Controversial mercenary war tactic condoned by PG


#770

A thing that nobody has little or no record of having happened over a long period of time is probably going to be evaluated as low likeliness.

I won’t agree with you that because it can happen it needs to be stopped. In my opinion, this game will probably never be in a place where the top 50 things to fix include things that might happen except in cases of such high impact as to end the game or drastically affect it vs a meaningful/timely patchat the time it becomes a problem. (Which we all grumble about but it’s not really unacceptable)

Do you have any kind of feel or estimate? Action requires measuring the problem. Also any change likely impacts people who aren’t currently impacted. You have to weigh that in too.

I don’t agree with you about it being dirty. Agree to disagree. Once a war has been declared, the team being declared on doesn’t get to decline. This is the one and only counter that exists. The merc’s base doesn’t need to be defeated. (Which is where the real Challenge would be)

Now If the person joined just before they were declared on, I would agree it’s dirty. Now you have to beat an unbeatable base. But you would have to either have advance warning/info about the future need (recently promoted) or would otherwise be indistinguishable from a permanent player. (Unbalanced teams are a thing I find to be against the intended mechanics but i dont see a good fix, and in the large picture it’s still correct, what isn’t correct is the league membership)

I will agree that this can be abused and maybe should be limited. I would also agree many teams won’t bother getting their own merc so the main counter isn’t necessarily fair.

100% of the mercs used on my team were diamond teams who we were actually battling their alt. Root cause might again be balance issues. I can tell you how many players prefer playing their alt then their main Which sits in a diamond team.

I agree but any datapoint is better than zero. I’d accept even perception at this point. Pg has better data on it. I don’t think that because it’s hard or the data won’t be perfect that we shouldn’t collect what we can. We just need to consider the source with all uses of it.


#771

Yeah. This is the kind of open-mindedness that I personally believe is needed to solve this kind of problem. You know we might find the original idea was the best, but we won’t know until we examine all angles.

I work as an Systems Engineer (computer/server design/architect/maintenance etc) and 99% of the projects we get essentially come to me as here, please insert this square peg into a round hole. It’s a huge pet-peeve that someone brings me a “solution” rather than a problem. 99% of the time the requestor would have been happier with a round peg in the round hole. The remaining 1% its still better for the company to go through the process as it informs better understanding with the engineers and instills faith and allows engineers to actually engineer.

I really believe it’s better for the community to get involved in solving and understanding these kinds of problems. (At least those who are willing to look behind the curtain)


#772

Competition is good. Risk is good… when it is a calculated one. The most gratifying wins are those where we were not the “starter”. To declare a war you know is lost from the start is a bit awkward IMHO. But hey, everyone has a certain view about this game.


#773

Yeah but not many teams declare these days. Some leagues are so stale that people go for weeks without a single war.

But I agree Wars you win that are declared on you are Often fun.

How do you expect to grow If you don’t stretch your team? If you only do what you know you can, how do you do more?

Again I think the system is severely broken.

My last league had a 10 way tie for 1st in the league. 1 point from 11th to 1st. That seems broken to me.

Most leagues I’ve been in lately have 3-4 teams without players over 300 or having less than 3 big players. Everyone just declares on those same teams over and over again. That seems broken to me.

Many teams mace macguyvered their way 2 leagues above their battle capability. I commend their efforts, but at the end of the day I don’t really respect the War ability of a paper clip and bubblegum more than a few harbinger dragons and well placed level 60 towers.


#774

I totally agree with you about “bulling” the same team over and over. There should be a rule of “ONE war between same teams every 6 days only”. This would improve the environment IMHO.


#775

I think if we’re going to have leagues then have proper leagues. Everyone fights each other once. System automatically generates matchups. May help sandbagging or bullying.


#776

I like this but I floated the idea and it was wildly unpopular.

People can’t see past their lost ground.


#777

It makes sense to me, so it must make dollars for PG.

Random matches would eliminate anyone getting war farmed and teams can’t move up just by warring the same weaker team over and over. A team would actually have to be better than most of the teams in their league to move up.

It would also be a lot more exciting to not know who your enemy is before the war starts.

Mercenaries could still help teams climb higher than they should be able to go, but maybe without the ability to grief there won’t be a reason not to code an end to that “tactic”.

…but one thing at a time I guess.


#778

IMG_5168


#779

ooh, generated matchups might be cool. assuming they can figure out a good algorithm for matching us up. I’m confident. :roll_eyes:


#780

Mike sorry my explanation may have been a little unclear. I was not suggesting basing it on player level, was trying to say highest dragon level within a tier. For example, within a tier you can have rare, epic, legendary, mythic. So that would mean if someone were to enter a team after war was declared they would only be allowed to do so if their dragon tier and the dragons level within that tier was less than or equal to the highest player on the opposing team.

@Gox1201 what would be negative about having a small band on this? I can see both sides here, as, it really wouldn’t make much of a difference if they had a legendary emerald or mythic emerald but I am always inclined to ask why not?


#781

Well 4.0 literally made mercenaries pointless. I hate them and I still think it is cheating. But with this update, you don’t need a high level merc to help defeat bases.


#782

so now we can at least close this thread out. :slight_smile:


#783

At least until they fix this debacle. This one is a doozy.


#784

PG screwy the pooch on this upgrade!!


#785

:+1:t3::+1:t3: All for generated matchups! That is one of the better ideas ive heard. It would make loads more sense as far as making the team rankings honest. It would also liven up the game by eliminating the ability of a league to go stale with no/few wars. This would make the game much more interesting, imo.


#786

No I’m actually proposing a match up system where we fight all teams in the same league once. Then at end of that time we have league change. Then we go again.

Maybe too much for teams that don’t play daily but it will all wash out at the end. :man_shrugging:


#787

This still does nothing about stopping the use of mercenaries. Unless every team is warring at the same time and they lock team rosters. Otherwise a higher level player can still bounce around.


#788

Who. The. Fudge. Cares?! Moooove on man!

@moderators please, I’m begging y’all. End this neverending thread :see_no_evil:

IMG_5168


#789

This thread is still going on?!