I personally don't see why, again , instead of fixing the current problem they should create a new format for tanks or whatever that will have even different problems . Primal in it's essence is the most fair war format imo. It just needs some tweaks . Whether that be In Matchup algorithm or in pot payout changes . But just deal with the problem head on . Stop making tangents that still are based on the original problem. But let's take a step back and look at the larger picture of it all. There is no general tutorial that teaches people war . There are no incentives to try war a few times where you will obv lose , to get the hang of it. It's almost like war needs an in game marketing campaign. It's the best part of the game imo and it just doesn't seem to get the attention it deserves by ATA.
IMHO- primals are doing fine the way they are ( easy for me to say, I guess). The tank builds and hybrid tanks complaining here are missing the main point about ee wars and 'their' role in it. I'll spell it out for ya- " IT AINT ABOUT THE PLUNDER". Just do your job and ummm "TANK".
Whiskey,tank or hy r not complaining.they want same fun as you r doing primal.if it is lvl field on pay out same or lil /- per steal or atk and then let best team/build/strat win the war.
Oh they don't want the kind of fun I have getting koed in the first minute of an indy war. Point taken
But im not against it if it will increase participation and help people feel they are getting a fair shake at wars.
Spies will still make more per steal than a attack build that attacks. Just fixes the balance in wars. Also hansels have cs advantage over tanks. A BC hansel has alot less cs than a attack build. If attack builds could drop sdp then it would all be fair but they cant bc they would easy be assass out
The point is there's already different war formats ( primals, rounds, indis- with classic, advantage and random formats). Each caters to a section of kaw user. In each, there's a role a build type has to take. Respect it, understand it and enjoy your wars for what it is. And strategize accordingly. I don't go into an indy war thinking about plunder. I go in thinking about a different role ( help my team gain control by getting a couple tanks down). A tank build has always been about helping your team control the war- understand it.
Hansel rosters can be beaten when the cs are close in matchup.... But how often does that happen ? Rarely Id say. So again this all goes back to the matchup system and increasing participation. But we have chicken and egg here People won't start warring until they feel they have a chance to win but we need more people to war to give everyone a better chance at a decent matchup. War rewards suck too
That's life. Everyone feels they are overworked and underpaid. Let's look at ee payouts- mith and ee levels 1 to 5. You win EE- you get the shiny bronze, silver and gold ee badge that actually helps plunder in ebs . You get mithril with an assortment of spells that make you stronger or help you in a strip or protect your gold investment. Can the mith payout be better- sure we always want more. But, like it or not- increasing any of the two rewards will actually diminish participation further. Can the mechs be tweaked or the formats revised, newer versions of war added- yes and a more resounding yeah! But, it's always gonna favor some users and alienate others. It's not about the devs caring about the clients- uneasy lies the head that wears the crown. Every action is always gonna have its share of naysayers.
Agree that there will always be naysayers ...however ... When war rosters fall into these patterns that exclude 90% of possible participants , it is not good for us and it is not good for the devs So now you have 90% naysayers instead of 25% There is no reason why the devs can not implement more stringent guidelines for rosters or roster ranges in order to possibly create better matchups I don't want to derail this thread but the pot payout, imo, is only being brought up because of the larger overall problems with war system .
Why wasn't this idiot IP banned. Let us first get rid of basement dwellers who make statless alts to forum post.
Everytime a hansel speaks up that Tanks complain have no biz speaking up against the issues. U want more ppl warring n more war clans for EE then u oughta face up to the facts. More Tanks in KaW than Hansels want war. 65/35 min Hansel rosters r best for EE. More Tanks r left out of wars. Leaves mostly IWar only not a war clan. Summary: if ppl don't care about Ops point then u don't care about the health of EE.
A: Hansels don't need ADT to slow down Assassins n lose lose out on EB plunder as well let alone Hansels make more plunder anyways for same eb's. A: Hansels get no mith for Assassins to not encourage Turtle Wars of old. Any WC can strat that one out. If ppl cannot recognize the imbalance then say nothing. Simply add another war format to counterbalance the anomaly. Q: Hansels have a problem with that?
Q: Tanks do u have any problem if a new format that counters current Primal War Hansel dominated rosters was at least trialed? FYI Hansels need not argue/complain. That in no way takes anything away from u.
Exactly, I stopped warring at the end of s4 because match ups are so terrible. Sorry but I don't want to waste my time warring a clan of hansels 150m cs bigger than us.