US Independence Day - Week Ahead 6/30/25

[LuSt]

I understand what you mean, but I don't think it's right.
An attacker has to specialize his artifacts to a certain troop; switching to a different tactic is extremely costly, as many artifacts have to be crafted.

In contrast, defenders want one solution to everything. That doesn't seem fair to me.

In my opinion, the attackers should then either get general lines, e.g. barracks troops damage instead of mortar damage - this would also reduce the options in crafting and make it easier to find suitable artifacts -
Or the defenders have to decide whether they defend "mediocre" against everything or defend particularly strongly against one troop type.
That's why we have spy report. You see a set of artifacts on the preparation day and can rearrange your own to counter your opponent in the best possible way. Both as Off and Def.

Huh? This is going off course. We’re not debating whether defenders should be able to use a single load out to defend against everything or not, they can’t and I agree with you. That doesn’t mean that they will dump everything into defending against 1 attack style and leave themselves vulnerable to another though. The only stats that cover everything are all defensive tower stats and making artifacts able to have more than 2 lines just aren’t as beneficial for defenders as it is for attackers because of this.

 

[LuSt]

 

[Rollin]

1. Nobody will want to play Defender anymore because it is unnecessary

2. BHG will never manage to balance it more (At the moment the offensiv is much stronger than the defense, and it will get much worse)

3. there will only be offensive players, which will make the world wars incredibly boring. EVERY world war becomes a time war

4. BHG Destroys they own game in 1 hotfix patch

congratulations @Harlems369th

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

Huh? This is going off course. We’re not debating whether defenders should be able to use a single load out to defend against everything or not, they can’t and I agree with you. That doesn’t mean that they will dump everything into defending against 1 attack style and leave themselves vulnerable to another though. The only stats that cover everything are all defensive tower stats and making artifacts able to have more than 2 lines just aren’t as beneficial for defenders as it is for attackers because of this.

The defenders benefit just as much. Defenders can also get 3, 4 or 5 lines of the same invasion stats.

The community has already made a mistake with the 85% limit. They insisted on holding back Sitrep 1, even though changing the calculation would have been important and correct. The problem back then was poor balance. BHG made a mistake by giving in to the pressure. It would have been better to go through with Sitrep 1 and then adjust the balance.

Now we are in the same situation: it is right to correct the error in the museum. We should even implement Sitrep 1 at the same time. But again BHG is being threatened; again a step in the right direction shall be blocked. I hope that BHG doesn't give in this time but sticks to the plan. Do everything right this time - if there are still problems afterwards, they can be dealt with via the ongoing troop adjustments.

 

[LuSt]

The defenders benefit just as much. Defenders can also get 3, 4 or 5 lines of the same invasion stats.

The community has already made a mistake with the 85% limit. They insisted on holding back Sitrep 1, even though changing the calculation would have been important and correct. The problem back then was poor balance. BHG made a mistake by giving in to the pressure. It would have been better to go through with Sitrep 1 and then adjust the balance.

Now we are in the same situation: it is right to correct the error in the museum. We should even implement Sitrep 1 at the same time. But again BHG is being threatened; again a step in the right direction shall be blocked. I hope that BHG doesn't give in this time but sticks to the plan. Do everything right this time - if there are still problems afterwards, they can be dealt with via the ongoing troop adjustments.

You have given zero valid facts to back up your opinion.

I have pointed out an obvious flaw by how much it favors attackers because they only have to focus on 1 troop meanwhile defenders have to focus on 2 or more. Because of that it makes attackers weapons and armor much more beneficial when compared to their defensive counterparts.

THIS IS WHY BOMBERS USE 3 OF THEM!

Do you ever see defenders use 3 weapons or armors? No you don’t, because it’s not realistic. Defenders primarily benefit from war equipment and the buff to war equipment will pale in comparison defensively to the buff attackers will gain from weapons and armor.

I agree that the -85% cap should be removed at this stage of the game, regardless of the outcome on artifacts lines. When it was brought up years ago BHG made the right call because there wasn’t as much bloated stats as there is now.

This is all stat related. You’re still ignoring the fact of all the time and money invested in current museums that will be completely wasted because everyone will have to sell their current artifacts due to them being inferior. Maybe you don’t care about the museum you have but I’ve personally spent endless hours crafting mine as well as an unimaginable amount of crowns to reroll over the past 8 years.

 

[LuSt]

The defenders benefit just as much. Defenders can also get 3, 4 or 5 lines of the same invasion stats.

The community has already made a mistake with the 85% limit. They insisted on holding back Sitrep 1, even though changing the calculation would have been important and correct. The problem back then was poor balance. BHG made a mistake by giving in to the pressure. It would have been better to go through with Sitrep 1 and then adjust the balance.

Now we are in the same situation: it is right to correct the error in the museum. We should even implement Sitrep 1 at the same time. But again BHG is being threatened; again a step in the right direction shall be blocked. I hope that BHG doesn't give in this time but sticks to the plan. Do everything right this time - if there are still problems afterwards, they can be dealt with via the ongoing troop adjustments.

Here’s a simple to understand analogy:

Imagine a game of tug of war but there are 3 ropes to choose from. If any of the 3 ropes gets pulled over to the enemies side you lose.

The attacker team chooses to pull 1 rope with all of its members, while the defender team has to allocate its members to pull 2 or 3 ropes.

Remember that just 1 of the 3 ropes needs to be pulled to enemies side for you to lose.

Now previously the teams could only add 2 extra weights to their members, but now they’re able to add 5 weights to each of their members. The attacker team loads all 5 extra weights onto 1 rope while the defender team has to decide how to best distribute those extra weights between the 3 ropes being pulled.

This is how weapons and armor are more beneficial to attackers.

 

[King Crimson]

. BHG will never manage to balance it more (At the moment the offensiv is much stronger than the defense, and it will get much worse)

Offence stronger than defence in a game where you get to attack players?!
This is madness!

 

[King Crimson]

The atmosphere is pretty heated. But I don't understand why.

With the rebalance, everyone complains that it is sent in small portions. Now the museum is being changed in a rapid bang, that doesn't fit either?! What would be the right pace for changes? I would even be in favor of activating the postponed Sitrep 1 at the same time. Then we can start again with a logical calculation and its effects will also be taken into account in the ongoing rebalance.

Apparently many (all?) agree that they don't want to re-craft. Then it shouldn't bother you that it's theoretically possible, because nobody will use it anyway ;-)
Maybe the community will even find new agreements, similar to esh
Then everyone can agree before the battle to only use artifacts that match the old pattern (max. 2 lines).

Your museums aren't getting any worse. No one takes away artifacts. No lines will be zeroed.
Well-crafted museums will continue to provide high percentages; just no longer the highest possible percentages of a benefit line.

The museum has always been in a state of transition. For example, from heavy tanks to helicopters to mortars. From transporters to fighters to bombers.
Each time we had to craft new artifacts. Now we have to do it again. It doesn't matter whether it's due to a change in the “meta” or a new set of rules.

Agreed. Everyone's museum is still exactly what it is. Seems players are annoyed that other players might get what they either couldn't get or what they had to pay to get.
Boo hoo, life is all about new challenges.
Ask for compensation if you must, but arguing against a positive change - for those still crafting - is petty.
I mean, it's not like the odds are going to be that favourable in the long term - this is bhg we're talking about. They'll add more artfacts to the mix and we'll be right back where started.

 

[Rollin]

Offence stronger than defence in a game where you get to attack players?!
This is madness!

"is much stronger" and with the change it will get a lot worse

"in a game where you get to attack players"

Where exactly does it say that offensive players must be stronger than defensive players ? Both have the same right to exist, one should not be favored over the other... this called balancing

we are not playing call of duty, its a strategy game

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

defenders have to focus on 2 or more

that is already the wrong assumption. They don't have to, they want to.
If the defenders want to focus on more than one strategy, then they should be worse than a highly specialized attacker.

Imagine a game of tug of war but there are 3 ropes to choose from. If any of the 3 ropes gets pulled over to the enemies side you lose.

The attacker team chooses to pull 1 rope with all of its members, while the defender team has to allocate its members to pull 2 or 3 ropes.

Remember that just 1 of the 3 ropes needs to be pulled to enemies side for you to lose.

You all regularly buy loot boxes with 1% chances. In your example, you still have a 33% chance. These are still better chances for success. ;-)
The defense team can also show an anti-lego museum on the preparation day and switch to an anti-bomber museum for the battle. Then the attackers will probably choose the wrong rope ;-)

But that's just wild theory anyway. In practice, attackers have so far and will continue to distribute their percentages, e.g. between mortars, artillery and paratroopers.
Even today I can have 2 artifacts, each with 2 lines of mortars and 2 lines of artillery. In the future, I can have one with 4 lines of mortars and one with 4 lines of artillery. I doubt that it makes sense to leave mortars on the base stats, for example, and craft 2 artifacts exclusively for artillery. So all in all it doesn't make much difference. Maybe it would help attacks that only use one type of troop e.g. heavy tanks. But even with 5000% damage, the tanks would be too slow to drive through a well-built base with bastions and traps. That's why I don't see a revival of this meta.

If the bombers are the only argument against this change, wouldn't it be better to change the bombers' or anti aircraft base stats and accept the update?


All in all, this is only a small component in the overall picture anyway. Your problem are 2 weapons and 2 armor? So that's 4 times 3 lines = 12 lines that might get "more beneficial" for attacker.
That's negligibly small compared to the over 100 (?) new lines through showcase with 50 lines of legendary artifacts plus another (up to) 50 lines of mythic artifacts.
It doesn't seem logical to me to make such a big fuss over just 12 lines.

 

[LuSt]

that is already the wrong assumption. They don't have to, they want to.
If the defenders want to focus on more than one strategy, then they should be worse than a highly specialized attacker.

Defenders do have to… I don’t understand why I have to even explain this. There are multiple attackers in a war. If a defender chooses to go all in on just anti bombers then they’re easy prey for mortars and vice versa… that’s kind of stupid wouldn’t you think?

You all regularly buy loot boxes with 1% chances. In your example, you still have a 33% chance. These are still better chances for success. ;-)
The defense team can also show an anti-lego museum on the preparation day and switch to an anti-bomber museum for the battle. Then the attackers will probably choose the wrong rope ;-)

Uhh… no. Attackers can see which bases to attack during war. Invalid argument.

But that's just wild theory anyway. In practice, attackers have so far and will continue to distribute their percentages, e.g. between mortars, artillery and paratroopers.
Even today I can have 2 artifacts, each with 2 lines of mortars and 2 lines of artillery. In the future, I can have one with 4 lines of mortars and one with 4 lines of artillery. I doubt that it makes sense to leave mortars on the base stats, for example, and craft 2 artifacts exclusively for artillery. So all in all it doesn't make much difference. Maybe it would help attacks that only use one type of troop e.g. heavy tanks. But even with 5000% damage, the tanks would be too slow to drive through a well-built base with bastions and traps. That's why I don't see a revival of this meta.

As far as your example of attackers currently distribute their percentages that’s because they have no other option In your example with mortars and sieges, you do realize that sieges do not need any museum stats to be extremely effective even against top tier end game defender bases? Given the opportunity I would go all in on mortar damage and HP in a heartbeat.

If the bombers are the only argument against this change, wouldn't it be better to change the bombers' or anti aircraft base stats and accept the update?

Bombers are definitely not the only issue, see paragraph above

All in all, this is only a small component in the overall picture anyway. Your problem are 2 weapons and 2 armor? So that's 4 times 3 lines = 12 lines that might get "more beneficial" for attacker.
That's negligibly small compared to the over 100 (?) new lines through showcase with 50 lines of legendary artifacts plus another (up to) 50 lines of mythic artifacts.
It doesn't seem logical to me to make such a big fuss over just 12 lines.

No not only 2 weapons and 2 armors, it would 3 weapons and 2 armors (or vice versa). Mythical and showcase are a wash just like councilors and manufacturing so let’s not try to add that into the discussion.

 

[LuSt]

I think at this point we’re just going around in circles… sometimes you just can’t explain something to someone that doesn’t want to realize they’re not comprehending.

 

[Rollin]

that is already the wrong assumption. They don't have to, they want to.
If the defenders want to focus on more than one strategy, then they should be worse than a highly specialized attacker.

that makes no sense, If you can't defend all attackers, then there's absolutely no point in playing defensively ? For what ? you will be destroyed by any other offensive player, maybe not against bombers but all other tactics will destroy you…

you lose either way no matter what you do ?? In a world war of 20 you need exactly 5 offensive players, 2-3 bombers and 2-3 mortars and you destroy the entire defense… the mortars destroy the anti bomber defenders and the Bomber players destory Mortar Defenders… WOW VERY CHALLENGING

Idk…there is a lack of gaming experience and logical thinking

 

[Steppenwolf]

I did some research: There are about 40 people from about 20 very high-ranking alliances talking here. That's very few. More than 95% of all alliances and players don't care. So why should the developers care?
And of all the people who have said they're quitting (some of them many times), only one person has done so. So why should the developers care? )

 

[DocHolliday]

I did some research: There are about 40 people from about 20 very high-ranking alliances talking here. That's very few. More than 95% of all alliances and players don't care. So why should the developers care?
And of all the people who have said they're quitting (some of them many times), only one person has done so. So why should the developers care? )

Exactly. Community is not just 30 active players in forums. Out there are thousands players who like/feel ok with those changes..

 

[I.D]

I did some research: There are about 40 people from about 20 very high-ranking alliances talking here. That's very few. More than 95% of all alliances and players don't care. So why should the developers care?
And of all the people who have said they're quitting (some of them many times), only one person has done so. So why should the developers care? )

obviously they don't care . according to this reasoning. but that's how it's always been. otherwise all the bugs they've had for a decade, they would have fixed them with 50 developers they have writing the game code... it is what it is

 

[DocHolliday]

obviously they don't care . according to this reasoning. but that's how it's always been. otherwise all the bugs they've had for a decade, they would have fixed them with 50 developers they have writing the game code... it is what it is

Damn those bugs . I've used to live with them after all those years.
For the inaccurate replays , honestly? It's ten years issue! I don't care anymore, Ok,They trying fix to them , probably they'll do, but it doesn't affect my fun if they don't.
It is what it is as you said.

What I want from BHG? Creativity and more updates with new stuff to make the game more interesting and fun..

 

[King Crimson]

"is much stronger" and with the change it will get a lot worse

"in a game where you get to attack players"

Where exactly does it say that offensive players must be stronger than defensive players ? Both have the same right to exist, one should not be favored over the other... this called balancing

we are not playing call of duty, its a strategy game

Oh come on! When you first started did you enjoy losing 4 out of every 6 games? Of course not. You attacked and grew.
Now that you're probably a veteran player warring often it's a slightly different story for you, yeah?
But this game is not just for us elite veterans. It's a game called Doninations, not defendernations or anything else to do with balance.
The cries of the vocal few shouldnt determine the gameplay.

 

[King Crimson]

Exactly. Community is not just 30 active players in forums. Out there are thousands players who like/feel ok with those changes..

Like/feel ok with those changes?
Or don't bother complaining because they know it's usually pointless?

 

[LuSt]

I did some research: There are about 40 people from about 20 very high-ranking alliances talking here. That's very few. More than 95% of all alliances and players don't care. So why should the developers care?
And of all the people who have said they're quitting (some of them many times), only one person has done so. So why should the developers care? )

You realize there are people that have an issue with this across all of the socials right…? Facebook, discord, Reddit, X…. It’s not just on the forums.