Points 3 and 4 don't make a lot of sense to me. But the rest sounds interesting. I imagine however that decision paralysis will make the whole EE soirée a case of death by a thousand cuts.
I dropped build to gh from 8m cs to war. Discovered the seasoned clan I joined for EE was very **** at wars on my tz and consecutively lost 200b stripping myself for towers and pots and mith for 3 wars that were all losses. I will not war again under this system. I have won 1 war out of 8 and it has cost me largely. Now I'm in the process of rebuilding my stats at a cost of 800b roughly..... Result: approx 1tr exp to war. Failed at gh without mith equip and can't gain entry to good clans without the gh perk. Previously as a 2.5m attack stat I failed against many gh with mith equipment they've gotten from these wars, and meanwhile they kick my ass. Result: no point in warring. The smaller newer clans have no chance while the experienced clans continuously rake in the mith. My vote is with old fashioned merc wars. Where the minimum combined actions from both sides is 500 or mith rewards are dropped, and the forfeit ability is disabled.
Nobody is mentioning it, but I think more Asian times are needed. For example I wanna weekday war that starts 9:00 pm here in Japan. But the times are all American. What does ATA have against us Asians? Is it because we are all too good-lookin'?
First, some of what was said would make the game more interesting and fun, random or player controlled regen times. But I have a real issue with the concept of b-hurt people claiming foul about other players build design choice that took as much work BUT far more imagination and perceptive observation of game mechanics then blind building. OMETs for example (at least the core ones) have a disdain for OCD monkeys who's view of a war game is homogenized pre-packaged button pushing slug fests. We value actual strategy and tactics - you want your war pre-packaged so everyone has one choice in build. What a BORING brain - I spent the last 3 years building this account a GH - and with tons of equipment I CHOSE to spend tons of gold on to enchant -INSTEAD OF adding buildings. WHY?? Because I was given the choice of how to advance my build 1) the straight forward way of LAND and then maxing my buildings OR 2) NOT building bigger stat buildings but increasing my BOnus from allies (something that has been the main feature of the game from the beginning) Then when I saw equipment I saw that IT was "exploitable" BECAUSE you can't strip it as in an OSW - wow so as my allies sold I bought enferno by the BUCKETs at 7.5B a pop. I maxed my equipment. NOT to Do EEs but because this game mechanic has been around since the BEGINNING of KAW and I CHOSE a LONG and HARD path to building a NON-traditional build. It was because of MY experiment with the OMET home clan of TLAL0CAN and OMETs coming out of hiding that the advantages of patience in making this build became evident. BUT it is hardly NEW - read OMETs first post about our builds and the GH or OMET build. So now our ingenuity and hard work will be rewarded by trashing the build and the time money and effort spend to add a different facet to the game??? Absurd! Giant stats builds have advantage over me and I have advantages over them - just as a spy build or a tower build has or a build with huge bonuses from Allies and those with NO allies (I.e. unstrippable) BUT hey here is a good idea - why not make a NEW KAW - with only one build, and all gold is auto banked, and each build has a sign on it saying its stats to the other player so they KNOW how often they will win, and then if you win you earn enough gold to build up your account in a single day but if you lose you don't lose any gold and oh here is one -- there is an approved build that is mapped out for you at the beginning. OMG HOW OLD is the person who wrote this thread and why don't we make sure he stops playing a game he can't figure is supposed to be about LEARNING the game NOT changing the RULES AFTER the GAME has been being played for YEARS under those rules. TOWER build modifications I could (sort of) understand BECAUSE they were a NEW build that sprang up because of EEs. But I have been a GUILD Hansel (OMET build) for the entire game and when plunder wars still existed and OSW. Want to change an exploit?? I dropped all my defense potions because it earns less plunder for the other side - fix that and then GHs advantage is completely reduced. BUT PLEASE developers if the "issue" is not one that has SPRUNG up recently as a result of a change recently made STOP changing the rules years after we have been playing by them because of a FEW whiners. My build is one I chose for OSW and now I demonstrate its good for EE and it cost just as much gold and effort to get it maxed out with allies and potions and VAST payments for enferno as some dumb kid spent building up new buildings on all his lands - I chose BFA as my choice in attack stats he chose building stats- simple My BFA stats are strippable his buildings are NOT. My build needs patience to build in order to attack him HIS does not. Each has a number of pros and cons Lack of strategy or changing the rules of the game years into it is basically cheating those who followed the rules and its a sore loser.
