Hi devs, I've written a long email to you since you replied to my pm saying that you listen to all the feedbacks not just those from the forum. However, you reply was to tell me to post in the forum instead. So I'm posting here hoping to receive your response. I don't want to repeat what's bad about primal wars or indi wars. A lot of people have already pointed them out. Let's just focus on the issues with the current matchups in normal clan wars and the possible fixes so that we can bring the normal clan wars back and also fit everyone's need. 1. We know that the first and major complaint is the stacking of lbs/shs. IMO all builds are valid builds. They exist for a reason and have their own weakness and strength. People only talked about lb/sh stacking, but they forgot there were other types of stackings including lbs/big stacking, lb/ps stacking(those two happen most often in the top bracket of EE wars), tank builds stacking(popular in primal wars), etc. etc. What I want to point out is that the problem is not about the stacking itself but that the same type of rosters don't match to each other. If lbs/shs only match to lbs/shs, will you gain unfair advantages from the builds themselves? Is it still an exploit? Apparently not. The same applies to all sh/gh rosters. I've noticed many times in normal clan wars that when there were all ghs/shs rosters, they all matched to non gh/sh rosters instead of matching to each other. It's a problem of the matchup system NOT the builds themselves. To fix it algorithm wise, you may consider creating different symbols representing different builds including sh/gh, mids and bigs. So every roster creates a pattern made of different type of builds. When you do matchups, you can do pattern matching so the rosters with most similar patterns will get to match to each other. So a roster of all bigs only matches to another roster of all bigs, a roster of a lot of mids matches to another roster with tons of mids, and lbs/shs to lb/shs, etc. That will solve the lb/sh exploits (as well as other exploits) if lb/sh only matches to lb/sh but not other type of rosters. Conclusion: MATCH THE SAME TYPE OF ROSTERS TO EACH OTHER. 2. You may ask what if there are no same type of rosters signing up in the war. In such a case, you can give a no match to the roster with most infrequent pattern. And in the long run, to give more war rewards to encourage the participation is the key. Free war xtals as you've promised since s2, no loss of EE/rancor after losing the war, better payout from wars than ebs... All those would encourage more participation. Conclusion: GIVE MORE REWARDS TO ENCOURAGE THE PARTICIPATION. 3. Complaints about bfe/bfa mismatch. We know bfe/bfa are like static stats while raw stats are dynamic. Those two are like two independent coordinates. They don't add up directly when considering matchups. You can compute the average BFE+BFA for a roster as value A and average raw stats as value B. Then matchup criteria could be set up as: if A > value1 or B > value2, no match; else match. Conclusion: CONSIDER BFA/BFE AND RAW STATS SEPARATELY IN YOUR MATCHUP ALGORITHM. 4. Complaints about ppl without decent bfe or towers not able to war. To solve that problem, you can divide the matchups based on leagues (average BFA+BFE). For example, if average BFE+BFA <= value3, then the clan will be matched in league 1 (less experienced). If value3 < average BFA+BFE <= value4, then clan is matched in league 2 (somewhat experienced). If average BFA+BFE > value4, then the clan is matched in league3 (most experienced). After participating clans are assigned into different leagues, the matchups can be done based on no. 3 mentioned above. To facilitate the league wars, more participation is still a must. I believe as more ppl have confidence in your matchups and if wars can give them more rewards than ebs, they will eventually sign up and war. Conclusion: DIVIDE THE WARRING CLANS BASED ON AVERAGE BFA+BFE. 5. Roster size. To encourage more participation, roster size can't be made too big. A bigger roster means a clan has to find more players to war. A feasible roster size will be around 11 to 15. I remember the clan wars of size 11 generally provided pretty fair matches. I also have some other ideas but it'll be better if you can help me understand what your current difficulty is so I can give advice accordingly. Last but not the least, we're willing to support and help increase the participation by helping those who want to learn about wars. If the clan wars are back and more fair matches are in place we can provide training sessions for those without experience and those with experience but want to learn more. If you can make it an official event... like training wars with refunded xtals to increase participation that would be perfect. Thanks for your time. We're looking forward to your reply. Best regards, DRAGONS SANCTUARY Update 1: Fixing the flaws in the matchup system is the key to resolve all the issues. Indi/Primal wars don't necessarily serve the purpose. There are still mismatches. There are some examples as follows: Primal war: Primal war match up 300m cs vs 660m cs viewtopic.php?f=11&t=167203 Indi war: Unfair Match 33, Cunning Rovers vs Honorable Fiends viewtopic.php?f=11&t=167143 According to my observation, outmatches of over 200+mil cs seem to happen often in primal wars. This leads to a question: do you remove the BFE/BFA before you make the matchups? The mismatch in indi wars happen usually when you put more towered builds with better bfe (mith/ee equipments) in one roster while builds with bigger stats but weaker bfa/bfe and towers in another, which means you put more experienced players in one while less experienced ones in another instead of evenly distributing them into two rosters. This is a mismatch of builds, bfe and experience. Aside from that, another type of mismatch is the mismatch of BFA while you have a top 10 lb in one roster and a top 50-100 lb in another. For 90% of the time, the one with bigger lb wins the war. All those above proves that by changing the war type won't fix the mismatch issue whether there's stacking or not. Changing your matchup algorithm will.
So you know your rosters are prone to create unbalanced matchups in your favor, usually giving the other side no chance to win, yet you continue to war with them? Do you not have a soul sir ?
