Hi everyone, I wanted to address a couple of your concerns with the schedule. Regarding War Times When the 12:00AM PST (Australia) War Time was originally introduced it came with the caveat that it would continue to exist as long as turnout made it a viable option. As we've seen with the Chaos Wars there's been a large decrease in the number of players that participate in this war time and as such we've removed it during the Season. We will see about bringing it back in the Off Season Wars and look at further changes we can make to cater to those in these time zones. Regarding Roster Size Some of you are wondering why we've made the move to a 25 person roster size. There are a few reasons for this. One of which is that during the season this will allow Clans to have more members participate without having to jump between alt/secondary/random clans. This is something we had seen a lot of feedback about, and with the current Chaos Wars we've brought back larger rosters in our more popular war times and have seen good results. In addition, larger clans will help to combat build stacking. Regarding the Rewards and Other Details We understand you're wanting to know more. We're getting everything ready and will share the full details as soon as we can.
Still no mention of the war crystals in that update. Is it part of the other details you mentioned at the end of your post kaw_community?
Lmao at kawmunity your talking about 1 war time, multiple time slots CHANGED YET ONCE AGAIN- why test all these weeks to **** IT Up(roster sizes) again? Please let me know when you decide to " stop testing" pull your heads out of your ass and actually attempt to fix a few of the issues " oh wait you did you nerfed the guild a little . MATCHES HAVE BEEN MUCH BETTER LOL
Larger clans can combat build stacking. Lol. It did not work so well in s2, and in phrasing it that way, y'all know it's a problem , while ignoring intelligent and well thought out ways to discourage this way to war. Smaller rosters and more clans warring have actually been a positive way to avoid A high percentage of bad matches, doing this will only lower number of participating clans meaning a higher percentage of skewed matches. Can't wait to see the repeat of s2's sign ups wain after so many clans get discouraged from the same system that was in place for s2. Same formula and expecting different results? Only the handful of us insane will blindly follow buying xtals and relying on 'the next match' will be a good high, similar to a drug addicts' eternal struggle to find the next great high, until eventual institutionalization, incarceration, or death.
So kaw admin what u in fact are saying concerning rostersize is to almost all family clans too bad you dont have enough people to war. Because 25 people for multiple wars a day means you need a lot more willing to war than 25. So we will see a lot of merc clans again stacked with gh's etc (oh you "forgot" again to mention the gh problem....). You saw an increase of wars with the size 20 rosters? You must b wearing different glasses than I do....I counted a few days and saw 8 (!!) wars in total. A job well done ✅
@kaw_admin It's been 4 weeks since you said roster size was gonna be on clan event schedule... BarbieGirL
Larger clan numbers will not stop or minimize roster stacking, just make the number of clans that war fewer. As long as you can have tiny accounts and leaderboard accounts allowed on the same roster, stacking will continue.
Btw: 7 wars atm.....going well huh with the size 20 rosters....but Im glad you saw some good results (you must b the only one)
UnBeKnowN recruiting for S3. Must have towers, or be a guild hansel. Currently seeking a war commander for earlier (UK friendly) wars. Wall or message owner (me) for details.
Hey devs we all appreciate the hard work, but I do have one question. Why eliminate 11 mans wars? 11 man wars are less stressful for war commander and tracker. And we don't have to spend 2-3 hrs setting up roster. A lot of us have jobs, kids, rl stuff to do and can't always make numbers in 20-25 man roster.
Hi Devs We all appreciate the effort you have put into making wars better and matches more effective. Hopefully you're making good use of the months of data from chaos wars. However, I am struggling to understand what you are thinking with both the times and the format of S3 wars. If you could take the time to address them listed below I (and hopefully others) will be grateful. 1. Roster Size. 25 man rosters when virtually all of chaos wars were 11 man rosters seriously inhibits clans' ability to organize and actually field a worthy prepared roster. I don't want to assume you don't know how much time/effort goes into structuring a roster but it seems your seemingly whimsical changes to structure leads me to believe you are clueless as to this aspect of warring. It's not like people in CC say 'hey you wanna do a war tonight?' And then 25 acceptable warriors magically cast--oh..and happen to have just the right builds. With 25 man rosters I think you'll find severe mismatches and very limited participation. 2. Matching Algorithm. You've obviously tweaked your algorithm...which I applaud. But it's really inconsiderate at this point to change the algo so significantly that many many clans have no matches....and have no idea what aspect of their roster might be driving the mismatch. You owe us an explanation. Again, it takes the organizers of wars a lot of time to get a roster together only to have all that time wasted and no explanation as to why. 3. Times. Along with roster sizes, it makes no sense to me why you would alter the times....I can't imagine you have significant data to support these times would result in higher participation rates. I'm sure there are other concerns but those are the ones I'm hearing the most 'buzz' about and that I agree with. Many thanks for your consideration.
Het Hatfield, how was space? 1. There are a number of reasons to change the roster size up to 25. Smaller roster sizes are too easily used to manipulate the matching system either to get easy wins, or to get a nomatch. Better matchups happen when the roster size is bigger according to our data. We also had better participation in both Season 1 and 2 with larger roster sizes. 2. During the season we will be posting the reason for no matches and giving feedback about how to get better matches. 3. We ran the new timezones as a test to see what roster sizes at what time zones we could support. We were very clear that if participation wasn't high enough, they would be cut. We also have enough data to know what timezones have the best participation rates and we created our schedule accordingly. Thanks for the feedback, I hope you enjoy Season 3.
@kaw admin. Hatfield hit the nail on the head with his post, and I know a good number of players that feel the same, yet with your "data analysis", you somehow waltzed in and shot down feedback that was right on the money. I won't bother repeating the points he listed, or any other points for that matter since you guys and your data analysis always have the best ideas about how the wars should be structured and what works best. After all, it's not like the players putting in the time week after week could ever have a better idea with what we see when we actually do the wars than what your data tells you.. I will say this though.. It only takes a pair of eyes and a rudimentary understanding of these wars to see which clans are trying to manipulate the system with their rosters vs the clans actually signing up looking to war on a moderately level playing field. If you had one human employee sit down and take a look at the matches your system spits out, it should be easy enough to tell who is trying to war and who is looking for a hand out. I don't know, maybe you can't afford to incorporate something like that into your budget, or maybe it's just too much of a hassle to be bothered, BUT... If you could manage such a thing, you would then make these wars more accessible to many more clans by keeping some wars as a lower roster count, all while being able to fine tune the matches in the process. Just food for thought. Here's hoping there's not already some raw data sitting around that will shoot down this feedback before it is given some consideration.