1. in the match-ups take into account all bonuses (BFA + CS + BFE) that each person has. it will be much better wars if you put 2 clans with similar total strength against each other regardless of where the stats came from. 2. Change the GH built advantages. It is an old built that nobody even remember why it is there. it should have the same power and abilities as other buildings. 3. significantly diminish the Towers advantage. couple of ways of doing that might be: Limit the number of towers that each person can be to 10% of the total buildings they have. significantly decrease static power - maybe even make it identical to another built with the same stats. 4. in order to avoid bad match-ups limit the BFA of LBs at some reasonable amount - lets say 150 mil cs. THis will allow the matches to be much closer as couple of LB will not move entire clans in the brackets that are too high for them. 5. Allow a clan to sign up a few standbys in addition to the ppl participating in the war. It allow you as devs to move alternates in to make match ups of similar size / strength clans. 6. Allow a clan to kick inactives after 15-30 minutes and have your system assigned another standby that will keep the match close. 7. a clan that obviously signs for a war in order not to get a matchup should not get the the red-paladin bonus. In fact using the suggestions above you can still remove some of their players, Bonuses, and players to create a matchup for them with a clan that is stronger then them. 8. Come up with a clear explanation as how how miths are distributed at the end of the war. Right now it sems to be very random. 9. allow system wars between clans that are really trying to war (for mith). I think you gained enough experience figuring out who is abusing the system - if clans do give them a harsh punishment. 10. SEND ME A FAT CHECK FOR DOING YOUR WORK FOR YOU!
Are you autistic? Guild Hansel is there to make ridiculous amounts of money with minimal investment. You seem butthurt. Next time don't drop the soap.
... okay and I don't know what to say, but I rather to be patience until devs throw some changes for Estoc Trials - Season two... Though, we can still participate regular Estoc Trials while devs make the changes for mechanics, of course... btw, this game, nothing real thing. Also, your step 10 should be slim check... lolz... OP is butt hurt... We don't know for sure until devs throw the changes for season two, so go back to epic battles...
TO Superman: It seems that one of us is butt hurt and knows the mechanics as to how you can avoid it in the future . . . who let ppl in jail play KAW anyway. As to my proposed changes - I will war anybody at anytime - win or lose I much prefer as close of a match to have fun. Unlike some 5 years olds bullies (recognize yourself there superman) that only get satisfaction from war if they are much much stronger then the other clan. Having even matched wars will bring much more fun to the system, will allow many more people to war. Hopefully will remove ppl with less then dbl figure IQ (yes that you superman). if you dont know what IQ means please ask your 3rd grade teacher
Every season people come up with a build that is an " exploit" and every season people cry and whine about them..next season will be no different..guess what? Towerbuilds still here and still kick butt..guild Hansels will get tweaked but will still pack a punch..adapt over come or go home
Taking BFE into account is only going to increase the chances of a no match. The more variables introduced, More likely, that a clan won't get matched.
A solution to the bad matchups is increasing clan participation. There are clans right now trying to practice for season 2. The problem is the system wars dont offer the same war as season wars. Add a 2 hour war to the system wars that uses the matchup system. Let clans choose their own timing and offer small mith rewards to the winners. Now you have more clans that can actually be competive in season wars. Next step is to use thr already established prestige system in determining mathups...no more canon fodder for the already established clans. Above anything else, sitting in pin for 2 or 3 wars does NOT encourage participation.You must allow new clans to face each other, gain some more traction and experience. This is the only way to fix the matchup system...cultivate more participation. Create or change the system wars so that they ate available for season training. Youve already done the work, its a simple alteration. Make it happen and you wont have so many people complaining about bad matchups because you will have more participation. The solution is easy
The only item on this list I agree with is implementing a way to kick inactives. Real life happens and sometimes people who thought they would be free suddenly aren't. One of our warriors had to take a family member to the hospital. Another got suddenly ill. Another had a tornado touchdown nearby and knock out the power lines... these things happen. I would support offering a way to boot inactive players (those with no activity on their account since the start of war. It is possible to have 0 actions but still be active- especially for very small builds who try but fail to hit their targets). I also hope the developers will offer a way to "undo" Wave of Conflict- this could be tricky, particularly if a clan has 25 warring and someone opts out at the last minute. But if a clan admin could "remove" people from warring (for personal emergencies, or simply if someone casted without permission), this would be very helpful. I'm sorry, though, I don't agree with any other suggestion made here. Guild Hansels are fine. Find them annoying- then figure out how to beat them. Plenty of other people have (Ask Rising Hawks of PA). Tower builds are fine, and solid. Those who complain about them simply don't want to invest the gold necessary to build them, or aren't willing to lose some EB plunder in order to build them. That's your choice, but it's not a reason to remove them from those of us who are willing to make those sacrifices. Limiting BFA? No. BFA is an investment, and those who utilize BFA have invested a lot of time and gold into it. The Devs already take BFA into account and monitor BFA changes post match-up closely. BFE- Earned through hard work and loads of xtals. Clans shouldn't be penalized for earning awesome EQ by having it count against them in war. What it comes down to, is you seem to want to make it easier for those unwilling to invest putting a good war build together to win. I don't blame you.... but it simply doesn't, and shouldn't, work that way. You want to win at war, you have to start with a winning build, and war with a clan full of winning builds. That's all there is to it.
why should devs do half the work for you, take cate of your own inactives, if a build us better, change yours to it. Some of the rigging of buying mass allies after match should be fixed etc. But the stuff we cam change and control, its up to us to bring a group of correct builds strategically to win
I still haven't heard a single meaningful reason why counting BFA is acceptable, while BFE counting is seemingly a bad thing. That's as silly as it sounds...
Most of these steps i disagree on on...you need to work hard. Towers kill plunder..its a fair trade But i do agree about GH, their rate of earnings is completely unfair.
many ideas here very bad -especially idea of limit towers ...???? why?? towers bring to game strategic planning.... if you remove it them will be boring -kicking inactives? set clan rule that who join war and don't hit is farm target and your ppl will think twice before join war -ghansels need just small change ... fix their earnings against stronger player in war ------- btw I don't like ghansels and I won and lost many wars; but: all ppl know these things, so idk why aren't able using these informations as their war advantages (and rebuild to ghansels or rebuild to towers???) and only crying on forum ?????? I accept lost against clans like Rising Hawks = they were awesome enemies and wars against them were always tough and fun = they show other clans that you could win with weaker roster .... isn't this what should this system maintain? or you want only wars where bigger wins? coz without towers will be here system where have bigger big advantage we need fix: - scout ... and add more steal into war system - ghansels = lower their earnings as they are small builds - BFE add into system, with locking changes in equipment after sign up ad take them into account (then will be easier make weaker roster after no-matchup when was clan too strong) - maybe out of KO time make random between 10-20 mins to make tracking harder - 1x free war xtal .... will be less xtals need for war
Would it be possible just to cap bfe/a as appropriate in war to enable matchup. Yes you sign up with stupid high bfx but we only count so much to enable match. Simple logic statement as far as programing is concerned: min(actual bfx, bfx that enables match). Apologies if its been suggested before. Just thought of it.