Possible Solution To Alliance Player Swapping

Just an FYI, I am neither for nor against player swapping in the wars. Personally, I think its absolutely ingenious


 

Player swapping refers to trading out players to fight in another alliance’s wars. Theoretically, it should be impossible since once you leave one alliance, your skulls earned leave with you (but skulls lost do not). This seems to suggest that one player fighting in multiple wars at the same time is not what the developers intended. There is, however, an easy loophole to this problem. That is: Different battles end at different times.

 

So for example, Alliance 1 starts their battle right away. Alliance 2 (who is an ally of 1) waits two hours before starting their first battle. Members from Alliance 1 could finish their battle, get the skulls earned at the end, then all switch over to Alliance 2 and fight in the last two hours of their battle and easily get in 3 attacks per battlefront (which is 95% of the alliance skulls earned). After 2 hours, their skulls earned are counted and the next battle starts. They then go back to Alliance 1, and start the process over again. Using this method, it is concievable that the same people could fight in multiple alliance battles and have 100% of their skulls count for each fight, and really not incur any penalties whatsoever for whoring (no offense :wink:

Just make each battle end at the same time globally. For example, if the war last 5 days, then have all battles fought end at 24 hour increments. For example, if Alliance 1 starts a battle immediately at the start of the war, cool. They duke it out for a full 24 hours. If Alliance 2 starts a fight two hours into the war, cool. They duke it out for 22 hours. All the battles would end at 24 hour increments (24, 48, 72, etc) and whichever alliance has the most skulls at that time wins. This would work out fine, because even if an alliance waits 12 hours into the day to start a battle, both the attacker and defender would have the same amount of time to go at it (12 hours) so it is fair on both sides. Since all battles end at the same time, there is no room for exploiting the current system of swapping players, without sacrificing their skulls earned in one of the alliances. Of course, there may be alliances who are just so big that they could take the player loss and still win, but this would drastically reduce the problem at least.

 

There would have to be a limit how close to the end you could start a new battle though, say 6 hours. Like no attacks after 18 hours have passed on any specific war day. Got to have some small accounting for time zones, and there would be that one (clever) alliance who would try to start a war with 5 minutes to go, and win a Fiefdom with like 3 battles lol.

 

-------------- Anywho, thats my idea. Any feedback would be appreciated. Once again, I am not necessarily for or against the idea of player swapping in theory, just throwing my ideas out there. Thank you.

How about once a war season starts there is a moratorium on player movement. I have seen in other games that involved guilds that if you left a guild you had to wait a certain amount of time before being able to join another. I say freeze players leaving and joining alliances till after war season is over. You fight with what you have at the moment the season starts. This should atleast be in affect for alliances that are still involved in a war. If an alliance loses all its fiefdoms and cannot continue in the war season they should be able to make player adjustments to prepare for the next war season.

While unlimited swapping obviously has some negative side effects, I’m not too sure about a complete player freeze.

I mean, if some members just turn inactive or just do no single attack for several days (e.g. as they go for holidays, phone broke, whatever), then not having any means of replacing them by someone that actually participates in the wars would be very detrimental. Also, if some members leave (or there are just some unfilled spots) shortly before a war season begins, the alliance couldn’t recruit any replacements for those. 

 

For a complete freeze system to work, other changes would have to be made first. 

 

 

Having globally synchronized start/end times for the individual wars within a season/league might be better.

 

But speaking about the overall start/end times another question comes to my mind: Would this be fair to people in different time zones?

E.g. if your alliance contains members mostly from one area of the world (e.g. Europe, Asia, Australia, …) and all the start/end times are somewhere during deepest night for you, while for others it is at evening when they have time for raiding. Wouldn’t you feel a bit cheated? You never could fight back if the other alliance would catch up close to end of war, as you would typically all be asleep then. Even for individual league tournaments, you want to be awake and online close to end of time, to check if any opponents try to overthrow you. Same applies to alliance war. 

all good points…makes me glad i went into hardware side of computers and not programming. Tho i would probably have a bigger bank account.

Yes, yes, yes. This is perfect, for so many reasons.

  1. It keeps players from guild-hopping.

  2. It prevents anyone from getting a head start. For example, if the start time is 2:00am for me, and every other guild starts their wars less than 24 hours away from one another, then they get an extra battle than me. That’s not fair. This whole 2hr 30min grace time gives certain guilds a /severe/ advantage. So limiting everyone to the same number of battles would prevent this.

I feel that it’s the guild’s responsibility to adapt to this. Most guilds have members from various timezones, and so can appoint people from each time zone to make sure they have at /least/ 19 hours in the day to go to war. If you can’t declare a war until after 12 hours, then there are some serious problems in the leadership.

Actually, I have a better idea:

How about, rather than synchronized Ending times, why not just have synchronized Start times? In other words, after, say, 2:00am, you can declare War again. And these Wars last for 24 hours, giving everybody a chance.

The only regulatory factor to this might be, you can’t declare War after 18 hours after the Start time. Otherwise you might have guilds who save their first Declaration until 1:59am, and then double-whammy whichever opponent is already being spread thin.

But overall, synchronized Start times with 24 hour wars, even though many wars might overlap, would give everyone a chance and keep the number of battles mostly equal.

Although, in reference to player swapping… I’d say that you should just freeze new members’ skull counts until the ends of the wars they started in. This would allow guilds to recruit, but wouldn’t allow them to call people in at the last minute.