Fix Wars to account for account sharing crack down (credit Jared)

@PGJared said we need a new thread that addresses the fact that people have to share accounts to ensure they don’t loose a war from somebody unable to log in.

So what can we do to fix this situation? Lets give them our best ideas!

@PGEggToken @pgEcho @PGCrisis @Arelyna


Honestly I’m not sure what you could do that doesn’t risk imbalancing the game.

If you give 1 or 2 “free pass” attacks that someone else can do for a teammate then you can just hand it over to the strongest player.

If you give the free pass to someone within a few levels of the other it’s kinda doable but then it’s very restrictive. It does also mean weaker fliers can “tag out” in tough wars and let stronger fliers take their place.

If there was an alternative, perhaps less efficient way, to earn flames then maybe you can compensate up to the cap of 250. Almost certainly it’d have to be linked to defence somehow but I can’t think of a fair way to really implement something without it being a major time sink or just being impractical.

Though if we can come up with an idea that would be amazig


I like the free pass idea. It activates for anyone 30 mins before the war is over. First who tap it can do a second attack.

The probability is very high that the lowest base is left so it wouldn’t matter who initiates the attack.


I was chastised pretty hard for complaining about high levels dominating the lower leagues making wars really risky and often times unwinable. I was told maybe my team didn’t belong where it was, have a better team or to find some high levels. Account sharing is obviously frowned upon. Every team risks a no show. Please explain to me why some should be allowed free passes? Would this be something for all leagues?


If everyone gets the 30 mins free pass I don’t see how this could be a problem bc it’s nothing but equal grounds for everyone.

Also I would limit said pass to one hit. If multiple players don’t hit then this team has other problems.

But it’s incredibly frustrating when your whole team defends for half a day and then you lose with tons of defense points more than the other team due to a no show and due to the fact that the other team can 5 dragon the last base and would win by 246/245

I completely agree. It sucks

Maybe build in Touch ID log in (or a device specific password log in for logging in WD, like a two step verification) for player after a certain level. I’d be hard pressed to believe that they don’t have newer phones, be it android or iPhone when they spend thousands on a game

Shooting ideas lol let’s keep the brainstorm going

How would that solve no shows :thinking:

No show? no show remains a no show? Lol I don’t have a problem of giving one free assist. Trying to accommodate what others think

We lost to AH because of a no show. Hurts me inside lol

Personally I don’t think this is a problem that need solving. Everyone is in the same boat. If you have a teammate that missed a war too bad so sad. Just declare another one to make up.

I’ve been on both sides of this coin as I’m sure you all have. It’s frustrating as hell yes but that’s where having a good team and good teammates come in.

This ain’t broke, let’s not fix it and perhaps break it in unforeseen ways.


I agree with Grumpy…you have to show up to play. That being said, I think the whole war system could use an overhaul where its not 250 to 250 flames and every war is won by defense (the real issue).

I would prefer a war system that looks something like:

-Backup and Defenders aren’t allowed

-Each player can only attack one time

-War opponents are matched randomly


This is a fix for account sharing.

Most use account sharing for doing exactly that. One player can’t make it and someone else does his war hit.

Of course we or at least diamond knows that this is also used for strategic gaming like always have the biggest dragon ready or defend while the owner or leaseholder of the license (=account) is asleep.

I rather have a solution which will change this strategy in a more meaningful way than having those players who used it for years being banned.

1 Like

In that case how about just petitioning PG for no retrospective bans, but if it keeps happening then ban away?

No one can claim they “didn’t know” then. Problem solved.

So, doesn’t that imply that the flames vs defense points calculation is a problem? Seems like figuring out a ratio of defense points to flames might alleviate the problem of having one person be offline since a team could make up a flame deficit by being really solid on defense.

Just my thought though.


You mean intrinsically linking both? They’re quite separate at the moment.

In this case why not just add both up then the one with most flames + defence points wins?

May work? :man_shrugging:

Defense points are often exploited. We’ve ran into many instances where we could not defend or points didnt count when the other team somehow raked them up extremely fast.

I think a direct comparison would be wrong since we still want flames to be very important.

It already is - you can get 5 flames from one attack but only one defence point.

I like where this is going.
A ratio of whatever would mean that for every extra X defends you do against the other team, the better off you would be.

AKA 2:1 ratio or something could be as simple as:
Every flame earned is worth 2 war points
Every defense earned is worth 1 war point

So a perfect 250-250 war would end up being 500-500 + defense points.
For every 10 defense points difference (2 x 5), the team would be able to have one missing person.

This is just a reply to get things rolling a bit further with an example, but i’m starting to appreciate finding value in comparing missed persons to defense points.

This might make a bigger impact in lower leagues or in leagues where there was 1 super high level on the team. It could be strategized to wave efficiently and then simply not attack the single big player and win via lower defense points on the other team.


That would make sense too.

It would of course benefit stronger teams.

We lost a war 246/245 they had 37 defense points we had 159.

This would of course put smaller teams to a disadvantage.

Let’s say they lose 245/250 they have 22 defense points the opponent has 19. If they would get the free pass they would win.

With a defense point add on they would need like 25% more (example) defense points than the opponent. That would be 24. So with your idea they would still lose.

Maybe defense points could be seen as flames. So you would need 6 more than the opponent and you’d win?:eyes: