Controversial mercenary war tactic condoned by PG


My guess is if the following scenario occurs, teams will bring in a mercenary

Team 1 (has a >300, and lots of <170 players) declares on team 2 (has only say <lvl 170 players)

Pretty sure you will see mercenary activity then.

Most often if both teams have say only lvl 170 and lower, or maybe one level 200, they wont feel the need to bring the merc.


I’ve been an officer before and I would have found it fun to try to best the team with the ringer. Because then I’d have to think about when to do the run on the 170. I’d be watching for the 170 to fly, either as lead or backup. I would have sent waves on them as they’re doing their runs with the ringer. I would have flown decoys at their defenders to confuse them. Its always more fun when there’s a challenge posed. Just my 2c.

Also, your war was close! You just ended on the wrong side of the result that’s all. :+1:


You’ve just described the ideal scenario for your opponent to consider bringing in a ringer. Because from their view why should they simply roll over and die just because you have a level 300 meat shield? No their prerogative is to try to win.

Theres no right or wrong here. It just is. Let is go.


…because that is how a pre-arranged team works. You fight against other teams with set rosters. If the intention was to not know what players you are warring against, they would have team members and details unviewable to other teams, or they would match teams randomly for war. Knowing the details of the team you declare war against is meant to be part of the strategy, players from outside of the team participating in war is an obvious exploit.

I won’t argue against this being a low priority issue compared to many others, but as far as whether or not “Mercenaries” are an intended part of the game:


For the 90th time not saying they should or shouldn’t be. But you’re just giving up and quitting and sitting on your computer complaining while your team loses all their nightly merc wars. If you want to quote Jared why don’t you take a guess whether he thinks this is as bad as hacking and cheating. Jared offering his opinion is great, and honestly I don’t disagree with him. But you guys just refuse to do anything about it except sit here and complain.

Learn more effective war strategy? Ridiculous! We shall instead sit here honorably on the forums complaining and ranting.

Accept decent advice that would help our team for the long haul and not even for this specific situation involving mercs? Absurd!

I never said you had to be ok with mercs and like them. What I don’t understand is why you’re so averse to wanting to improve your war performance.


PGJared is not the voice of everything PG. He does not make the rules. One employees opinion does not mean it’s an unintended game dynamic. :joy::joy::joy: Keep trying with that lie.

Not only do I not see it as a problem, I prefer to have teams use Mercs. Easy win for us.

We just had a war where I was outgunned by a regular player on their team. They were level 462 with multiple Obsidian dragons, I am level 285 just starting Emeralds. (I know, I am behind on dragons)

He had to take more than 20 runs on my base before he was able to 5 flame it. That is where the Dynamics of base design and team defense plays a heavy part of wins. If my team had been full we would have won the war easily on defenses alone.

Mercs are not a problem at all.

Edit:My team is on Plat 2, have been bouncing around Plat 1 to Saphs for a year now. I have not seen a Merc used in at least 1.5 years. It does not happen as often as you think, or possibly it is something you are doing that attracts them. Do you fight the same teams multiple times?


You are mistaken on many of your points. Just because it is a lower league doesn’t mean it is any less competitive. Since the league shuffle all leagues became more competitive.

These strategy’s are not designed for certain leagues, they are for everyone. People dont declare wars for different reasons because of the league they are in, war declarations are a personal choice and differ by player, not league.

If the team doesn’t play with that level of strategy and are being pushed down leagues then the league has changed. It’s not the casual way it used to be. If you want casual, head to gold. Gold is the new platinum.

That right there is the real problem imho


Another senario where people bring in a ringer:

You declare war on the same team every day for 5 days (war ends early due to not full rosters, making this possible). Talk smack and be assholes in LC about it. Then it turns out the team you are ragging on has a bunch of Diamond Alts in it and they don’t want to be patient anymore. They bring in a main account to beat your ass in war. :woman_shrugging:


@Modmat or somebody please close this thread. Its repetitive and has become a “who can be the wittiest at insults and get the most likes” contest. The problem is known.


Holy crap there was a lot in this thread. I didn’t read it all, but in the 50% or so I read, I never saw what I deem to be the most problematic aspect of ‘ringers’.

We agree that the majority of wars will be won by defenses, and a defense counts whether ‘successful’ or not.

