War Mercenaries


#61

I guess I should say team members. But anyway we’re not a full team, so the point still stands


#63

All is fair in love and war…if I could borrow a 525 for wars I would. Just being honest. But I don’t have friends…that’s why I play this game.

The real problem is just that (don’t hate me) 50 player teams are too big. This problem, and most other war mechanic issues, all go away if teams are smaller. Even half the size would be amazing. 10-25 player teams would be perfect.

If there is a programmer out there in the ether with wild aspirations of building a WD spinoff…PLEASE…make teams smaller. Thank you


#64

Yeah, the idea of how many people is “enough” is interesting across games, platforms, and genres. In some games, you’re limited to 4 people in a party (Diablo), in others you can have 5 or 6 (WoW and Everquest, respectively). In some games, a raid may require 10, another raid 25 (WoW), while other games may require something like Everquest’s original of 72 (and that’s 72 people all online at the same time for 4 to 6 hours at a stretch).

If PG were to simply say “Alright, teams are now down to 25. You lot have fun sorting that out!” I think it would generate a lot of hostility.

Then again, it seems they’ve grown some incredibly thick skin, so…


#65

Oh I get that. And I wouldn’t suggest that teams simply be ripped in half. I think that down the road, whomever is smart enough to build the successor to this game should allow for smaller teams.

Can you imagine the outage if all teams in the game were suddenly disbanded and ALL players were required for form new, smaller teams AND start from scratch…there would be rioting in the streets…lol


#66

Hadn’t thought about this before if I’m being honest. On the surface I like the premise but this affects Atlas quite a bit assuming Atlas doesn’t change. Hard to defend 20 castles with 25 people who may not play at the same time.

Edit: Especially if you had to actually split the land up amongst former teammates…

For this reason, not happening. An interesting thought though. I like it.


#67

Right, eagles eating the liver and all.


#68

I don’t think I’d ever make a post in these forums till I saw this. But coming from the original merc and a guy who knows more about war teams game mechanics etc than many here especially myself is why I must ask, and U know I respect u a lot so when I ask you this plz don’t take it the wrong way. But would you quit playing this game for a war Dragons spinoff that was the exact same but only had smaller teams? Or if u had said programmers from even pg doing your bidding would you actuallychange this one and if so would you seperate the smaller teams from the fifty player teams like how machmaking hides u from larger players? Or would these teams be left to fend on their own like in atlas except with a penalty to flame count or buff ie ten flames per attack instead of five? As u know it’s easy to go from bronze to silver one or gold five or whatever in just a few days using a team of four high lvl guys ie so called mercs until u run out of medals. This is what has stopped my own team from advancing. One thing I’m sure of and yes this as usual is gonna be a novel lol :joy: the game is so broken from each and every new update it forces u to upgrade your device every year to keep up with the damned menus. How could this be implemented without severely messing up the game when they can’t even include a chest munching Draco into the mix? And if u are solely speaking about a spinoff can u elaborate? Thanks :black_flag::skull_and_crossbones::black_flag::facepunch:


#69

No I wouldn’t up an abandon my team. HOWEVER, in this hypothetical situation that all of a sudden a BETTER version of War Dragons was released…I’m sure that I would start playing it and recruit existing team members to join me.

The team size ship has sailed. That’s not going to get changed. Every team struggles with recruiting and maintaining an active 50 roster…that’s why so many of us have MULTIPLE alt accounts ;(

There are SO many gameplay issues right now (see the multiple threads currently up). My point earlier was simply that IF teams had been smaller from the get-go, a lot of these game-mechanic related issues could have been avoided. But the developers decided on teams of 50…and so here we are.

Again…I’ll echo my request from an earlier thread…I would like to see PG take 3 simple steps:

  1. Read and reflect on the negative feedback coming from their loyal player base
  2. Make an official statement detailing their vision for the game, the steps they will be taking to implement game play improvements, and a realistic time frame regarding when we can expect these changes
  3. ONE final and complete MAJOR update (there will always be minor ones) that has gone through QA and testing, and is released across all platforms with a final/permanent game structure

#70

Thanks for the well thought out answer. 100% agree with you on those three points. I as well as most of us here have been screaming this from the rooftops!
As for the first part it IS very hard to recruit 49 others I know. And u know everyone knows. Someone here said then how would you defend all your castles in atlas? My answer is simple really, the same way we’re doing it now with the use of alliances. So yeah I just think it’s an interesting idea and one I have never heard discussed before. Also having smaller teams would make the core group tighter as most teams have a core group of ten to fifteen players anyway and when drama lama comes to town these ten to fifteen others either merge with another team or vice versa thus creating a problem wherein one group needs power but has to give up leadership and if a problem arises again you most likely are going to be loosing all of them like what happened recently with a couple of teams I know of leaving them to scramble to quickly find enough players to fill that fifty spots before being declared upon.


#71

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.