devs how do you predict that a 66v33 would go 60 guild hansels and 6 hybrids v 30 t5hlbc hansels and 3 attack builds the guild hansels have twice the amount of xtals and to ko someone you dont need to win just pin them
I would say if clan fall into no match, there will at least have some basic amount of mirth as reward
One question to admin: If we have two clan which participate in estock (hypothetic). How big must be a difference between this clans to opt out them from fight? 5ppl? 10? 20?
new speed war Can we have some speed wars? Cut war time in 1/2 (2 hrs) Speed up regen and ko time 2x so we can keep the same number of actions. If the devs need more ass on the backside to get performance up on db servers.. Contact me. Www.bluegrass.net. I can help Redeye DFA
Please do Fixed # battles 30 - 45 - 60 - 75 and we can choose which battle to enter. We do not need to have the exact amount in our clan to sign up but the max member we fight would be restricted. Also look at the figures on scouting because people are scouting massive hansel/spy builds far to easy making people run with 2,3 or 4 guild hansels rather than a big hansel its not balanced.
With full bars at the beginning of war you can do a max of 60 actions. (Attacking and assassination) My match up last night was 43v58, which just from the start, is a total of 900 more actions they do. And another 900 more if they mass crystal as a clan. I don't see how in anyway possible that can be fair? It would be physically impossible to win unless they have inactive in war(which they didn't). I'm an honest person and I never complain about match ups, but last night was the worst match ups you have produced since the Estoc Trials started. I'm asking as a fellow ham being to refund us something, whether it be Estoc Edge, or crystals. Just something to show you're not the cold hearted devs we all think you are.
@ tnt didnt ur mama ever tell u "if u dont have anything nice to say, dont say anything at all"?? nothing constructive, jus calling people idiots lol haters gon hate i guess
I have a question... Rather a request U state that with the no match found system we should check to see clans of our size and rank and try to match them to avoid being left out of wars... With this I completely agree and agree with no match found .. Believe that and opt in spell are the two best things uve fixed since this started But my question is how do we find that info ? Once the wars are over that info is gone and we have no way of knowing who else was close to us in rank or size to make these adjustments My request would be a war record 1 by date of EE war then list all the wars so we can have a record of the results and participants 1 under clan name on war results screen just make a line if text that reads ex. 43/70 size 50 And for the other clan the same so we can compare If we had a no match found but were 47/70 and 45 we would no our better changes would be to get to 50 or 40 or whatever the most clans in our size bracket were fighting at As it is now we get a 4 hour window while we are trying to war to see wat other clans are at and how many and we don't even know where they rank unless some one there is kind enough to tell us
How does this help us that were mis-matched this week? We were outnumbered by 11, but had to war? And received nothing in the way of "oh, sorry we f'd up" from ATA devs. We lost mith,xstalls,gold fighting a war we couldnt win or get out of. Maybe look at what ur doing next time!
no-matchup option will piss kaw ppl, imagine that clan prepare for war, that invite friends (some do it) and then no-war ...... -------- we need more clans to participate, then will be better matchups. only way how to do it is double hit-earnings during wars ... then will be for all kaw ppl better join estoc then do epics in war times xtaling will have finally good income-ratio; now it's waste xtaling for 400mil-1b unload ( ppl in danger that are pinned after xtaling)
Devs have you thought about letting the warring clans decide? I think those clans that have an odd match up should have the choice to war. For instance if 2 clans were matched by the system but it's not a great match; let the clans decide. Notify the clans of the matchup and statistics like you do now, but then give those clans the choice of whether they want to proceed with the war. Both clans would have to choose to accept the matchup in order for the war to proceed. If either clan chooses "no" than the war is off, but it leaves the choice in the hands of the clan. The mechanics could be very similar to the current war declaration system where a certain number of admins must accept the war. In this case, both sides would vote to accept. I would propose that the owner must be one of those votes and then possibly 2 admins in addition. This way the choice is ours whether we want to take the chance or not.
And what do the clans get that have organised time around the war they want to do maybe 50 mith 1st time 40,30,20,10 and eventually 0 mith rewarded people will learn by then
I don't know what to say. Now we have to do the devs job for them? 25-100 too big of a range to scout every possible clan on Kaw for. And roster sizes change each war. I'm all for the no match. But how about some idea of what a "no match" is. Is it 5?10?15?20? Accounts. You say. If alot of clans are warring "60" then war that number. Well if 5 clans sign up around 60. Who gets the no match? If you created brackets as suggested numerous times before or replace a max number cap would be best. Because a clan warring 100 one day could war 50 the next. Too much guess work. Too much time to end up in a mismatch even though your clan is matched Obviously with all the mismatch yesterday. The 100 max cap didn't help. So of the few clans warring yesterday like 10 would have got no match? That's not gonna work if you have almost a 50-50 chance of not warring after all that work
******* ****. Not even a match up...??? Now I have to wait another week or so till I can do estocs.bull.
Re: Estoc Trials - No Match Feature *EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY* OR You've just given no match up - why when it said 'ROUND 5' not 4