Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! 30 -60 match up don't seem to be addressing the poor match up. It's seem to make it worse.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! War 1, i saw Clan war rebel with 34 members or something VS HGL of 56. The match up still not fair
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Please introduce the handicap system to make up the gap in strength and numbers. For example, with the current roster of HGL, you can hardly find another clan in comparable strength or no. of warriors, considering ZAFT and apocalypse are out of ee wars now. Simple matching no. 1 with no. 2 doesn't solve the problem. There could still be a huge gap between the two consecutive ranks and it's not fair to the weaker side. Don't forget that it costs lots of miths and pots for wars. Thanks for listening and hope this issue can be addressed.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Ok here's another complaint about matchups. I know I know. First off the clan I am in for the most part has always had good matchups. However 3 out of last 4 matchups have been horrible. Today it was 30 vs 45. There top 20 were comparable to ours. 15 extra files gives them the opportunity to make approximately 750 more actions at start of war. 15 x (25 attack 25 spy) = 750. Add in 2 xrstals - 2250 possible extra actions. I say possible because a failed action diminishes ur troops more than a successful action. However even failed actions diminish ur opponents troops. Lame in my book. Last Saturday my main hlbc attack file was ko'd twice by failed scout. Really a failed scout action can ko u. Lame. I was also ko'd once by a failed assn. I have spent 3 years building my file to get KO'd by failed action by a 1 month newb with combined 1K stats. my 1 attack on them should pummel their entire troops. I ahve put too much time in to get Ko'd by a failed action by a newb. ok enough with that rant. back to my point - Even if these extra 15 files had all failures (weakens opponent) it gives the other 30 ppl better opportunity to make successfull actions. In the end still providing the opportunity to make a lot more actions. Two ways to fix this crap. Make number of participates a set number like 30,40,50 etc.. R a smaller gap like 30-35 , 35-40 etc. yea I know. Some people will be left out. So this ain't perfect. But matchups will be better. Other option which I have stated before. Reduce the affect of a failed action. Why should I be penalized due to ur failure. This would eliminate the affect of smaller files spam attacking larger files. This would even out the extra 2000 attacks I spoke of up above. Next topic. I'll say it again. Have clan hierarchy. Main, war clan, training clan , etc. war time. Ppl go to war clan. Veil issue resolved. U don't lose estotic edge to move to the family clans. I spent all day trying to organize our war effort for Wednesday. I am father of three and have full time job. I want to enjoy kaw. Not make it a job. Remove the worthless Allie chat and make it a family chat. That's my two cents. I hope ur listening devs. Like always. Typing on iPad.dont give a crap about spelling and grammar. Ciao
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Good thoughts and it's worth a try!!! We've had matchups with 21 more people on the opposition. Even for us vets that can be hard to overcome
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Support cabo !! The idea of smaller accounts being used to spam attack larger builds is total BS!! And the idea of failed actions creating a KO for the opponent is a bit contradicting don't you think since they LOST ... Fix
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Support Cabo! EE should not be dropped if you go to family or allied clans, or there should not be a limit of 100 members for each clan.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Hopefully I can get feedback from Devs, why can't all our ideas be incorporated into the current system? A lot of the feedback is identical in ideas. If we open up EE to 2 hour wars and 4 hour wars. 15-20 clan members in war, 30-50, 60-100. Like I'm seeing the same things over and over again. Winning clans with 60-100 people get more levels of EE(levels 9-10 with 60-100
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! 60 v 40, didn't even stand a chance. 20 extra ppl, over 140 extra hits plus Xtals , plz explain devs
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! no max purchases but you could only own up to 6pcs of mithrils, what do you guys think?
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Any plans of bringing out 2hr long wars. I know was mentioned in beginning. I think would be easier for more plyrs to commit to this shorter time slot.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Hi Devs, can I please suggest that u adjust the war times by 1hr for us in SGT timezones. War 2 and 4 please Add 1hr War 1, 3 and 5 please take 1hr. This would get more participation from me and likely Asia n Perth
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! I want to war but can't with all current times.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! Funnel the Fun of Estoc Edge Wars Dear Devs, I am concerned for the new war system. I have either participated in every Estoc Edge war, or 'watched' others' wars. I see the one complaint gravitate above all other grumblings - 'How can this matchup be fair, they were stronger and/or outnumbered us badly! How can this be fixed?' You are trying to solve the timezone issue by simply adding new war times. This is wrong. You are spreading the clans thin(If they haven't given up on your system already). 12 signed up on for war #1(No numbers for me to compare with yet), 46 for war #2(Which was at 80+ weeks ago), and I fear the numbers for war #3. By increasing the number of wars, fewer clans will sign up some days, thus, you are increasing the potential of poor matchups, which is OUR (the players, the ones that keep you in business) biggest complaint. Some may argue that there is a huge OSW now that is restricting many from doing EE war, but that means the devs must be very careful with the new, and VERY delicate war system. We are gamers, we are by nature slackers, procrastinators, and lack focus. You offering a gamer 5 FOUR HOUR WARS requires more than 20 hours a week of our time. Some gamers have a hard time holding down a job for 20 hours a week. So what do we do, we procrastinate, and say we will catch 1 war next time. Maybe 2 wars. Or we quit that job and no longer buy xtals ;-). See my point? Solutions: 1- Funnel the clans into a ROTATING war schedule that works for a worldwide game. Make it fair to the gamers that don't live by PST. 2- Funnel the clans into 2 FOUR hour wars to get those signup numbers up. More signing up, better odds of a fair match. 3- Add a 3rd TWO Hour war that also has a rotating schedule. Because ANYTHING 4 hours is a HUGE request for the gamers' attention span. 4- Give the gamers plenty of advance notice, remember we are slackers. ;-) 5- See above. 6- Look again. 7- Think about it. 8- Now you're getting it. ;-) 9- Make it happen, we are counting on you. Game on, Zoom
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! It's obvious that wars should be geared towards US and Europe to get max participation. Friday and Saturdays are the big war days and those are US and US/europe wars respectively. Make a Tuesday 8p est war and watch 60-80 teams sign up. Do a 20-40 max war on Tuesday and you will get some awesome matchups. If your clan is too big for max 40 then skip the war. It's an additional one anyway. But more likely u can slim down for it.
Re: Kingdoms at War - 01/29/12 Update - all 30 minimum! MIUIR has hit the nail on the head Devs, please take strong consideration of his/her post. Very well thought out and points 5 and 6 must be followed to the letter before getting to point 7