Wars Improvement

First: as many people had said before: it would be better if we can choose the guys who will fight in war, and there will be no war between 11 players from the one side and 20 from the other side for example. 


Second: Why only the result from three best battles?!


Third: the Map should be changed.


Fourth (but not necessary): The rewards in war battle (exept from the scull) could be higher.

There is no point to this suggestion besides to complain.



First: If you choose your opponent you’re gonna choose a weak opponent. Then they will just complain it is not fair strong people can choose weak people.



Second: What alternative would you prefer? You don’t like the results from the 3 best battles count the most so what. Flare isn’t going to answer you. You are just making a complaint not even trying to suggest an improvement.



Third: Changed to what? Is that a suggestion or a complaint?



Fourth: You don’t want higher skull rewards? What is the point of complaining, about the 3 best attacks?

You don’t make much sense. Try thinking through your posts.

There needs to be an additional consideration when determining opponents in alliances wars.


Rank of the alliance alone does not work. There needs to be consideration for how many players are in an alliance.


For example… one alliance is ranked at #941 and another is ranked at #967. If you just use rank, these two alliances seem evenly matched…but they’re not. The first alliance has 17 players, the second has 10 players. The alliance ranked at #967 actually has much stronger players than the alliance ranked at #941.


10-player alliance - Rank: 967; Average number of trophies per player: 2,990; lowest level player: 63; highest level player: two at 86


17-player alliance - Rank: 941; Average number of trophies per player: 1,795; lowest level player: 34; highest level player: one at 65


Even the highest level player on the 17-player alliance would have a challenge beating the weakest player on the 10-player alliance.


These two alliances are not at all equal and should not be pitted against each other. These two alliances were the top two alliances in the war. The lower alliances had no chance at all against the 10-player alliance, but they were fairly evenly matched with the 17-player alliance.


This is happening right now in Alliance Wars. I am on the alliance with 17 players and not a single member of our alliance has been able to score more than a 100-200 skulls against any of the players of the 10-member alliance. They ran right over us…and all of the other alliances in this war…with no hope to defend against them. We only scored 545 to their 15,672. We have tried to fight them anyway and some of us have died before getting to the first barricade…scoring zero skulls.


There was not a single alliance in this war that was able to prevail against this elite group of players.


Not fair at all.



Alliances are not matched by their rank! But by the number of fiefdoms. By losing your war, you will lose  fiefdoms, and then you will be matched with easier alliances (but with the same amount of fiefdoms).

You inspired an idea!

Check this out!


Fiefdoms or rank…it doesn’t matter. If the strength of the alliance is not taken into consideration it’s still not a fair way of matching up alliances.


In our war, the top alliance had NO resistance from any of the other alliances. NONE. Some of the alliances appeared to give up…or couldn’t score at all and lost by 10,000+ to 0. The alliances were so mismatched there was no one to stop the top alliance from taking most of the map.


So where’s the challege for the strong alliance?


And where’s the fun for the weaker alliances?


A weaker alliance could have scored the same number of fiefdoms as a strong alliance…but that in NO WAY means they’re equal.

Turnuva rakiplerim benden çok güçlü … acil bir çözüm bulun malı