Decline in war

[mavrick68]

Hello to all leaders and nexon,
I like to think I am an established player (leader),that is fair when it comes to joining an alliance ie no pressure it’s all about fair play helping players to develop and grow.
Is it me or when it comes to war the number of players don’t seem to be interested as much as they used to be.
I think when they changed Marco’s gifts ie troop chest with rubies every now and then this has made a major effect.

 

[mavrick68]

Any feedback more than welcome,
mavrick Aragon archers/the Goonies UK

 

[TizJourney]

My average income on MP around 5000 oil per 1 attack with british/museum perks on EASY bases. War gives around 5000 for WIN. War Rewards are total joke. Rubies are useless. Matchmaking as bad as ever. The decline is normal.

 

[Freightshaker]

I quit wars months ago due to horrible match ups. Tired of shelling out hundreds of thousands in donations for nothing. Last match up, they went against 10 CWA and 5 enlightenment bases; I am the only CWA in our alliance and I wasn't even in the war.

 

[Play2loud]

I agree. Match ups needs serious work. We have a low, mdeium and high level war. Our low guys. Enlightenment gunpowder guys get matched aga8nst mostly atomic cold war and global players. They get slaughtered everytime.

 

[Bedlam]

I took a break from wars and I am swimming in oil. The perks are just not worth it when you do back to back wars.

 

[No Angel]

I quit wars for months letting lower level members do wars, hoping that once in a while we could get decent wars. Didn't quite work All about stupid matchmaking!

 

[Bootney Lee Fonsworth]

Wars are mostly an expensive and poorly-matched joke past industrial age, particularly since the advent of the museum and its various loot boosts.

Rubies are only used to buy troop cards to use in wars, so no real compelling reason to fight for those.

BHG seems unwilling to and incapable of ever fixing matchmaking/eliminating sandbagging.

Nor do they seem capable of creating more alliance perk levels without CoC doing it first, even though I'd wager that most active alliances hit Perk 10 months ago.

Besides most wars are the same anyway. Spam 4 cards and 7 decoys and hope that the hidden variables: traps, uni skills, stronghold troops, etcetera aren't powerful enough to overcome that. The balance they always claim to be seeking is predicated on pay-to-win troop cards and one tactic being so clearly superior to others that it's ridiculous to consider using anything else.

 

[No Angel]

Yeah, sometimes I think what else are rubies for, they need to be more creative in that one. I barely used troop tactics anyway . Ain't spending money for developers! Skills, no bills!

 

[Saruman the White]

I fight almost every war, but mostly for the joy of it. I'd like to see much better rewards for participating and fighting in wars and much more better rewards for winning the war.

 

[Ankara]

I’m visiting a few alliances right now and doing a few wars but consider myself ‘retired’ from wars for the reasons above, especially the requirement of troop cards coupled with the increased likelyhood of failure regardless due to the ramped up defence. I’m no superstar, so it was progressively a process of buying troop cards and still getting absolutely destroyed by a maxed out defence base. I tip my hat to the highly skilled attackers out there, but my War experience lapsed from buying cards to take down a base and see if we as an alliance were able to win a war to buying troop cards and failing miserably. Pay to lose basically, at which point it just ceased to be fun. Almost retired from the game but remembered how much I enjoyed the game for all that time before war was released, and retired from war instead. It’s been really good to be honest.

 

[Bootney Lee Fonsworth]

Yeah, the troop card crap has ruined wars for the most part. Much like the not-so-bold predictions said when they started flooding the game with them in late-2016. Glory means nothing from a gameplay sense so I can see why more and more people are opting not to bother with it.

Too bad. It's a good game that could've been so much greater without so many shortsighted decisions on the part of the devs. Bully for those that buy into what wars have become, they keep the lights on afterall. But to pretend that there isn't a noticeable decline in war participation and enthusiasm over the last year and a half seems a bit much.

 

[LordAnubis]

Same here. Now retired from war. Its not worth it anymore. Troop cards have killed the game as it does for any game they (or similar thing) is introduced to a game.
​​​​​​
Funny thing is back when cards were introduced into the game players formed 0SH as a protest against it only to become the biggest users of troop cards thus negatting their efforts.

 

[yemen]

I get that you don't like 0SH, and completely agree with the sentiments that troop cards have made war and game balance stupid.

But we would happily make every war a 0SH or 0TT, and never use them at all. If Nexon offered that as an enforceable option (only search for other 0TT teams, and nexon prevents cards from being loaded or used on attacks), we would use it every time, and I guess start burning the free cards in multiplayer, instead of on the terrible matchups we get against heavy spenders.

 

[LordAnubis]

yemen that would be a great war option. as it stands now if a non-0sh team matches with 0sh is a guarantee the 0sh team will stuff SHs....which is hypocritical to their core ideals.

in that sense 0sh is actually fuelling Nexons ongoing push for troop cards. if they were true to their founding beliefs and not use cards at all it would have a much greater impact.

 

[yemen]

LordAnubis - Many of the teams that started and participate in 0SH were those at high enough glory levels that they were loading SHs every war before. Now, they don't when they have a 0SH match. That is less spending.

Others, like my team, would only fill situationally - when we felt it was an even matchup, and it was likely the other side would fill. We would always reach out to the other team to get an agreement when we could before 0SH came and along, and now even if they are not 0SH. It is just a shortcut to make that happen more often by being part of the group.

There may be situations where 0SH leads to more spending. But not for most participants.

It is very unpleasant being in an apparently even war, and discovering you are at a huge disadvantage because the other side filled and you didn't. Nexon designed it to work that way. They should allow us to communicate directly with the other team to make agreements without all this extra effort. And SH donations should be visible, both how many and what they are, to the opponents during both planning and war day. The secrecy is Nexon's way to encourage everyone to fill, just in case the other side is doing it.

I enjoy this game, but my feelings of dislike for the company running it grow every time they release something new it seems.

 

[Manifesto]

To be fair to 0SH teams, would it be right to say they most likely fill their SH's when confronted with other teams who do (probably non-0SH), therefore trying to make it a level playing field?

 

[LordAnubis]

Manifesto no it wouldn't. everyone dances around and ignores what 0sh was founded for...to protest Nexon's introduction and push for troop cards. when the sad fact is 0sh teams do the complete opposite and extensively use cards.

I was in a top 100 team when 0sh was formed. on one occassion we were matched with another 0sh team. our leader clearly stated "fck em we are 0tt, not 0sh" and he had all SHs stuffed. hypocrisy at its finest.

other times we were matched with 0sh/0tt teams both sides still filled SHs and used cards.

so the movement is a complete joke.

more to the topic there is a definate decline in war. dominations.pl reports alliances at under 14k...a drop of more than 2k groups since a few weeks ago.

 

[No Angel]

Yeah the "noble idealism" of the 0SH. It should be the perfect movement to suppress down troop tactics usage massively, yet they are still allowing and even promoting them (because the 0SH's most likely meet non 0SH teams).
As I posted in other thread :
There's no point on using 0SH/0TT on alliance name but still using TT.
Just remove the tag, and you can stay to be on-demand 0SH with fellow alliances in your Discord/Line community. As simple as that.

 

[Manifesto]

Well Lord Anubis, one could argue that 0TT stands for Over The Top!