In Platinum 1, where my team is, most teams have 1-4 300’s, 5-15 200’s, and a mixture of ‘lower levels’ (I lump them because typically their bases are not a point of contention - the 200’s and 300’s can back any attacker and 5 flame the ‘lower levels’ bases first try, no problem, no question).

Where the ‘ringers’ skew things is precisely by the defenses, but not in the way I’ve seen it argued. A ringer with obsidian dragons can wipe out the majority of platinum 1 bases I’ve encountered, even fully defended. The ‘problem’ is that, without these ringers, the attackers would likely have to be very strategic, wave, and often repeatedly attack the stronger bases to get the 5 flames… but some ringer can come in and wipe it out defended on the first try, so what would normally take 2 attacks (conversely 2 defense points or more) is now possible with only 1. Ultimately, a ringer can come in and wipe out the main 1-10 bases only allowing 1 defense point each - but without that ringer, there could have been numerous repeated attacks, accounting for numerous defense points.

I think the higher league you are in, the less likely this is to happen to you. I happens to us in P1 very rarely, but it does happen - usually by teams who are completely outgunned and shouldn’t be there to begin with, so the tactic has been very hit and miss from my limited experience.

Do I think it’s ‘dirty’ - yes, absolutely. Is it prevalent enough to stop the presses and devote dev time to - not from my limited experience… Just my $.02.


But do you agree that using a (single) “ringer” actually forces these teams to attack one at a time (no waves for them) thus making it more likely that the non-ringer team can get a defense point for every attack. Normally if a team uses waves of attackers there is a high risk that there will not be enough people on to defend each attack. Especially if multiple people join the first few attacks seen.

It’s really just a tactic but there is a counter tactic and disadvantage of using a “ringer” as well.


I see what you are saying, but having a ringer doesn’t mean the team won’t wave on the bases they don’t need a ringer for. I suppose they could decide to attack one at a time, but more likely (and from the few times’ I’ve seen it happen), they will do a wave that includes the ringer.

I definitely agree that a ringer isn’t an unbeatable strategy, in and of itself. As I said, I have seen it work and seen it fail. I was trying to illustrate a facet I had not seen discussed (although admittedly I hadn’t read the whole thing, so it very well may have been).


Where does one go about setting up a DNR for this thread? Asking for a friend :eyes:


I feel I should confess that I feel a perverse sense of joy every time I open the forums and see this thread still alive.

I think I must hate myself.


This is one specific example where mercs werent a problem. There are many examples in this thread where they certainly are. There are a lot of variables.


Exactly. So I don’t know why this thread keeps going on and on about some whines of some individuals. Others have showed ringers don’t factor in that much in war :joy:.
Can we close the thread @ModMat @Psarus or are we waiting for this to go to 1000 threads?


So have we all agreed that mercs are perfectly fine to use? Go Mercs! I can’t wait to be one! I will crush all you plat teams!!! Muhahahaha


Everyone flag this thread and get it closed please. It’s become annoying.


Well i wanna go over all this 1 more time so i dont embarrass myself in front of everyone…(WAR)dragons, i forget that one time an army never had help from an outside, private party OR that one time a war was lost bc of 1 person…actually should probably just start all over and explain what flames and defense points have to do with anything.


If you don’t like this thread, there’s a button at the bottom that says “Tracking”, please change it to “Muted” and you will never receive a notification about it again.

Question for Platinum league folks, is it fairly common to have 100% participation in Platinum league? I’ve gather in Sapphire league and Diamond league it is 150% required to have 100% participation otherwise you’re not staying their for long.

I ask because this thread has two different definition of defendable. Defending for defense points only makes a difference if the teams are going to end up tied in flames. The only time I could see tieing consistently would be if both teams were capable of consistently getting 250 flames.

I haven’t made it past Plat IV yet, what I’ve seen for Plat IV and below, participation rates are rarely 100% and most wars are won or lost based on participation. This is were having a base that the other team can’t get five flames on can become important and defense points don’t matter. I can see how bringing in a ringer at that point would be upsetting.

BTW for those teams that have 100% participation, can we take a minute and recognize how impressive it is to get a group of 50 people to work together? How often do you see a team building exercise of 50 people in real life work well?