I was so excited when glory came out. Finally a war leaderboard. I actually thought they got a lot of the components right on paper, and still do...but there are some serious problems crippling war for so many people now. I can't really find any official Nexon commentary on pretty much any of them except for one bug that is "under review". For each of these, I was hoping to get an official response on if Nexon feels these are problems that have planned fixes, or if Nexon felt that these were working as intended and would be staying in a similar fashion for some time to come.
1) Iron age base stacking. 5 of our last 7 wars have been 20+ max global bases, mixed with 10-22 iron age (or medieval/classical/gunpowder bases with almost no upgrades). Its an awful experience. Our players either face mirror bases that are +2 ages above them in upgrades, or -4 below them and no loot. The top rankings are littered with them, and it has completely, utterly broken the matchmaking algorithm. I would guess this is negatively impacting most teams in the EA/IA average range. I honestly dont know what the solution is, would love to hear any ideas. I'd like to think encouragement not to do it (by rewarding good behavior with glory) is probably the best idea. The only reliable counter would be to boot 20 members, load up on unplayed alts, and do it ourselves. We wont take that path, so instead we just get a really crappy war experience, which is pretty much the only feature most of us play for.
2) Max score stalemates. This was brought up well before glory was even released, and I can't for the life of me find any official response other than one misguided attempt that didnt understand the question. Its common, and will become even more common as time goes on, for more advanced and organized teams to both have perfect scores/destruction. These are probably the teams that deserve to be rewarded the most in many cases. Right now they get none. I wouldnt advocate giving it the same glory as a flat out win, but something like 60-75% would make it so much less painful, and probably encourage top teams to face each other again. Or, introduce a 3rd tiebreaker.
3) Confirmed fixed, good job Nexon. >100% destruction glitch. This ties into #2 but is so dreadful it deserves its own callout. It hasnt happened to our team as a tiebreaker, but I see >100% destruction frequently and I can only imagine how infuriating it would be to go from a max score stalemate, to a loss because of this glitch. A team invests so much time and planning into wars, to lose glory because of this is such a bad customer experience it is beyond me how this hasnt been fixed yet. This bug has been reported well before we ever even heard the word "glory" as it related to wars.
4) Glory point award/loss calculations. Opposing team's glory rank simply matters too much in the calculation of how glory points are awarded. Total war upgrade rank (whatever the average age modifier is that has been posted) has to hold more weight, as well as war size. Right now there is so much more glory to be had by stacking iron age bases and finding lower age teams to beat, compared to taking a risk in facing other similarly advanced teams. In fact, I think the weighting put on opponents glory is so high, it renders almost all of those other modifiers for war size, war rank, nearly pointless. Our 45v45 wars have offered us lower than our 35v35, by a substantial margin, and our highest glory reward ever was against a team that we easily outranked in terms of advancement, yet when we face 25 max global bases its been 1/4th of that. In my mind this is one of the best ways to discourage iron age base stacking - give people incentive to fight with normal rosters against teams that are of equal difficulty.
5) Recognizing top medal alliances. Doesnt really have anything to do with war, but there are so many teams that worked hard to get into the top medal rankings. They went from being the only way to see an alliance ranking for 1.5 years +, to entirely meaningless. Why can't we at least sort teams by medals, or reward the teams that do well in maintaining them, or have a separate leaderboard for medals.
Im not in a top alliance, when there were medal rankings we were in the 90s. We've been in an out of the glory rankings, I think we topped out at 50, but have dropped off since then. Its not just the top teams that this impacts. It really sucks for a lot of us that want to compete and try to join the glory leaderboard. I know you can't promise timelines, or give exact solutions...but I think it would be nice to know at least Nexon's stance on these issues. I truly believe that if at least 1-4 in the above list isnt fixed soon, the game will really be over for the majority of people that consider war one of the best features, and I dont want to see that happen!
1) Iron age base stacking. 5 of our last 7 wars have been 20+ max global bases, mixed with 10-22 iron age (or medieval/classical/gunpowder bases with almost no upgrades). Its an awful experience. Our players either face mirror bases that are +2 ages above them in upgrades, or -4 below them and no loot. The top rankings are littered with them, and it has completely, utterly broken the matchmaking algorithm. I would guess this is negatively impacting most teams in the EA/IA average range. I honestly dont know what the solution is, would love to hear any ideas. I'd like to think encouragement not to do it (by rewarding good behavior with glory) is probably the best idea. The only reliable counter would be to boot 20 members, load up on unplayed alts, and do it ourselves. We wont take that path, so instead we just get a really crappy war experience, which is pretty much the only feature most of us play for.
2) Max score stalemates. This was brought up well before glory was even released, and I can't for the life of me find any official response other than one misguided attempt that didnt understand the question. Its common, and will become even more common as time goes on, for more advanced and organized teams to both have perfect scores/destruction. These are probably the teams that deserve to be rewarded the most in many cases. Right now they get none. I wouldnt advocate giving it the same glory as a flat out win, but something like 60-75% would make it so much less painful, and probably encourage top teams to face each other again. Or, introduce a 3rd tiebreaker.
3) Confirmed fixed, good job Nexon. >100% destruction glitch. This ties into #2 but is so dreadful it deserves its own callout. It hasnt happened to our team as a tiebreaker, but I see >100% destruction frequently and I can only imagine how infuriating it would be to go from a max score stalemate, to a loss because of this glitch. A team invests so much time and planning into wars, to lose glory because of this is such a bad customer experience it is beyond me how this hasnt been fixed yet. This bug has been reported well before we ever even heard the word "glory" as it related to wars.
4) Glory point award/loss calculations. Opposing team's glory rank simply matters too much in the calculation of how glory points are awarded. Total war upgrade rank (whatever the average age modifier is that has been posted) has to hold more weight, as well as war size. Right now there is so much more glory to be had by stacking iron age bases and finding lower age teams to beat, compared to taking a risk in facing other similarly advanced teams. In fact, I think the weighting put on opponents glory is so high, it renders almost all of those other modifiers for war size, war rank, nearly pointless. Our 45v45 wars have offered us lower than our 35v35, by a substantial margin, and our highest glory reward ever was against a team that we easily outranked in terms of advancement, yet when we face 25 max global bases its been 1/4th of that. In my mind this is one of the best ways to discourage iron age base stacking - give people incentive to fight with normal rosters against teams that are of equal difficulty.
5) Recognizing top medal alliances. Doesnt really have anything to do with war, but there are so many teams that worked hard to get into the top medal rankings. They went from being the only way to see an alliance ranking for 1.5 years +, to entirely meaningless. Why can't we at least sort teams by medals, or reward the teams that do well in maintaining them, or have a separate leaderboard for medals.
Im not in a top alliance, when there were medal rankings we were in the 90s. We've been in an out of the glory rankings, I think we topped out at 50, but have dropped off since then. Its not just the top teams that this impacts. It really sucks for a lot of us that want to compete and try to join the glory leaderboard. I know you can't promise timelines, or give exact solutions...but I think it would be nice to know at least Nexon's stance on these issues. I truly believe that if at least 1-4 in the above list isnt fixed soon, the game will really be over for the majority of people that consider war one of the best features, and I dont want to see that happen!
Last edited:
