Limit number of back ups by each team member

#262

I cannot see how this would overall be a good thing. I would completely support a change that a member joining after war is declared simply cannot click the war button (EDIT: or attack/back any war run) which would limit the Merc issue. That one I do see as an unfair advantage. The other is just part of the game, people progress at different speeds and if a gold team can retain a 400 they must be doing something right.

1 Like

#263

Not sure what the effects of this would be, but what if the backing system was simply rearranged such that the original attacker gets two attacks, then a backer can attack, then original attacker, then all final backing attacks? It removes the need for specific tier based control, rewards lead dragons rather than brute force solo dragon, places a bit of control on the variation between the first and second dragons, and allows for better rage management/control (you know exactly how much rage the second dragon will need, and that means you can actually perhaps use a rage or two before swapping). It might even help with miscommunication- your teammate might forget to shoot down a red mage unaware that you need it to be killed. If implemented, I feel like this would only be effective in wars (possibly PVP?). The flame system would also be retained- first two dragons for five flames, next two for four, etc.
Bigger players would still win their own attacks without penalty, while smaller players will hit within their own range, but with two dragons, rather than one (again rewarding set up and strategy). Also, the penalty for having a bigger player back exists, but is not too steep- it only happens if you can’t beat the base with two dragons on your own, and only at the cost of one flame. This means your team can still hit that enormous sandbagger given that you have the resources/dragons on the team to hit that player, simply for four flames. Finally, it doesn’t change the number of total dragons in any given war raid, which means a three flame is still a three flame, and a four flame is (probably?) still a four flame. In this system, your larger players aren’t rendered useless- if you and your team is active enough, you may still be able to hit those higher levels for four flames, even if you don’t have backers of that size (introduces strategies of two lead dragons, preparing the base and follow dragons in more creative and diverse ways).

Honestly this might be a terrible idea but y’all know to call out a bad idea anyway haha :heart_eyes:

0 Likes

#264

I’ve been saying this for years, since Cafune was back in old Diamond running SantoDracones through literally everything. Events, wars, whatever.

Set a limit on the number of times you can SUCCESSFULLY provide backup (a win, 3 or more flames - ) to a teammate. I think 5 is a more than reasonable number of successful hits.

The problem a lot of you have is that you’re already so far up the proverbial PG behind, you fail to think outside of the box to what would make this game actually fun, interesting, engaging, etc. because you like being parked on a team where someone else does the work for you.

Here’s the thing. Wars would be SO much better, require actual teamwork, and coordination outside of simple waves. It would be a war, what a concept. Scores wouldn’t be 250-250 dependent all on defenses anymore (which lo and behold, was another of my ideas years ago…) instead it would be a mix of offense and defense both required to win and you would actually see teams think more about warring and see many more shifts in leagues as well as teams being forced to average out their levels a bit more. You would see wars with 127-78 scores or 240-238 and you could just make defensive points count as a half point up to 250 where the leftovers would determine the winner.

This game is dry as hell in the lower leagues for this very reason. High levels take breaks from bigger leagues, and to carry easy teams off the strength of their presence. It’s not always one person, it’s usually a handful of them - which prevents this made up burnout a lot of you are citing. Like these players will get sick of winning eventually :roll_eyes:. Well the same ish works on the other side as has been pointed out - many new players remain in lower leagues and having to face that kind of carrying all the time is demoralizing and probably makes a lot of people quit who have picked the game up recently.

Wars are simply not fun. As most of this game is not fun, it is simply progression or supplementation for another area of the game that we get sucked into (it’s an actual psychological issue, and we’re being preyed upon - it’s been discussed in these forums before) and I think it’s high time - especially with this being the year of QOL improvements supposedly - that PG really starts thinking about what is best for the players. Having a couple alt’s on a team that aren’t up to par with the majority is one thing, but when it’s stacked the other way around - which is the case even in sapphire leagues (tell me I’m wrong, like there aren’t 1-5 level 400’s on sapphire teams that determine a team’s ACTUAL strength in the current climate, I’ll wait…) it always makes things just grind down to a halt. Nobody declares unless they have at least one or more higher levels than the other team does or most commonly, when a team is falling apart.

Adding the same basic content every season, raising the price, and not bridging MANY gaps that have been created as a result. The game keeps demanding more and more time (Atlas, an entirely different novel) and not giving us any real satisfaction.

