Crown a champion in WAR GAMES...next update!

Become the champion your Alliance needs! The next update for Royal Revolt 2 will let you crown a champion in wartimes: Earn extra skulls, represent your Alliance and lead it to victory.

 

https://www.facebook.com/RoyalRevolt/photos/a.273277632781157.56401.273256826116571/730977373677845/?type=1&theater#

 

11139345_730977373677845_837126344846422

Nothing special i would say…

 

 

I really like it. It allows me to crown the person who score’s first place (something I do for my alliance) in WAR SEASON. A crown of honor, if you will. And, the person can earn extra skulls (not sure how that works).

Whatever it means, it will be an enormous burden on the shoulder of the so called ‘alliance champion’. And did flare even consider what happens when the champion leaves his alliance during a war? I don’t think so, but it would be dramatic, alliance likely will lose that war for sure.

 

This is what I can think of it could mean:

  • Higher skull amount per attack
  • Higher percentage extra raids, instead of 2% -> x % (x > 2)
  • More attacks are fully rewarded, for normal players 3, for champions x attacks. (x > 3)
  • Every attack against different players of other alliance will give full skull reward.

Whatever algorithm is used, the poor person that is responsible for being alliance champion needs to fight a lot more battles, since those battes are more valuable. And when war is on several fronts, he/she must fight even more. How exhausting this will be?

 

As a windows player myself I even don’t have the bread for doing those extra attacks. Besides the fact that a lot of players like me even don’t have the time to continuosly attack, because there are other things to do like work/school.  We have a private life which is more important then 24/7 playing a game, there is no need to introduce something like this.

 

Just increase the 2% to a higher percentage (5% or more) and then alliances who’s members are active have a chance against alliances with more members.

 

In my opinion there is no need for a so called alliance champion. It looks like an honour, but will feel like a curse,  

 

 

I have to disagree but hear me out first. I have a few people in my alliance that will attack repeatedly and will not stop. They attack only in WAR SEASON the entire time duration. They are always on and score 1st - 5th over and over again. So, I would say, crown these. It is not a burden as they enjoy the task already. I guess it all has to do with perspective or how a person looks at the situation.

Joekee, I respect your opinion, but you have to realize this is a game that needs to be fun, not becoming an obsession. There will always be different opinions and I respect yours encouraging it, I discourage the idea and that’s just fine I guess.

 

Sure some players like to attack, but… Say some of those players attack 24/7 and you are placed in war with alliance that has very strong or even unbeatable players in comparison with level of champion. It depends on the rules if it’s nice to be the champion or not.

 

Most alliances have elite boosts active during war season and normally you pick opponents that are beatable and leave very tough opponents alone. After three successfull attacks, you fight one of them time after time again or pick other beatable players. Pick the worst rule possible, full skull for every distinct opponent attacked.  I don’t see the fun of attacking opponents way to strong and lose a lot of fights with only 10% or less raided.

 

I really feel bad for such champion if that’s the case. That would force him/her  to fight against unbeatable opponents or spend tons of gems for still beating them? Not everyone is a high level player who can beat all others. 

 

Off course it depends on the rule, if every attack gives extra skulls, then it’s fine, but like i said, it depends on the rule. Is the champion declared for complete war season or per war? That would also make a big difference.

Dena4,

 

Those are all really good points. I did not think about some of that. I have posted in a thread about unfairness in WAR SEASON. Matching between alliances just based solely on fiefdoms is a bit harsh. Like the WAR SEASON we just won. Our alliance ranked them many times over (we are at 298 and they were at 2100 and 2600). But, we had the same amount of fiefdoms. The request is to use more than just fiefdoms to match them up. Perhaps this would assist in fixing the concern you mentioned.

 

-Jeokee.

This is too much pressure on alliance leaders…

Love it. I could never understand people are negative about this or over-analyze it. I think there should be more of these kinds of things in the game:

 

  1. Most improved

  2. Most raid attempts

  3. Highest average skulls/raid

  4. Most courageous (who went up against the toughest bases even though they have a weak king)

 

More stats like these would be wonderful. Thanks, Flare!

Was off my rocker in this post, cleared. 

I think it is a great feature coming.

 

You of course will only name the most reliable, strong and active person to be your champion. It is just common sense. Don’t name a new member to be a champion, name the leader or one of the generals to be a champion. This is an issue for alliances that don’t have loyal members and have a lot of clan hoppers, but for our alliance we have a solid core of 10-15 members that have never left or left just to say hi to other friends and came right back. Now more than even building a loyal, friendly alliance that works together is key.

 

My simplest formula to this is if a person has:

 

The most or almost the most trophies

Scores 1st place in WAR SEASON time and time again

Is passionate about others joining in on WAR SEASON.

 

Friendly loyal alliance members are great!

My concern is Flare rolling out this update without telling us what a champion’s real functions are.

 

Tons of people fit the bill in my alliance but we still don’t know what a champion is.

 

 

Also I’d like to be able to calculate how much a champion makes without the added skull percentage I’m assuming champion provides.

I’d like it to be whoever makes the most skulls consistently. But that will be hard if I can’t tell how many skulls the champion made without the bonus.

 

Flare has a habit of just rolling out updates and hoping we figure it out in time.

 

It adds another factor into whether an alliance wins or looses. If several of my alliance members hit WAR SEASON with their food every chance they get. They are impossible to match against. People were complaining in the forums about the 2% being useless. This may be Flaregames’ way of fixing the complaint. Crown that bad dude/chic and let him/her lead the alliance to victory.

 

 

I have notice this figure it out on your own type of thing. Especially in-game. It is very hard to find data on things in the game. Have to go outside the game to make sense of it. I learned more in this forum in last 5 days than I have in the last few years of playing Royal Revolt and Royal Revolt 2. The list of updates is great.

Pretty easy to guess who the champion will be: The mercenary.

If an alliance brings in a strong player from another alliance, it’s only logical to assign him to be the champion. You’d expect him to get the most skulls after all.

On the one side the Flare is punishing player swapping through the 60-hour window and here they are rewarding it. Really strange to contradict yourself that way…

 

Mercenary’s don’t have that big of an advantage.

When moving to a lower ranked alliance the Elite Boosts are also weaker so they have a harder time than usual.

 

There is morale to take into consideration as well. Morale can be lowered if an alliance overrides long time members for champion.

 

But I see your point. The 60-hour window was obviously put in place because of the coming champion update.

 

CHlLD,

 

Just to add a little detail, the Fiefdoms an alliance has is what determines the level of boosts received from winning a WAR SEASON.

 

What I meant is the normal Elite Boosts an alliance has active… Compared to a max alliance the same Boosts can seem very inadequate.

 

But also a lower alliance will have a lower fiefdom count so both sets will be weaker.

 

Yet another disadvantage would be less active Boosts. A top alliance will have more active boosts.

 

So mercenary’s aren’t the game changers everyone wants them to be.

 

Can’t agree with you there.

 

I’m currently on a friendly “take a step back and chill”-visit to a friendly (but not allied/faction/whatever, just a personal friendship, before you start shouting at me!) lower-lvl alliance with 2/3 active boosts compared to 10+ in my home alliance…

Sure, my own base is definitely weaker now, but my offense isn’t affected that much - after all, I can’t bring boosted bomb towers / frost traps / whatever structure, or 5 different types of troops into my raid anyway :wink:

 

So, depending on how big the influence of those champions will be, I think mercenaries could actually definitely be game-changing even with weaker boosts in the hiring alliance… though, one of the bigger issues is always getting everyone to participate in war - if you have 5 or 10 players who don’t do 3 successful raids, then even a champion won’t help. But, if you hire higher-lvl or same-lvl mercenaries for replacing inactive members, or just recruit more-active permanent members, then the mercenary champions might make a big difference. 

Also let’s not forget that many players at the top are paying money (some only few, some a lot), so they could just bring with them whatever boost they need/want for a few days… so not only can raiding-mercenaries get hired, but also “paying-mercenaries” that help buffing the whole hiring alliance for the war, if the motivation is big enough (and I know such things have happened already in various places).