This is what going to happen if we won 3 wars in a roll.

The title says it all. We have won 3 times in a roll which are #1, #1 and #2 respectively. Last war was a tough 1. We have only 31 members, but we have to fight against clan with 34 - 39 members. Very tough war , but we are lucky enough and won #2 for previous war.

 

 

Now, check out the current session war.

 

 

 

Are you guys serious? Our clan is rank 130 only and need to fight against clan with rank 22 and 51 ? 30 players vs 54 players ? I think flaregames must have high expectation on our clan. LOL

 

Suggest to have a skip this war button if you can’t fix the matching algorithm. Thanks

what will happen is that you will lose the next war , which is normal.You can’t win every season , at some point you will lose.

This happen to most alliances, even most top 20 alliances.

 

If you win 4 or 5 fieldoms? You are going to face a lot stronger alliances next season.

If you lose (-3 fieldom) you will face weaker alliances next season. Your opponent will have the same thought as you, your alliance is too strong and it isn’t fair.

Same is happening for our alliance. We can’t do much about it. Flare made it that way (unless someday they change the system). We can’t win all the time, especially if your alliance have 28 members and your fighting against 35-45 member alliances.

Last war season, we finished 1st against 29-35 member alliances by merely 100 skull points. This time, it’s just too much.

 

10502354_659013224243094_480636976375389

Agree with you guys. But I am not saying that only our clan has this issue. In fact, there are a lot of complaints about this. I just make this topic to address the issue to flaregames. They have to tweak the matching algorithm. We want a challenging war but not a mission impossible war.

If you would always be matched against the same or nearly the same numbered alliances - you would stack up fiefdoms cause strong 31 people alliance would always win weak ones and there is no telling - would be there another strong one alliance with same number of people or not. Then, one day, you would level up your alliance to level 55, obtain 60 people and be with 100 fiefdoms, while all others are struggling to even get to 80. So, it would become common practice to stay at 10-15 members, collect fiefdoms and then level up your alliance. More than that - right now, only new fiefdoms come from those new and low membered alliances. If they stop to match by fiefdom count - alliances at the top would simply dry weaker ones out to 3 fiefdoms and be happy about it.

Doesn’t matter how frustrated you are about this matchmaking - it works. In a perfect world where 100 millions of people play this game and there are really ALOT of alliances - you probably  would always be matched with nearly the same numbered alliances. But we have just about 350 000 of players, that’s why even medium alliances are numbered. If you want a shot at winning more - level up your alliance to 60 members and try hard recruiting. Otherwise - you would always be a food for higher alliances, in a system like we have in RR2 - it’s the only decent way for AW to work.

Thanks for the explanations. It makes sense :slight_smile:

 

I completely understand the ruck up, suck up, and move out. I am the same way. I would; however, like to see a system put in place. This system simply allows the players who do not participate to not loose skulls to the other alliance. Once a person attacks, they can be attacked. But, if they do not attack, they are invisible to the opposing alliance.

 

What do you all think?

It’s wrong on so many levels… Cause then every alliance could withhold all, or various players till the last hours, when not everyone could play. Or they can withhold weak ones.

But for a real life changing suggestion - simply remove 60 hours restriction and reduce skulls that could be earned when guy leaves alliance. 20% reduction if he was out of main alliance for 1 hour or less, 80% reduction in skulls if he was out for more than 10 hours. 30% reduction if guy changes alliance (plus additional reduction for every hour after the first one). Reduction applies to current wars*

 

 

This is being done already. Kick all your lower levels and invite them back when you need a few extra skulls. This can be done over and over again without the 60 hour cool down as long as the kicked members do not join another alliance.

 

Removing the 60 hour restriction is absurd!!! It keeps people honest. With all the calculations on restrictions, who would know how to utilize that system, well, cheaters. It is best to keep it rock solid and you cannot participate if you were apart of another alliance.

 

It also discourages alliance hopping for those who are afraid of commitment.

You’re right that the 60 hour restriction discourages alliance hopping, but what RevenanT suggests might even work better against it. If you leave your alliance and you can only win 80% of the skulls when you get back, that works way better than not being able to win skulls for an other alliance. This not only discourages hopping, this also discourages “dirty” tactics.

 

I honestly like the idea RevenanT!

Leave or join a clan is prohibited during war session. A user can only be kicked and join same / other clan when the war is over. What do you guys think ?

 

Thank you. I laughed for a long time.

Then no one will be able to make the first attack.

 

Maybe you mis understood. If a person does not attack the other alliance they cannot be attacked by the opposing alliance. Once a person enters the attack screen to select another person to attack, they are fair game. Lay of the pot dude, your brain is worth more! :stuck_out_tongue:

 

I will add your suggestions here (link below). Thanks for the idea. Sorry for shooting it down :slightly_frowning_face:

 

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/3517-i-huge-list-of-recommendations-for-flaregames/

Not necessarily. It just means that only the strongest member would attack ^_~ He whose leader has the best defense wins the season~ xD

 

This might help out some with the balancing issues:

 

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/3433-crown-a-champion-in-war-gamesnext-update/

 

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/4187-%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F-%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%8F-55-wins-in-a-row/

 

World record? :rolleyes: