How are Alliance Wars won in the top alliances?

So, considering that only one alliance can be the best, we’d expect that one alliance would continuously beat out all the rest, growing their fiefdom count indefinitely. However, this is not the case. Rather, the top alliances seem to alternate who wins and who loses. Why is this? Are you all equal, and it just matters how many fronts you’re forced to fight on? Are certain alliances able to defeat one another, like a game of rock-paper-scissors? Do you all just putter out every other season, creating the illusion of alternation? What the Hell is going on up there?!

Seriously, I don’t get it. If it’s a matter of motivation, SK should be winning every time. They have so many actives, and so many guilds. They could easily create a Winner’s Guild, for those who want to make 50 bajaillion attacks at the highest levels, and a Lower Guild, for those who just want to make 3 attacks and be done. So it’s not about motivation. I doubt it’s a game of Rock-Paper-Scissor, because you all have cookie-cutter bases. So all that leaves is how many times you get attacked. And considering that the winnings seem to alternate, this leads me to believe that you’re just ganging up on whoever has the most fiefdoms.


Strategies for breaking Factions of 4:

  1. If the two outside alliances are placed properly (There’s a 2/15 chance), they can fake-attack one another to safeguard themselves, preventing the other 4 from gaining fiefdoms, giving others the chance to rise and knock one of the 4 down a spot.

  2. While the faction is fighting in League 1, the top 3 alliances in League 2 could come together, gain 3 fiefdoms each, and potentially have more fiefdoms than any of the 4, ensuring that only 3 of the 4 could possibly stay in League 1.

This is discussed before. The NATO-SK-Apo-RL alliance is winning all the wars and they make agreements who gets first-second-third-fourth place each war. Because they are working together, they are all four slowly progressing instead of one alliance who wins 5 fiefdoms everytime. They can keep doing this by switchting players from one alliance to another, to keep players fresh for wars and if someone doesnt want to play, he can get a rest in one of the other two alliances who arent doing anything in the war. The opposing team is facing at least one alliance of 60 people who will participate and score at least 2600 skulls each. An alliance as VL can keep this up one, maybe two days, but five days is really hard.


This kind of tactics make sure that not one alliance is growing really fast, but four alliances growing one or two fiefdoms at a time. Also this might have as consequense that you can win a war with around 100k skulls in five days, or get second with 68k skulls, while an alliance with over a million skulls gets eliminated.

Oh wow xD That really sucks for VL. Though I’m surprised that VL doesn’t counter by using algorithms and macros to attack for them. I mean, considering that he who wins is he who attacked the same person 50 bajillion times, considering VL’s previous moral compass, and considering that they’re constantly outnumbered otherwise, I’m surprised that VL isn’t kicking everybody’s ***.

But SK’s strategy doesn’t quite seem… Optimal? I mean, in sharing between 4 alliances, you’re only getting 6 fiefdoms each season, and sharing that between 4 alliances. At a rate of 1.5 fiefdoms per season, getting to 90 is going to take forever.

In an every-man-for-himself scenario, or even a 2-guild alliance, two alliances would get +5 each season, knocking the other 2 back a tier, wherein they would then get +5 each season. Even if they meet again and it ends up being 2 guilds feeding the other 2 guilds, that’s still harvesting 10+ fiefdoms as opposed to 6. But maybe the extra work isn’t worth it?

You should try to fight three different wars at the same time and reach at least 160k skulls each to have a chance at winning, that’s pretty tough :grinning:




It isn’t optimal from a fiefdom point of view, but if you can get fiefdoms without having to go all the way every five out of eight days, that seems pretty comfortable.

Probably 2 alliances isn’t safe at all, even 3 is a bit risky?

I can also imagine VL deliberately targeting just one alliance, and having them both sent back a tier. I can just imagine Everdeen yelling “IF WE BURN, YOU BURN WITH US!!! D=<” Then it’d just be a 1 v 1, and VL could gradually separate the alliance.

Oh, did you really miss out all so-far posts about “faction wars” and “SK faction”? :wink:


The thing is, with at least 4 alliances ganging up at the top, they face at most 2 real opponents in any season. That means, any non-SK-Apo-NATO-RL-… allied alliance will face 4 opponents which cooperate, switch members, don’t attack each other (or only for a fake-war that ends with 10k skulls in total, also known as fiefdom-dumping/sharing).

The 4 can easily balance it out to have some players or whole alliances completely inactive, concentrating the most-effective members wherever they need them, and chances are high they eliminate one opponent on day 1 already, by attacking all their 3 starting fiefdoms in parallel. You can hardly defend against that - sure, you can try to get your top3 raids in 3 wars, but you just can’t grind 3 times as much as they do. And when I say 3 wars, that already implies not attacking back any of their fiefdoms, so a very defensive no-fief-gain-possible strategy. 

And if you try to win one of the wars, they will do their best with member switching to remove any “easy” high-skull targets or less active players and replace them with the most eager grinders/skull-farmers. 

To see their strategy in perfection, just watch a replay of war season 2 linked in some other topic. :grinning:


So, even if e.g. VL and IL try to ally and cooperate, they’re at a 4 vs 2 disadvantage. And while you see 4 SK faction alliances at the very top fiefdom-wise, they have more allies than just those, so even more potential for switching :grinning:

Thus, even for alliances at the very top, it is hard or impossible to beat that faction. Any others will fail obviously, as they can’t even beat those bases even with scrolling, so they surely can’t win in the game that is called “collect the most skulls”. :grinning:

And, don’t forget, if necessary, players will grind to 3k skulls and beyond, and intense high-/top-lvl alliance wars can quickly turn into a gem-battle that is about buying food and scrolling to beat the hardest, highest bases in RR2 with bugged spells, so it’s not just like “well, everyone do 3 more raids and we’ll win this!”. 



Anyway, this cooperative, slow growth (compared to a single-alliance higher growth attempt) assures that any league is always mostly filled with SK faction alliances that are not fighting each other, but always help each other, giving them a decisive advantage.

Also (again, watch the replay mentioned above), they will eliminate their one or two opponents in 2-3 days, meaning they don’t even have a single war on days 3-5, giving them effectively a “2 day war, 6 day break” cycle, compared to “5 day war, 3 day break” for any competitor. And, if any of them lost any fiefdoms, others will share theirs after the opponents are eliminated, to assure the faction stays together in the top league for the next season, while the non-SK-attacker (-3 fiefs) will be sent down again. So even by concentrating on one of the SK faction alliances, you can hardly make that alliance lose any fiefs at the end of season. 


The argument of “it slows down their progress towards 90 fiefdoms” is pointless, as - while higher lvl boosts definitely are stronger, yes - one lvl more or less doesn’t make much of a difference anymore. With nearly maxed out bases and waves, the current boost lvls are more than enough to make their bases “a hell” if properly built. Also, obviously, the slow-but-spread-growth strategy requires much less effort for SK and also prevents the “pick the weakest ones off to make a hole into their faction” idea. 


Last but not least, any non-SK alliance moving up the the top-league vs the SK faction has had a tough last season (winning the 2nd highest league), while SK had (see above) relatively few effort and a much longer resting period. This also creates situations where their opponents give up from the beginning, knowing there’s no chance of victory and saving their ingame and real life resources for next season, thus of course also making the SK faction’s required efforts even lower. 



Summing up, SK’s current strategy seems mostly optimal to me. 


No matter whether or not it is good or bad what they are doing, for sure they are doing it efficiently. 

I’m tired of explaining this , basically if other alliance do it then we’re cheating or helping cheaters but if they do it then it is normal and happen in every game to save time energy bla bla bla


They wanna control the world I guess

Hmm… Well I would like some proof for this statement.

The only allies I have ever had in a league were ones I reached out to. And I haven’t seen any of these scary “SK Factions” in any of my Leagues.

I’ve seen many people make war pacts and they don’t ask SK for permission.