To be fair, dragons sanctuary is made up of hardcore EE warriors. If they weren't sh, you can bet your ass they would be huge tanks. And they would just "lb, bigs" stack. This is a great idea xiao. I believe why the devs haven't implemented a system close to this, is that no matches would be much more frequent than actually getting a match. It's a ton of criteria to meet unfortunately. This could work if we had more participation. Not only can participation be promoted by rewards, they can be promoted by making them a more critical part of the game. Such as: 1: your EE expires every 5-6 days to promote more frequent warring. 2: every day you don't war, your EE goes down a couple percentage 3: if you don't war at all, you can only make half of the available plunder from bfa. Or even a smaller percentage 4: if you don't war every 2 weeks at least, you lose a building (your soldiers die from internal feuding due to lack of wars) 5: if you don't war for 3 weeks, you lose all pots. Etc. There are hundreds of ways to make warring a CRITICAL part of your experience. Right now warring is a LUXURY. It needs to be a CRITICAL part of kaw. More participation = equals more matches = fairer matches = more competition = happier kawers
As it stands, EE level 5 barely covers the cost of the towers required to war. We can't compete with eb noobs for plunder, so why should they war at all? Just don't build towers, and you're good. But if their bfa didn't count towards their hits.. Everyone would be running to wars. Can be easy too. If you war, you get EE level 1. and it goes down a couple percentage every day you don't war. This would require all of kaw to war every 5-6 days which would make for a TON of matches
Gonna be honest fonzy, some of your ideas are radical and downright ridiculous. People don't have to war. Don't try to make them if they don't want to. I fully support Op's ideas however, and hope the devs will at least TRY them and see what happens. It couldn't get much worse.
️ yes it could. With xiao' suggestions, almost no one would get a match. And I'm sorry, too ridiculous for you? How about you think of what this game is called, kingdoms at war. If it was called at, kingdoms at war-if-you-want-to, then ya. My ideas are ridiculous
I love being called stupid lol. Would you like to elaborate, or do you just shoot stuff out your ass on a regular basis?
But since you insisted, here are the problems with your idea(s). First off, kaw should not be centered on system wars, will not be, and never has been. OSW is the backbone of kaw and it always will be. #3: if someone doesn't war for x amount of time, they lose half their money from BFA. This is crazy, tbh. If someone can't war, doesn't have time or money for xtals, or anything, why be punished for it? And with HALF their bfa? Insane. #4: if someone doesn't war for x amount of time, a building is randomly destroyed. Once again...what? Fully upgraded HF buildings cost ~950bill I believe. If someone is on vacation, or doesn't have money for xtals to war, or for whatever reason they go inactive, they'd come back to an account with no buildings at all! Not reasonable. #5: if someone doesn't war for x amount of time, they lose all their pots. As with the possibilities stated above, this would just be unfair. If people do not have the opportunity or ability means to war in the amount of time provided,
they should not lose their billions and in some cases trillions of gold in pots. Overall, your ideas would just INCREASE the amount of pay2Win in this game. Purchasing xtals would be absolutely necessary as they are mandatory for most every war clan, and some people can't/won't do that.
I like the build token idea. So to expand on that a bit. What about fixing rosters for clan wars... So each roster would need like 3 lb 6 tanks 3 SH and 3 PS (not suggesting these are the actual numbers. And possibly have different divisions of rosters as not all warring clans will have access to lbs). Not unlike what you see on the court/field/rink of many sporting events. If the devs were to require a predetermined number of each build it would take away a lot of the creativity (exploiting) in setting clan rosters. Assigning each build a token would allow players to know what part of the roster they fill when they cast. Just a thought
Obviously you didn't understand these are randomly generated ideas that haven't been fully thought out but can be a stepping stone. The time limit I set for 2 and 3 are probably too short. 1 month and 1 month and a half should be great. The building thing: destroy a max of up to 3 buildings (one per month) of the most expensive building. No one takes a month long vacation. And if you do, you're in the 1%, and you're probably paying for wifi. The half bfa thing: obviously I meant their max plunder is cut in half. Hell ya. That would mean all the eb noobs HAVE to go out and play. This game is build around osw? Really? How little you know lol. This game is built around people looking to make an easy buck. But it turns into something much more than that. With the introduction of EE, this game can finally love up to what it was meant to.. Kingdoms at war. Obviously you can osw any time you want. But EE should be more critical. If it's not, we will never have crazy fair and fun matches all the time. Again it's all random ideas. My basic point is that EE needs to be more of the POINT of this game, rather than an addition. Osw will never and has never been the point. It's a way to resolve our conflicts. And this is coming from a guy that loves osw more than EE And no, purchasing xtals would be necessary. Like I said: if you war, you get the first level of EE. No need to win. The EE doesn't stack unless you win, but you just need to war every week.
That just will never happen There is nowhere near enough interest in EE for this to hold. EE wasn't even invented until years after the game came out, and now you want it to be the main focal point that everyone would be quite literally FORCED into? Just...put the bong down already.
Insult towards me: lack of argument Of course there isn't enough interest in EE. There's no need for interest. You need towers to EE. You need edge to get your lost plunder from the towers. If you don't build towers = no EE. But, you have great plunder. So why war? Of course there isn't enough interest in EE. Who wants to compete with all the insane stack that used to go on? And now with primals? Be towered to the hilt - or have no chance. Um yes everyone needs to be "forced" into EE. It will make kaw evolve, just like it always has been and just like it always will. But hey you're totally right. Lets just leave it be, and we can be kingdoms at EB.
Thanks Mike. I like that idea, which was actually also one of mine. I didn't bring it up directly in the email coz I wanted to wait for devs' reponse first to see what would be the most feasible ones for them to implement. A fixed roster would require certain type of builds which may not be always present for some clans. For example, not every clan has lbs to war with them. So I brought up the most easily implemented ones. They told me they could open an online chat room for us to communicate directly but I've never heard anything since after.