension.  Why not make 3 battles the limit? That way, no room for error. Every battle is critical, you mess up and boom, several hundred skulls lost permanently. With 4 battles, you have one “do over” built in if things go south, with 6 battles you get 3 do overs.

Other possibilities-a great reward for an alliance’s top skull getter of the entire war season, a good reward for #2 and nice reward for #3. Likewise, for among all six alliances in the war 1) a special prize for the player with the most overall skulls and prizes for #2 and #3.

Instead of showing only your own alliance’s individual scores, show scores for players in all six alliances ranked in order so players can battle it out for the top individual scores and rewards. Kind of a mini pro league.