Players Leaving Alliance mid-War


During the last war, we noted some of our opponents players had left the game. Instead of the usual message saying the name of the player, this time it had the Alliance name (ATLANTIS) listed instead.

I’m using Windows PC and my IGN is JAY THE ABUNDANT.



1 Like

Yes, would be nice to see the names.

Also, and maybe this needs a new topic, but alliances should have some sort of penalty for people leaving during a war, or else the opponent should get a bonus. We face numerous alliances that kick low level players (or have second/third etc low level accounts leave) during war in order to reduce the number of beatable targets.

I understand the dilemma in not forcing people to remain in an alliance during war, but the alternative is to allow teams to cheat (in essence).


If those players were never in the alliance to begin with, how would it be any different? (It wouldn’t)

So the act of kicking them during war can’t be cheating. If your alliance took in a low level player on a trial basis and the first war they enter they tell you that they can’t beat the lowest level player on the enemy team, and on top of that they’re getting lit up on defense, you’d be putting your alliance at a disadvantage if you didn’t kick them. Why should you be penalized for that?


Don’t be naive. These teams are kicking players during war (extra accounts) and then they join again after war. It’s cheating.


If you’re going to go into war, then pick your team going in. Don’t suddenly decide your team sucks and start kicking people. It’s laughable and teams should be penalized.

1 Like

Please don’t call cheating, features of the game. This is why this topic is here, so possibly discuss and change things for the better. Extra accounts run by 1 player, are legitimate, joining the same alliance as your main account is also fine, kicking or leaving is also part of the game.


What’s the difference between a team that kicks lower level players during war and one that kicks them right before war? The result would be the same for the team facing them.


I’ll call it what I want. That’s how I see it.


Kick before war then. Kick after war. I don’t care. But kicking during war is cheating imo.



Alliance A has 30 players. 20 are level 140. 10 are level 90. They face Alliance B who has 30 players who are level 120.

Alliance B has difficulty scoring against the level 140 players in Alliance A.

The 10 level 90 players in Alliance A have trouble scoring against Alliance B.

What is the actual, functional difference between Alliance A kicking their low level players (1) before or (2) during war? If they kicked them before war, they would still be matched with Alliance B, who would still have trouble scoring against the level 140 players. The war would be fought on exactly the same terms.


really? maybe i interprete the terms of licence wrong…


You can have a second (or more) account(s) , thats no issue. There is no interraction between accounts, therefore there is no limitation.

Sharing an account with someone else is not permitted.


i would say both is not allowed, the second is ofc worse.

“You shall not have more than one Account at any given time, sell or give away your Account, create an Account using a false identity or information, or on behalf of someone other than yourself”


“You shall not share the Account or the Login Information, nor let anyone else access your account or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your Account.”

edit: sounds like reading from the bible … “You shall not … !” >_<
but wait - posting any information that is e.g. religiously is also not allowed. outch.


I dont know if they changed the rules, after the introduction of titan points and many people making new accounts to benefit gems. I actually never did that for fear of ban. But many did and I think they later changed that setup/exploit and possibly allowed the accounts?

In any case I have contacted FG directly regarding my second account, people mention it here all the time… if indeed its still not allowed, I will stop playing it.


It seems like it’s always been one of those rules that is only enforced when there’s abuse going on. Most of the time a secondary account is inconsequential and ignored, but if it’s being used improperly or for fraud it could result in a ban.


So in your example - Alliance ‘A’ kicks their 10 lvl 90 players.

Now alliance ‘B’ - has no targets they can reliably attack. Sure they can attack the 140s - and maybe if they do well enough get half credit - or burn a 1000 gems over the course of the war to maybe do better.

Personally, I think the difference is - if Alliance A kicked their players before the war, they would have never been matched to B.

That’s the crux of the issue / exploit / cheat … whatever.


The game already has a safety net in place - it won’t allow ‘inactive’ players to be attacked. If an alliance has a player at the beginning of the war - the opposing alliance(s) should be able to attack them throughout the whole war - it shouldn’t matter if they leave or are kicked.

As an aside … Yes … game ‘Features’ that are abused - are called exploits, and the continued use of those exploits are called cheats.


But that isn’t true. Matchmaking isn’t based on how many players you have.


I’ll entertain your reply because you’re a much more experienced player - but my own observations lead me to believe that war matches are influenced by the ascendancies of the players in each alliance.

Specifically - in your scenario : Alliance ‘A’ with 20 lvl 140 and 10 lvl 90 vs Alliance B with 30 lvl 120
If you remove the 10 lvl 90s from Alliance A - I don’t believe those two alliances would have been matched.

In fact, I believe many Alliances purposefully keep a low level account (or accounts) specifically to be matched against mid heavy Alliances whom they will have a large advantage over - and a significant advantage if those accounts were to say … have an accident.

Perhaps you don’t see this much at your level - but it seems these are some pretty regular shinanigens in the lower leagues.


There is no matchmaking within a league based on any factors the alliance has control over, i.e. level of the alliance, number of players, amount of trophies, average level of players, etc…

So in this completely hypothetical scenario, Team B would always be matched with Team A. Adding or cutting players before war starts has no impact on matchmaking. If kicking the 10 lowest level players during war is cheating, so is kicking those players before war.