WW: who had the great idea to drop the base level restrictions like in MP?

[Spaceboy]

This remains still one of the most STUPID ideas during world wars: there is no restriction in the bases that you can attack! In MP you can only +/- 1 ( except the top level -2).

if we restore this restriction for WW too, all teams would be obliged to have a better mix of players, and not only 15 SA players with some sandbags.

Why this restriction has never been put in place for WW? this would surely make the wars much more interesting, as both attacks might not be possible!

As global player of 215, I am a bit fed up to get 5* against my base by digital agers of 280. Easy for them of course. It makes all my defense work useless.

I do not understand who had this very smart idea in the first place...

 

[SomeRandomPlayer]

tl;dr: I vote no.

Multiplayer is a different beast. It's a place where maxers (e.g., a Global Age player at level 215) can do their own thing in peace without worry about affecting the alliance mates; in this case it means having a poor offense. War is different; in War the alliance mates do affect each other with the ultimate goal of winning. War is war; when folks go to war in the real world it's 100% about winning. Nations with fancy planes, unlimited bombs, and so on, often take on countries with rifles mounted on old trucks. This is how war works in the real world, like it or not.

This suggestion would cause a war matchup nightmare well beyond what we have today. The war matchup complaints would increase tenfold; as would the alliance war requirements and pressure to have every age covered/active at all times.

An alternative solution is to go Atomic to have 3 or 4 more planes, 15 more troop space, far better everything, a bigger museum, a new wonder, and so on.

 

[Uhuru]

Spaceboy, you dug deep Limiting attacks by age would be correct, but this will break down matchmaking and so BHG won't dare to do it - there are too few active alliances.

 

[Theoneandonly]

Always people want to regulate the game around their personal wishes. Only cause one alliance doesn’t like rushed bases or another alliance think a fully age mix is the best way to war that doesn’t mean everybody has to agree.

 

[Spaceboy]

I wouldn’t change the matchmaking algo, but restrictions on age. It would change the WW dynamics for sure, and it would require much more strategic planning than just rushing with 8 mk6 planes and a bunch of heavy tanks on all bases.

I play this game since 2015, and it has lost its strategic elements. Now it is only to show who has the biggest...lol

 

[Mountainking]

Always people want to regulate the game around their personal wishes. Only cause one alliance doesn’t like rushed bases or another alliance think a fully age mix is the best way to war that doesn’t mean everybody has to agree.

hahah. exactly!

 

[Radzeer]

I dont know whether any alliance would like to start the war, knowing that it is impossible to attack all the bases of the opponent (although having all the firepower to do so), while the opponent has no such limitation.. Why should an Alliance leader combine a roster for every possible aged opponent (thus benching valuable war members, just because this rule), when he has to possibility the field the strongest ones who care to play?
Have seen many good ideas from Spaceboy , this one is not that great though...

 

[Spaceboy]

Pure frustration..we are getting very bad matches with opponents way too big. Easy for a space age to 5* my low atomic base. No fun in there. I go not attacking gunpowder bases with my atomic base neither.
What can be done to improve the world wars? Only 1 attack? Seems ever worse as idea...

 

[Black tiger]

Nexon, allow alliances to invite other alliances to war. Since you can’t implement useful matchmaking, let your commanders do it themselves.

 

[Uhuru]

It is necessary not to invite, but to confirm the matchmaking.

 

[Saruman the White]

This can't be done. What happens if an alliance of 5 Space Age players and 5 Industrial Age players is matched against an alliance of 10 Atomic Age players??? No attack could be applied by any of the players!!!!

 

[Spaceboy]

Exactly .no winners..no losers..seems fair no?

 

[SharkyFinn]

..seems fair? No.

Seems like a waste of 2 days and alliance gate troops/tactics. How about instead, whenever you have a match you don't like, just your team sits out 2 days? That seems fair to me instead of ruining wars for everyone else.