Suggestion: War brackets

It probably has been suggested before but I did a few quick searches and didn’t find it.

Thinking about teams that intentionally throw Wars, what if there was automatically declared wars in a sort of bracket system similar to how basketball playoffs happen? Forcing each team to fight a few battles in the 7 day period which either forces them to move up or down.

The details in how many wars, how teams match, etc could be adjusted to need. (For example if each team had a mandatory war with every team it would be the ideal evaluation but we probably don’t want to make 25 day long reshuffling, but it could be done traditional bracket style or maybe each team battles 4 behind them and 3 in front of them in rank adjusted by position)

Regular War declarations could be kept for bonus wars.

Was just an idea. I’m sure it’s probably been ruled out, but it might reduce sandbagging some. Of corse I think incentives still need to be raised as well. But I was thinking how most teams declare on any easy win. A truer rank would force difficult wars.

4 Likes

Actually a nice idea…
IMO
And the final 4 (get it? College Basketball) will get a grand prize. Maybe this could be an event or somehting

I suggest this in the old forums and presented the idea at pg headquarters at the atlas party. Pg Coffee loved the idea. My idea was for more of an event though

2 Likes

http://wardragons.pocketgems.com/forum/all-forums/wars-and-alliances/129137-new-event-idea

1 Like

Yea, I like this idea more as an event than a regularly occurring feature of the war system.

4 Likes

I’m personally not against it as an event, but as many have pointed out we have serious problems with wars

From lack of incentive to compete, to almost no point difference from one league to another, stuff ain’t right.

I think a large part of the problem is that when you can choose who you can hit, you can climb higher by hitting the weakest teams. Not at all calling it wrong, just that it is partly responsible for the situation we have. We may have to accept things may need to change in order to get better.

That being said, I’m not opposed to trying it out as an event of some kind, but it won’t fix anything unless it was a large team ranking as a result.

1 Like

What if my team doesn’t want to war that week? There should be a way to opt out.
-edit-
I see what you said about forcing teams to war, but smaller teams that are working on building up won’t survive with this kind of system.
I especially don’t want to war on a week that’s feeding or fortification.

1 Like

Sure they would. They would float down until they were in a group of other teams who were in the same boat.

Although if you mean like bronze and maybe silver, well maybe they would need to be exempt as that’s kind of a different situation. That’s sort of when you learn to do Wars.

I didn’t read it but I’m taking it that it’s probably about the same…Atleast the same idea with wars in the event :wink:

I was talking to a teammate not long ago about how neat it would be to have a main event but aimed towards wars!

You could do so many things with it!

You could have it like a main event but even longer run over a 7 day span! Where you got the points from war but it would be cool if the ranking and global rating was really effected by the event! The strongest teams come out in each league!

Or you could shorten the war times and have it a 5 day event! Like abunch of 12-16 hour wars with several going at a time!

I love the idea of war being in an event and how good your team does has a big impact of the league rankings! A major war event!

If they put war in an event somehow I think everyone would love it! Everyone loves war :grin: And you get prizes too! No brainer :joy:

Why do you want teams unable to throw a war? Is it not part of strategy to move where you want? I was thinking about a “White Flag” button that the leader could tap to concede a war and that way it doesn’t take the full 24 hours to run its course. :thinking::thinking:

1 Like

Less able to throw. The idea is that rankings would be truer and competition would be better. (Dare I say more fun).

Yes it is a strategy, but I think it’s partially to blame for league stagnation. That and lack of incentives for advancing.

1 Like

I don’t know what makes you think that warring 3 above and 4 bellow or whatever other combination will make teams be “truer” to their rankings. Nothing stops a team to forfait a war and win another. So in the end, I don’t think this would benefit to anyone but PG by making money on attack buffs/hammers/potions and other spells people would buy.

An event based on warring, that would be great ! Disabling the possibility to do multiple wars against the same team in the event would make things more balanced.

So, in the end, I find the idea interesting, but I am not sure it will have the expected end result.

Just wondering, but when was the last time you yourself have tried to build a team from scratch? Meaning from just you and maybe one other person.

1 Like

If I’m understanding this right then my vote is no. I don’t want to be forced to do wars. And when we do choose to war we shouldn’t be denied the choice of who we war and when.

We already have events that are basically mini wars already too. They are some of the most fun and I can’t see this improving on that in any way.

I think it would be fun as an event. There would be the chance for “cinderella stories”. I know a lot of strong teams hang out in the middle of the pack so they wont move up to the next league or get knocked down if they have a bad war. If it was an event, theres no chance of either happening so teams would be more inclined to see how good they really are. Plus you would be reearded more for doing well. No other event is anything like this. We all know in every event except king of the hill a team is only a couple mega coins away from losing last second. An event like this takes all the bonus stuff away and makes you earn everything.

1 Like

I would looooove a tournament war event! That would be spectacular!

1 Like

They are essentially picking easy wins and not forced to rate vs the realm. There is also no mechanism to punish sitting without Wars. (You don’t bleed rank for doing nothing in leagues where nobody declares)

Yes it can still be thrown, but a lot of teams won’t throw a battle but will chose not to have one or to have them against teams missing a lever for a split second or with smaller players, etc. truer is not completely true. It would be an improvement. To say because it doesn’t make everything perfect is not reason to make incremental improvements.

At the end of the day you can’t fully stop sandbagging, but you can incentivize people not to do it. (this is the part where I said incentives need increasing still)

In my opinion too many people game the system
Rather than compete within the intended bounds of the game. It is worth trying something.

1 Like

I did it recently for an alt team. Was way easy knowing the tricks I know now. I did in a few days what took my original team months.

I do think there are issues at the bottom, but it’s easy to move around them. And this could help improve that. Some of the issues are with teams who don’t rank based on their abilities. This should help that.

I think it would be good for both TBH. People who are afraid of being forced to compete are just ones who prefer gaming the system rather than having competition based on battle. I’d love to try it as an event.

Of corse anything that fixes the system will be unpopular to those who benefit from the broken system. Imagine if in college basketball they got to choose what teams they competed with how terrible the winning teams would be on the sport of basketball and how good they would be on picking their battles.

1 Like

So you did it as a level 100+ player. What about teams that aren’t started by a player quite as high level. You were capable of dominating the lower leagues by yourself. Your high level also attracts players to join with you regardless.
It’s not quite as easy when you’re not such a high level that can breeze through the lower leagues.
And when did you start getting a lot of players? Was it in bronze and silver?
All I’m saying here is your perception of team viability is very different than how most teams are faring in the lower leagues right now, with or without doing mandatory wars.

1 Like