@frog. The fact is there are around 20 signups for the Asian wars. Matches are rarely even at all with those numbers. It's just a toss up to who is -3 or completely outmanned in those wars. Think last week there were like 8 matches made for 1 Asian war. There are 12 wars already. We DON'T need more.
While I agree that the EE system is broken, proposed solutions for the most part do not fix the underlying problems. First we have to agree on what we want from EEs: I think the biggest problem with EEs is that some of the people wanted good wars, but many simply wanted the good equipment that comes from winning. If many people simply want good equipment, then they will want easy wins and work to subvert anything done to try to create good matchups. (1) No support. Nice try but simply replaces tracking with constant sweeping. Neither is particularly fun, but sweeping much more tedious. (2) Partial support - changing mechanics on scout makes sense; it is too easy now. I am not sure anything is wrong with rewarding KOs however. (3) No Support. While a good idea, this is not the major problem with matchups currently. If you look at what determines a players strength in EE, in order of importance it is: 1. BFE 2. CS 3. BFA (for top 1000 - 2000 LB players BFA is more important than CS) 4. "strategy or skill" While I agree including prestige in some manner would be a proxy for (4), the least important factor in my mind "strategy", until the first three factors are correctly incorporated, it makes no sense to attempt to work on the least signifigant. (5) No support. No reason to change mechanics of guilds; a good matchup algorithm would incorporate their effect It is good that you are trying to (indirectly) address the BFE issue, but new players have to be given a chance against seasoned veterans who chose to tear down building and reduce stats. They are not going have fully enchanted EB equipment, and should not be subject to that type of matchup.
@OMET So you would like to consider your guild build a full-fledged complete build. Fine, then it should pay like one, not some mere 10 mil like now but the 60m+ you guys get when you hit us. Personally, that is my biggest beef with the build.
60 mil?? My build only gets in the 50s mil when hitting a fully potted HLBC Hansel - get your facts strait Also regular GH with no SD towers is easily countered in EE. It's only hansels that have significant SD towers that r useful and they pay much better when other side hits but make crappy plunder - stop talking about stuff u don't understand
Oh dear god... Phil a gh with SD (the only useful type of gh in war) Pays more 15-30mill depending on the amount of sd, so before assuming things like we pay a mere 10mill why dont you find out your self? Also with SD up It decreases our plunder earning abilities greatly, so hitting Someone fully def potted most gh with SD make about 30-35mill, and a hansel with no def pots 20mill. You obviously dont understand anything to do with Gh and plunder, so why assume things?? :|
Thank you Emily ! You expressed yourself more clearly than I He clearly lacks the fundamental knowledge about builds/build payout, EE strategy, etc... but insists on posting about it - it's just silly...
At least phil is trying to suggest some solutions to the current EE war problems. If we make plunder from gh and normal hansels not based on the amount of adp they have but rather the types of buildings a kingdom has, this can fix it. Adp should not reflect on plunder earned. As a gh myself, they are vastly overpowered ONLY because of the plunder earned issue. Not who they can hit or because they have equipment. Bigger builds have the same equip. I agree with prestige/bfa based matchups, but have a few brackets for builds. Say 250k-2.5mcs, 2.5m-6mcs, 6-9mcs, and HLBC only(9-12m cs) Then matchup clans in these individual brackets based on prestige first, bfa second. Tracking needs to be reduced/eliminated. Like it or not, some clans DO use bots/outside devices/programs to track. I've personally seen it. Make random and faster regens. When someone is koed, you'll know to wait say like 10 minutes then anywhere 11-15 minutes after ko, they will come up. It'll be randomized. The other ideas I've seen are pretty good. Bashing phil isnt going to solve our issues with EE. We need to let the ATA developers know our ideas and opinions, so that they can figure out how to make the game better so players dont quit. Less players = less income. And without DRASTIC changes, I honestly think we will see a decrease in clans participating in EE season 2.
