Tiebreaker: did we really need it?

[Wendy]

With all problems the war has..did we really need a tiebreaker? At least before, a good non-shopping skilled team could stalemate the mismatches the system gives.
i make an example:
we are at war against a sandbagging Korean team.
this match gives us 3 glory and make us lose 729. Easy war you will say. No, because this team is a new alliance created from a team that is on leaderboard. Original team has 23k glory and is empty. New team has 12k glory.
so: Huge mismatch vs a team a lot stronger than we are, and in the remote case we can stalemate them, tiebreaker could make us lose anyway.
now I appreciate the tiebreaker with a matchmaking that works. But with the current one, with AA bases ranked 11 and global age bases ranked 3, did we really need this new feature?
And, even if the thread is about something else, do you think it's fair to give 3 glory for such a mismatch? I know glory won/lost is based on how much every alliance has, but don't you think it would be better if it was calculated on how difficoult the match is? We should be losing 3 glory, not them.

 

[Quovatis]

Back when it was very easy to stalemate, yes, the tiebreaker was necessary. But they have added the stronghold, and now the pay to win defense troops to war, which makes getting a perfect score extremely difficult. So I agree, it's no longer necessary if they insist on keeping the ridiculous pay to win aspects of war they introduced.

 

[nikki bella]

I'm more concerned about the ease in which a 23 k glory team can just move effortlessly to a new alliance name and remove all those glory points from their opponents.

There seems no clear motive to do this unless to clean up glory from their peers, thus making the playing pitch lean even more heavily in their favour.

 

[Wendy]

This alliance in particular has already done it twice. They have n 1 alliance with 19k glory and n 2 with 23k and now a third with 12k. Both alliance n 1 and 2 are empty with just a little level 17 leader.

 

[LordJestix]

This alliance in particular has already done it twice. They have n 1 alliance with 19k glory and n 2 with 23k and now a third with 12k. Both alliance n 1 and 2 are empty with just a little level 17 leader.

My guess as to the reason, they are trying to get a bunch of allinaces in the top of the leader boards. So they run up the glory, put some random alt account in it and then leave, rinse and repeat.

 

[JMoney]

It seems like the reason that alliance would be doing that is to mess up the leaderboard enough that action has to be taken to fix the system, less the top alliances in the leaderboard be full of ghost alliances. But considering the players leaderboard has had the same players, some of which aren't even playing the game anymore after more than nearly two months -- like Ajisan/あじさん -- I don't know if such actions would cause such a thing to happen. The system needs a big overhaul, that's for sure.

 

[Wendy]

I like it anyway. It could be simpler than every other kind of complaint. Just show Nexon we don't care about a so bugged leaderboard

 

[Bowmore]

I'm amazed that the Glory boards still have enough importance to certain people, such that they would actually devote their time and energy to this sort of nonsense.

 

[Motaz Tarek]

let's be honest the new tie breaker is a pay2win feature, even if both alliances are equal, it's obvious that the one who finishes battles faster is the one that use as much troop cards as they can.
this is really one of the worst ideas ever, frustration that comes after doing ur best and getting a 5 stars is really a very bad feeling
instead of solving the stalemates by reducing the troop card madness in wars they r just making it more legit to be the only way u can reach the top of the leaderboard

 

[Wendy]

You know, we lost the war yesterday. 100-97 with a couple of bad spinning wheel rolled back attack. In case we stalemated times were so close I could not say who the winner would have been. I really liked the fact that before, if you had a mismatch, the ability to stalemate was enough.
A global age player very skilled we have took down 2 of their AA players yesterday: 2.53 and 3.04.
Instead of appreciating this I had to think that times were not good enough...insane..
btw I appreciated it a lot and I'm so proud my little team was about to stalemate n66 alliance in leaderboard ( the one with currently one player)

 

[Motaz Tarek]

yea for me i am a global age player and i could take down almost all AA bases i attacked (except korea army ones) not just nerfing tactics made it semi-impossible but also the time factor is against me cuz of my army dps taking more time than an AA army to finish the battle.. sux like hell

 

[Wendy]

exaclty, instead of being rewarded for your abilities you are punished! what a wonderful sistem!