I think maybe you focus on the subject so often because the “VL Factions” that you are part of and you would like to do the same thing with, aren’t coming out on top.

Honestly I’d like to see your full report on them and there allies if you can be impartial.



The “VL Factions” team up in the same way when they can.

It’s odd how your alliance eludes to there side being the exception and the opposite side being the rule.


Honestly I’d love to start my own faction or whatever it is called if I could lol… Why not?

Oo! I think I’ve found a way to beat the SK Faction! :wink:

It’s mostly a matter of luck, though. The two other alliances have to both start on the same side of the map, being at the extreme corners. This allows them to be accessible to only 2 of the SK alliances. This provides the opportunity for a moderately fair fight.

Furthermore, there are then only 3 fiefdoms exposed. That means that, if both alliances attack each other, this blocking those fiefdoms from being attacked by anybody else, then only one alliance will ever have to battle. Luckily, with the new 60hr cooldown, this makes certain that it is just 1v1, at least for the first 60 hours. Furthermore, even if that fiefdom is lost, the two remaining open fiefdoms will be impervious so long as the two attack one another instantaneously.

In things remaining so stagnant in that league, yet so fluid in the league below, there is the large possibility that another alliance would come in and knock one of the SK’s out. Possibly even 2 of them. Leaving it either 3 v 3, or 4 v 2.

What do you think?

(P.S. There’s only a 2/15 chance of the positions being distributed properly for this.

the 60 hours skulls cooling period only apply if the new member has earned skulls from his/her old alliances. If he/she hasn’t earn any skull in the new season, he/she can join any alliance without 60 hours waiting period.

Well I’m in Us vs Them, so I’m competing at the lower half of the top 10 right now. Here it’s all competetive. We have our rivals, and we always go at it… We don’t really do the whole ganging up on alliances thing. A few weeks ago we ended up fighting the top alliances, and it did NOT end well, suffice to say. I prefer everyone fighting, than 3 or 4 alliances deciding to gang up on someone else. It makes for a more exciting war season. I can honestly say that winning depends on multiple factors, and the same alliance wont win every single time. Using UvT as an example, we have lost a few to say, Deutschland, but we can, and have won against them as well. Same with Burninator or Voltron Force… it can go either way. That’s how wars should be fought. If you make an alliance within the top 5, and decide to gang up on anyone that isn’t with you, it takes the fun, suspense, and mystery out of fighting to make YOUR alliance the best.

This is a game of strategy after all isn’t it? It is always a good idea to be the lion rather to be a rabbit.As about VL or any other clan, Apocalypse can handle anyone at easy.We may not have the players which are knocking out each other in the top 10 ,but surely the best team out there.Love the boys/girls which are part of our team.We are having great great fun and for those which missed the opportunity to be part of our team I’d say ,you don’t know what you just missed.And never the less a leader which really does hes homework credit to him. Those victories every time vs VL or whatever, are easy when as much work is done before hand. WHO is next?)))) 

Challenge accepted. Come at me, bro.

wrong ))) you have to make it to the top not vice versa .But yes we need fresh blood VL after 7 seasons as is turned out run out of ideas.They are boring already.Maybe you guys will join them make the challenge more spicy. Well at least they didn’t collapsed like Todes in 1 day. 

No one ever said you’re cheaters - tricky and quite dishonest guys - yeah, don’t know about cheating. If you find a bug and exploit it - then it’s considered cheating, if you use social features in social game - that is just gameplay.

Only concern for your alliance is - you cry that everyone else are bad, and you’re good, when you’re doing the same - simply not the right and honest move. At least for that season you’ve kept the word you’ve given. If you plan to use something, help someone - simply say it and do it, no need to say one thing and do another (that’s what is causing frustration).

Bitch, I’ll take on your whole alliance myself ((*O*)/)

No, but seriously, I really would like to be the leader of VL for a season so I could implement this strategy. At most, your faction would be able to gain 1 fiefdom, which allow others from our faction to rise up and knock you back. The only problem is getting that 2/15 chance.