Not sure if this WW option has been suggested or discussed.... I think it may be good to limit the "attack down" to 2 ages in WW. For example, Info Age base in WW can attack down to Digital Age and Space Age but not Cold War Age or below. It may help in balancing a WW team on players to bring to a WW, and may also provide some strategic thinking on attacks. In MP, we are limited to 1 "attack up" and 1 "attack down" except for Info Age since there is no age above Info Age. For example, Cold War Age can attack Space Age and Atomic Age and anything in between.
WW Attack
- Thread starter dfwdragon
- Start date
Clown Control
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2019
- Messages
- 45
Totally agree, the current matchmaking matrix is so unbalance, the war pool continues to decrease. We just did a 30:30 war, it took almost 20 hours to come up with a match. Which had a multitude
of digital age bases attacking a Atomic age or below team.
of digital age bases attacking a Atomic age or below team.
theBobNamedDan
Approved user
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2017
- Messages
- 330
I think if you want a more balanced war match BHG needs control of who is in what alliance.
I don’t see how they can improve match making much otherwise. They can only take alliances that choose to be in war at a certain time and try to match them. If the alliances are all out of power balance then BHGs can’t do much with matchmaking.
we seem to find decent matches at the 15 and 20 participant level. At 30 we were always matched with much more powerful opponents.
also, how would limiting people’s choices of attacking help war? For example, we go into war with no sandbags with our lowest being Industrial Age. The opponent throws 4 Iron Age into the war. We would be unable to even attack those 4 Iron Age bases? Automatic loss. Sorry, this is a terrible idea.
I don’t see how they can improve match making much otherwise. They can only take alliances that choose to be in war at a certain time and try to match them. If the alliances are all out of power balance then BHGs can’t do much with matchmaking.
we seem to find decent matches at the 15 and 20 participant level. At 30 we were always matched with much more powerful opponents.
also, how would limiting people’s choices of attacking help war? For example, we go into war with no sandbags with our lowest being Industrial Age. The opponent throws 4 Iron Age into the war. We would be unable to even attack those 4 Iron Age bases? Automatic loss. Sorry, this is a terrible idea.
Last edited:
Not sure how this would practically work if an Alliance had say 30 InfA bases and get matched with an Alliance with say 5 CWA bases.
Such limitation does not make sense IMHO. But I do agree the WW attack, matching and winner rules needs an overhaul.
Such limitation does not make sense IMHO. But I do agree the WW attack, matching and winner rules needs an overhaul.
Similar threads
