So, we(i mean we, stupid noobs non-GH) should stack high static defence for what? To defend from tinny GH without a single tower(as you MM). And all that becouse the reciprocal plunder is Obscene? I have not any problem with GH builds. They are nice build to grow up fast. But the discussion here is not the PVE but the PVP system. A PVP sytem dependent from plunder. Hence, the GH issue. So, let's repeat it again here in CAPS for all the GH that do not understand or act as they do not: 1)THE GH ISSUE IS THE SCANDALOUS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PLUNDER THEY MAKE AND THE PLUNDER MADE ON THEM IN PVP(and yes, they can hit very high). 1a)The matchup system allows roster stacked with LB players balanced with GH. Now, you can repeat again: you'r noob, put more towers, go learn some strategy and bla bla bla...
I can see that some ppl are trying to mix up the concepts of gh build and gh exploit. GH build itself is a valid build. There is no problem having a couple of gh builds in the roster. GH exploit means when ppl stack 10 to 16 ghs together with 2 to 4 ally LBs and other big stats attack builds to draw favorable matchups in the wars to make easy wins just from the advantages of builds/bfa/bfe instead of the strategy. Usually the victims are the clans without many gh builds or even any LB but rather a more balanced roster with many small builds which GH build can plunder off. Their tops are not strong enough to defend themselves from those LBS or big stats attack builds with huge bfes. DTW/DTS doesn't allow them to hit those tiny ghs or even if they can hit those ghs, they only get less than 10mil from the attacks while ghs with good bfes can easily attack them and gain 50mil to 60mil per attack. On the other hand, they can't win those builds much stronger than them either. That's where those huge blow out wars come from. This is the loophole of the system, which gives those opportunists the chance to exploit it. Ideally, if the matchup system is working correctly, a roster of LBs and tons of ghs should ONLY be matched to another roster of LBs and tons of ghs, or a no match should be given. Another solution is to increase the payout of GHs by determining the payout based on the no. of buildings and the level of buildings in stead of the CS itself. If ghs can easily have 50mil to 60mil plunder when attacking builds with bigger cs, it means they are comparable in terms of strength. Then the builds being attacked should also be able to plunder about the same amt from ghs. That's only called fair. Besides, as we can see, usually those rosters with 10 to 16 ghs stacking with lbs and big stats attack builds are made of a lot of mercs instead of the loyal clan members. Why? Because a clan with most of the perm members won't ask half of their members to drop builds to become ghs. Only a merc clan can do that easily. People will be asked to leave the clan at any time if their builds don't satisfy the "requirements" (not good for stacking to exploit the system) any more and a lot of merc ghs or LBs will be recruited or poached from other clans. There are no loyalties there. If the objective of the EE wars is to promote the clan loyalties, then apparently the current system is working against it. Hope devs can really think about it and listen to those good advices from those experienced and honorable warriors/clan leaders like WSP, Lady_liz and many others. (Sorry I can't remember all the names.) I'm a gh and I still request this loophole to be fixed. It's not hard to do and there are many feasible solutions already being provided. Please look into and fix it. Don't let the war experience of the majority ruined!
Plunder gap really are you putting any rational thought into your monotonous button pushing… Your are hitting a weaker build but want the same plunder as you would get hitting a mid build… . . . Yea stupid right Oh no not you… your thought process
We have loyal clan members. We have people competing for sign ups. Do not lump us in that category. I can understand that type of match up you are referring to, but it is unfair to change builds and plunder because of the match up system. These were all in place before the start. That is unfair IMO. Fix match up. Don't change builds or plunder.
*scans clan war history and matchups* ... yup, that makes sense, you legitimately don't know what people are talking about.
Not only is your whining pathetic its irrelevant… Yes I'm a guild hansel without a single tower. Think on that. Keep thinking... Now guess how many assassinations I see on me in wars… let me help you PRACTICALLY NONE. Scout bomb away I make great plunder off my spies
We don't choose our match ups. We choose our roster carefully based on the test wars. You should have as well.
@minas. Yup that's right the plunder needs to be evened out. Because players like you won't stop roster stacking unless that difference is nerfed. Then all you gh can jump in a clan together and fight each other and the rest of us can enjoy some good ee. I won't expect any sensible reply from you. It is clear that from your comment on the previous page that the devs solution for this exploit is going to cost you big. Still you have made plenty mith so far. Be happy the devs have left it as long. Heck there arent even any guarantees their solution will work. But there are lot of players who have spent money fighting exploiters who will be cheering if it does xD
@ minas morgal We are trying to make war more enjoyable and popular Even kaw admin admit there seems to be a problem and have asked for kaw communities feedback. Again gh is a good war build they are a good at what they do but for you to say that there isn't a problem is delusional. Hmm wonder if you are really that clueless
From the GH discussion I many ignorant players say just deal with it and learn to adapt. Honestly its a ridiculous notion that as a GH all i need to do is put up a few towers and I can zero a HFBC account's spy bar by a few scouts and attack them and gain 50+ mil a hit. When you say adapt I have seen full clans with 2 mil+ adt's still get crushed by RH due to the inability to generate plunder on the 16 GH's and LB's. No matter how you look at it the discrepancy in plunder is too great to overcome in situations like that and there is no way to generate plunder at all. This is not a lack of effort, strategy, or being unwilling adapt as the wars change. As i'm not surprised to see that 90% of those against the GH mechs change are GH's. Well I will refer to your own advise in situations such as this and learn to adapt because currently the system is broken. From a GH who is honest enough to see that we are taking advantage of the system. Spartan
Adt dosent help against a guild hansel with good bfe I have well over 1m plus very good bfe and bfa and a guild hansel can still win on me for 50m or more if they can hit like a big build then pay up.
I see a lot of good ideas and feedback here. Which has been repeated daily for the last 10 weeks and still nothing has changed. So don't expect it to now. I also see a lot of really bad ideas and feedback. I will say this again as I've been saying for the last 10 weeks on these threads. The hit ratio formula does not work. The dtw/dts introduction was a pedestrian attempt at best to quell the GH uproar but has only made them even more powerful. Yes for a small build cs wise they are very influential in these wars. At least before bigger accounts like myself could at least assign ate them and somewhat keep them in check. Now they run amuck uninhibited since they are now dtw to me but can still hit and gain plunder off accounts way larger. The simple solution and easy fix is to go back to the season 1 formula and get rid of the ridiculous dtw/dts so we can manage them again ourselves. As far as lb and bfa/bfe go I see no point in punishing players who have worked long n hard and spent lots of money to get where they are. Looking at the individuals signed up for war instead of the clan as whole would be best solution. Might take a little longer to do match ups but would greatly increase the amount of more balanced matches. For example player 1 on wr for clan A has 20 tril in allies with a sharp drop as you go down the roster player 15 has 5 tril player 29 has 3 tril. They get matched with clan B player 1 has 15 tril but more evenly spread bfa player 15 has 10 tril player 29 has 5 tril. Now providing in this example cs are faily close between both clans. Clan B is clearly stronger and is almost guaranteed the win since most of clan A can will lose hits on most of clan B due to a more evenly spread bfa throughout the clan and clan A was thrown off by the high bfa of just a small few. Bfe is a small factor which I believe you've way over calculated for. I see little to no difference unless your a hansel or GH. I've run tests with and without equipment. With no real change I'm win/loss ratio either way on same account. Factor in the bfe to appease those who are too lazy to put the time and effort the rest of us have just don't overemphasize it. We know not every match can or will be ideal you'll still have mismatches and blow outs. Just not 8 out of 10 wars a week if you can reduce it to just 2-3 would be a great improvement. You'll still have the whining and complying cause you can't make everyone happy. You just won't have the entire player vase doing it all at once.
Season has started, I am realistic enough to know big changes at this point are out. As an admin, here are my three quick fixes for the season. 1-Return no match.. I've given up on your algorithm, appoint a ee commissioner to review matches n approve. Well wait an extra 30 mins at mattch 2-incentive to war -add a random bronze bar drop for winners n add inferno n aqua to vp. Make rancor curse a 24hr ee spell. 3-leave gh alone, but make any kingdom wit woc cast pay a minimum of 25 mil at hit. Easy short term fixes. Your welcome.
war time at gmt asian sick , unfair war some time , also clan prestige remain same for winning bt if we loss buy 1 m down to -3 rank . Sick of that