Phil, good suggestions! Support! My ass gets handed to me in ee by a GH! Is embarrassing! But to all the EE! Respect! Y'all a diff breed and a evolution to the game! I don't EE! I prefer osw/ eb! Lol I hope to see some changes however!
First off I want to say that the title of this thread is quite presumptuous. You present your findings as if they are a fait accomplit when they are simply your ideas for how you would reshape future EE wars. Getting that out of the way there are some valid points. 1. I think I would like to see a couple changes. First is put clan number in the cc messages. So 3 Pumm has Ko'd 18 Hobbit. Regarding random regen times I think the best solution would be to have someone recover at the 15 min mark but that person will have up to 1-2 minutes to initiate an action after which time he would open up for opposing actions. 2. I am ambivalent about this point. 3. This will not work. Look at the top clans. You have top lb clans and bottom feeding Gh clans. It would not be fair to match them. 4. Again ambivalence. 5. The Gh advantage as you put is directly a result of the anachronistic payout system. Kaw has been around for at least 4 years (I could be wrong) but equipment has only been around for 1.5 years. It's time that equipment - like bfa - be factored into the payout system. A typical Gh with modest equipment is almost entirely useless in EE war; a well equipped tower Gh in war can be a ferocious terror. With many of the Gh in prominent war clans, their cs equivalent from bfe is about 6M. Add this to their size and bfa and a typical t5bc build would make about 40-45M off of them if they have no def pots. This is a fair amount. On the flip side the same Gh would be stronger and their plunder vs big builds would be decreased. A bc Gh would probably see their plunder go from 52 back down into the 40-45 range. This change would balance out the payout discrepancy and as well could be applied to "regular" kaw such as in osw or bl. 6. The devs have tried this on numerous occasions and have said repeatedly that there are not enough clans warring at these times to offer so many. 7. A. No. B. No again. Prep time is so important. C. Get rid of the vp for losers. Give losers a payout based on their contribution to the war. I was thinking 25-50% range of what they would have received had their clan won the war. This prevents throwing or laying down for a war as well as cuts down on eb time for clanmates who were not participating in war. Extra notes: Bfe needs to be considered in matchup. It should be lumped in with bfa. The devs should have fixed numbers for war. Each war could have 2 sections. Exactly 25 or 32. Each war would only have 25 vs 25 or 32 vs 32. This eliminates the biggest problem - being outnumbered. To make it easier on clan admin the devs could design it so that if people sign up a clan with more people than the designated numbers that people are randomly dropped until 25 or 32 are reached.
Adding prestige rank will not work in the long run. Yes it would work for the first few wars but the prestige rank increases as a clan wins so before long, the winning weaker clans would have prestige ranks equal to the stronger losing clans in your scenario. BFE, BFA, towers, spy builds, and ghs determine the outcome of the war. Honestly, 98% of the wars do not even need to be fought because you can look at the clans builds beforehand and know who will win. That is just sad, boring, unsporting, and wrong in every way.
great thread with a lot of great ideas. I really like the idea of one auto generation with 10 min left in the war, or better yet, make the auto regeneration happen when the clock has only 2 min left
A fully potted Gh pays 30 mil. If youre complaining that we get alot of plunder drop your defense pots, we did it. Instead of getting 40 mil a hit, we get 20.
As an ex ee gh myself. I made 40m off successful attacks and that was before I put up 9 towers. I paid out 25-35m with max sdp. Everyone assumes ghansels are absolutely killing every build on plunder, and maybe in the case of the rare ones who have 8tr in ally's.... But for the average guild hansel. It's pretty damn average.