Limit number of back ups by each team member


#363

Lol I’ve been in platinum and I have been the bigger backer for smaller teams in the past and yes I know its tiring and I’ve been in saphire for some time and actually rarely do wars these days… so no it has nothing to do with that since everyone in my league is big :eyes:.
I just simply dont think it’s as big of an issue as you do. Sorry!
I think its mediocre because you should not penalize someone for being the very best they can be! Simple as that. Maybe this bigger player is in a lower league because all their friends are there… maybe they are in a lower league bacause they are sucky flyers… maybe they just dont like being super competitive in upper leagues… they dont need to be hindered by a limit of war backings just because they are seen as too big for that league and people are salty because they are being beaten by 1 player.
Now if you could present a solution that doesnt hinder a very active player from helping then sure let’s find a fix… but I dont agree that this is the answer…


#364

Again, it would effect everyone. Not just them.

You obviously don’t understand that wars were never created to accomadate this large player power-level gap that we see today, as they haven’t updated the system in years. Wars have been broken since Ettin was the top dragon and tower max was 20. The more and more people that reached that plateau, the more wars began to end in ties, and then they implemented the stupidest defense system possible to break ties, which just led to wars being won in the first 30 minutes and then teams sitting on defenses to win them.

They obviously need to make changes somewhere. League changes are huge (in leagues that actually work) and we’re not seeing them enough. People mostly move up and down based on PvP ratings now, and will use makeup wars to hold their position. That’s obviously not the intended mechanic of the league, but wars being broken for longer than most people who have played have obviously taken it’s toll on how people (mis)understand their purpose.


#365

One person, active or not, should not be the decider in a war-game with a team of 50 people. Your logic is flawed. Wrap your head around that.


#366

Yes again because it’s a different opinion then yours its obviously flawed. :joy:. You are the type that is very similar to the “left” as they say… so I choose to not conform to your opinion and hope they leave wars the way they are before they listen to you and make them even more painful then they already are.
You keep fighting the good fight! They seems to be making changes to war a top priority :joy::joy::joy::joy:

Later.


#367

Yes, yes it does mean they need to be limited. In every league. On every team. No matter if they are the smallest or biggest player on it. My suggestions are not a player penalization, it’s a team/league balancer. The fact that you and others view it as some kind of penalization is hilarious. You don’t need to be backing any more than 5 wars for your entire team to win it. It’s 250 assist attempts across the board. Miss me with the crying about one guy not being able to do it all because he’s active.

Your whole team should be active and relevant for them to win a war against another team of 50 people.


#368

See this is the problem… you assume that you should automatically lose a war if you dont have 50/50 participation… I’m personally glad there are ways around this… some people have lives lol…

As I said… no ones crying in this thread except for you… trying desperately to change peoples opinions to your own… you can continue to reiterate your point… it doesnt change the fact that some of us will still not agree that your solution is the answer…

Deal with it.


#369

You already lose wars if you don’t have 50/50 participation… some people have lives is a poor excuse for you to retain your league position. Imagine if that worked in Basketball lol. “Hey Coach, Lebron is out for the game today, he’s busy so he couldn’t make it.” I can’t with you :rofl: take your L.

What are the ways around this? Asking for a friend.

Based on what you’ve said, I can only assume you’re a big fan of the head Cheeto in charge and so I’ll just stop with you lol, can’t tell y’all anything that you don’t already believe is true :man_shrugging:


#370

Yes because all wars have 50/50 participation across the board every time… I forgot I didnt live in the same fantasy world you’ve created for yourself…

Must be cheating if you can’t comprehend it :joy::joy::joy:.

And amazing even after all your explanations and salty innuendos… your suggestion is still simply insufficient.
:v: dueces.


#371

The ones that involve good teams do. Sorry you don’t know what that’s like :wink:

Account sharing is against the ToS, and constitutes as cheating. FYI.


#372

Is that supposed to mean something to me? Sorry but your accusations are as idiotic as your suggestions for game improvement :joy::joy:


#373

Defense stacking and having (an) unbeatable player(s) is usually the only other way wars are won, which would still work with my suggestions. So I’m curious still, as you haven’t really said anything other than my suggestions wouldn’t work, WHY you feel like they wouldn’t work?

Because so far the only reasoning that you or anyone else has given is that players should still be able to sandbag. :man_shrugging:


#374

With limiting backup even more, it will separate team of bigs and team of small.
Tiered prizing will also make teams with many small players have no chance at all.
Strategy will be applied less than before, as it will be a contest of “the number of bigs” instead of “who is the biggest”.

If we want to involve skill and strategy that much

  1. Let us build our own “Sandbox” base exclusive to war.
  2. Let every divine be set at the same power level (or using minimum limiter from both team for base and dragon.).
  3. Let the war begins.

cons.

  1. No incentive for progression
  2. Less income for PG

#375

Ok… so here is my thing… I like to back people for wars… I find it super fun…why should I be limited to only being able to back 5 times a war. ??
Because if this is implemented… it would be across the board for every league…
What then is the purpose of the leaders and officers… I feel like they should contribute more to the team then just having a fancy title? But now with your idea they are limited and cant do their job.
Most teams in platinum dont have 50 very active participants… they arent around enough to back all the players… not every team is a super duper 110% 24/7 kinda team… should we penalize other teams from winning wars because they dont have 50 dedicated people and some other teams do?
This is the kind of stuff I find flawed in your plan…
Yes you would weed out the sand baggers as you call it… but what about the teams that dont have the big ol players but need a small number of players to pack the entire team? Your are pretty much forcing these less active teams to auto lose wars cause no one can give 110%.


#376

Why do you feel that teams that are built that way due to the way things currently are, #1 would stay together, but #2 and more importantly, why do you feel like teams that are built that way deserve to win against a team that is more balanced? Why do lower level players deserve these higher tiered rewards that were earned for them on the backs of others?


#377

If a leader’s worth is based on his war assists then… you have bigger problems lmao

Also read what you just wrote lmaooooooo!

The short answer is: Yes.

If your team is not as active, or a good matchup, you should lose. Period. That is how competition works.

What’s likely to happen is that teams built that way won’t get to stay in platinum and will be pushed down to gold where they actually belong. The bigs will find a platinum team because it is more their speed, or they won’t and they can enjoy gold league with the same team if they so choose. Balance is the objective, not catering to snowflakes.


#378

But you dont agree with competition of a bigger player on a lower league? Sounds contradictory.


#379

Again, slow one, I already said that I don’t care based on my changes if bigs land in lower leagues, they just won’t be able to carry the team. They will have a place like any other member and would need to do their part like ANY OTHER.


#380

I cant figure out where you are getting this information from…
No offense but I have been on a ton of platinum teams… and none of them are as hardcore as you describe…

And to be honest the number of times I seen a 250/250 score was NEVER! Lol…in a platinum league that is.


#381

Quote my contradictory statements or leave the big words to those that know how to wield them.


#382

So you’re going to interject your opinion on competition in this game when you’ve never actually seen it? Okay :rofl::roll_eyes: