A lot of players complain about current war seasons arranged by match making system solely based on fiefdoms leads to totally unfair war seasons for a lot of teams. Since the algorithm seems not to hold reckon with number of members inside an alliance and other aspects, this system is far from being ideal.
The war map is far from giving all teams equal chances. I don’t call it fair that some teams are placed inside the middle, while others are placed at the borders. I also don’t call it’s fair that one team has to fight several battles on the same moment, while other teams only have one fight and can focus on that war.
I think it’s time for another way of war season, a half competition, with a cooldown period between the seasons, similar like now. Inside a competition every alliance has to fight other alliances in same competition exactly once, no more no less. Every day you have to fight another team during the competition. Skull rewards and loser bonuses are obsolete. I leave it open whether or not an attack limit would be needed, but I don’t think a limit is needed. A few of the main advantages of a competition is that a team can’t be eliminated after day one and all teams have to fight exactly the same amount of battles.
How to initially set up such a competition? I would split it into several divisions, one top division, two second divisions, four third divisions, eight fourth divisions and so on. if this is boring for top alliances, because they always fight same teams, make two, three or even four division number ones, (double the competitions per lower division) and so on for making it more interesting for them. An algorithm can make sure teams that fought in same competition will not fight each other next season. Use the current fiefdoms, plus alliance rank plus number of members to determine in which division a team should start. Decide how many teams are inside a competition. 6,7 or 8 would do. Strongest alliances on paper will start in division one and so on. A team that starts all over will start in lowest competition.
It must be worth something to fight for in a higher division. The strength of war boosts for example could be dependent on the division you are in. War boosts can still be rewarded to top three alliances of a competition. Number one of every competition will promote automatically, the two lowest alliances automatically demote.
To make it even more interesting, introduce an extra promotion/demotion day after the season. Two alliances of same division (read, not competition!) that ended on second place have to fight with an alliance that ended third from below in a higher division on exactly one day for promotion/demotion. So for example when there are six teams inside a competition, this promotion/demotion fight would mean that two numbers two of division two have to fight a number four of division one for deciding who fights next season in division one.
Maybe it’s unfair having to start a competition against a team that has won war boosts during last competition, but that can be fixed by arranging who fights who. Let teams that promoted (and probably have war boosts) fight a team that demoted first or just a team that didn’t win war boosts. A promoting team should have that advantage and also teams that won a boost should according to me. War boosts can be prolonged by paying for them like now and the can only be prolonged untill the competition ends where those can be won.
I am realistic enough to realise such a competition will not be introduced soon, but I think it’s definitely more attractive than current war season.