/rant

TLDR: Limit successful assists to add depth and strategy back into wars.

4 Likes

#265

Will always disagree. Guess what if they limit the number of times someone can back wars they need to do the same thing to events. Same concept if the little guys are too small to hit big screw them they dont need event points right? This limiting the amount people can play the game is a toxic idea that will do nothing but make even more people quit the game than are already doing so.

3 Likes

#266

There is a big difference between limiting the number of times a player can back in a war and the number of times a player can back a successful war attack…

Not saying I’m necessarily on board, but it’s a distinction that is making me actually think the concept through.

1 Like

#267

I think things should stay the same. Think if a high level can’t back up lower levels in a war a high level the team should not be able to declare a pity war on that smaller team. At the same time you lose wars out right for in even wars. I feel like wars should not happen it on team has 50 people regardless of level attack a team with just 20 people that’s b.s. so what the difference from a 300+ flying for lower levels in a war the out come is the same it’s a one sided war. War is not suppose to be fair. And it’s not common but there are some big teams in gold league my biggest level atm is a little over 200. We had about 18 people then and we was declared on in gold 3 by a team with over 20 people and they had a 100s 200s 300s and one 400 plus. We was massacred. Lol

0 Likes

#268

?
Pity war?

0 Likes

#269

Yes a pity war where only one side is automatically the victor the moment the war is declared. More so when they declared multiple time as if farming you for wind.

0 Likes

#270

Without being able to be declared, one lv 500 will have an immunity…
Thus it will be one man-team…

0 Likes

#271

I also feel that it would be beneficial for only one war can be called on every team per week.
Meaning if your team was declared on by a team the can’t declare on you again within a week’s time. This makes it to were people can’t be do back to back wars on the same teams for easy victories. Yo can declare on every team once per week. And can only have a maximum of say… 3 declared against you and can only declare a total of 2 at a time making it a possible amount of 5 war max at once. Or something similar to that so people can’t be demolish at least instantly among reaching a higher league.

0 Likes

#272

But it no difference compared to one team having more players than the other cause it’s still completely one sided is it not?

0 Likes

#273

Mainly because War Dragon is a team game. Meaning that we should maximize the team as well (50 members)
-edit-
Actually many higher league teams plugging their slot with alts, to maintain 50 members.

1 Like

#274

I’m in gold league the game play is different down here I actually mess being in sapphire league but that was before the league’s split

0 Likes

#275

Down in lower league’s the hardest thing to do is recruit people

0 Likes

#276

Finding players that fit requierments in higher leagues is not much easier🤣

0 Likes

#277

If you have a B2 bomber during a real war would you want it’s use to be governed by the enemy? No limits on backup.

3 Likes

#278

That pretty much sums it up.

I’m just waiting for people to carry on the analogy with payload capacity…

0 Likes

#279

Wow, and I thought the car analogies were dumb :joy:

0 Likes

#280

The sheer amount of energy/time required to back your entire team during events is already enough of a deterrent there. The way events have been restructured since the timeframe I was referencing, the addition of quests, super attacks/mega coins, etc. all of these things together have made it unnecessary/too time consuming to back an entire team’s event runs. My suggestions would encourage more wars and change the standard outcome.

Counter my points or be quiet. Thanks.

But I’ll go ahead and bite anyways. Let’s say we do add a limit to event assists as well. Oh well? It will encourage teams to level out and recruit people that belong in their respective division. All these alt’s and lower levels don’t belong in higher leagues anyways, and it would also bring some of these bigs back from the lower divisions as well. The point of these suggestions is to find balance and encourage a playing field that makes sense.

Like I said, accept your level restrictions :man_shrugging:

0 Likes

#281

First of please dont tell me what to do. Second are you an officer? A team leader? Have you even opened your eyes and tried recruiting players that are higher level that can compete in say plat 3 and score well in events? If not your entire arguement is flawed come back at me with something else. Everyone bigger looking for teams is looking for sapphire or plat 1 and above my team is plat 3 holding 6 castles in atlas and if we didnt accept lower level players the team would be half empty or alts.

This is a game and limiting the amount players can help their team is counterproductive of a gaming mindset. People join team to do well in events and to help anyone they can atleast that’s what good teammates do. Maybe you arent a good teammate or you dont have good teammates and that’s the whole issue behind all of this :thinking:.

0 Likes