Jump to content


Gobalmap Alliance's - (Not) working as intended?

Gold Clanwar Globalmap Competitive Season 10 Alliance Firefly Convoys Feedback TX CW

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

Poll: Personal objecitves in clanwars (45 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Your opinion?

  1. Farming gold, playing randoms (9 votes [20.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Fighting wars, finally no randoms! (26 votes [57.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.78%

  3. No reward tank, no interest (6 votes [13.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.33%

  4. Not interested at all (4 votes [8.89%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.89%

Vote Hide poll

Anostra #1 Posted 08 October 2018 - 12:21 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 30557 battles
  • 45
  • [R1SE] R1SE
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

Dear Commanders, proficient saltminers, CW veterans

 

This statement only regards the TX map!(i have no idea about the stuff happening on T8)

 

Finally, WG cared about the Clanwars section and put in some changes. We now have an ingame alliance system, which

- enables us to share share provinces to a higher or lower power of your Clan,

- enables us to run attacks cross-timezone for a higher or lower power of your clan (I'm not sure about the higher power here though)

 

- in exchange, the lower clans pay a fixed amount of taxes between 20% and 50% to their higher power, inside convoys that can be raided. (this feature will be implemented soon)

 

I'm personally always all in on changes, but I would like to question, if the goal has been achieved. So here is the situation:

As Clanwars is all about performance, the clans which can live up to their names, hold provinces with a neat gold income. There are two different approaches:

 

A) The Firefly provinces. The best clans compete for these. The names you find there are CSA, FEST, ANUBI, KAZNA, ROIDS, (currently MEME, gz!)

B) The rest.

 

Case A), In and around the firefly provinces there was quite a bit of fighting between the Clans contesting them. Seems fun! Case B) there are five main alliances, the turqouise, the green, the grey, the blue and the purple. Most major powers are contesting the fireflies, while the secondary and tertiary powers contest the borders. Sounds pretty logic so far. The space is enough, most renown clans are on the map, either through sheer power or diplomacy. Clans which try to attack one of the bigger alliances get drowned in attacks left and right, as the system is meant to enable us to. To speak openly,  yes, R1SE is also one of the lower powers sitting comfortably inside the alliance system, it might seem i'm just a pot, calling the kettle back.

 

I spoke with different people about their opinion, and either they have so much gold, they don't really know what to do with it or they are rewarded their 1-3k g per month in exchange to fence clans off their landing, which are vastly inferior. But I can't recall younger CW-Players talking with the same enthusiasm about any happening in the last few years, as I listen to stories about Africa or bigger wars back then. The longest recent war was the "three day FAME vs GO-IN"-Incident... Some sharper tongues even consider the competitive scene as dead, as there is only minimal movement on the map, with no wars but only small skirmishes waging here and there. The convoys could change it all, but i doubt it, as the alliances probably wont attack each others convoys. I assume the same will happen as with the current landings

 

My personal opinion would focus on the the idea of shifting the gold income away from passive province income to acitve rewards for missions or events happening on the map. These events could be set by WG or defined by the alliance leader. A quick example:

- All provinces get reduced to an amount ranging from 120 to 480g, except firefly, they range from 960 to 2k.

- All the freed gold is put into "Orders and Missions", taxes and convoys will remain the same.

- How orders work:

G__G is the mayor power of R1SE of the turquoise. TEST of the orange alliance holds Province A. G__G can issue an attack order for Province A. If the order is successfully finished, R1SE is rewarded with 500g, G__G with 250g. Vice versa, R1SE issues a defence order to G__G for Province B, where T3ST attacks, so they get rewarded more than R1SE. Important to note, this is not subtracted from the hoarded gold of G__G or R1SE, but a different source of income. The more active your alliance, the better the subclans are, the more money the alliance will earn. Everybody has to wage war, the focus will shift away form province focussed play

 

Is this the clanwars everybody was looking for? Are you guys, interested in farming gold? Or do you play the game to fight? Or another reasoning I didn't get so far? I would love to hear the opinion of other competitively committed players, FC's or Clan commanders.

 

See you on the battlefield!

Anostra
 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Anostra, 08 October 2018 - 01:39 PM.


X0PE #2 Posted 08 October 2018 - 02:18 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 14948 battles
  • 1
  • [R1SE] R1SE
  • Member since:
    06-09-2013
@Anostra very good display of the current state of the world map, good criticism and well thought out suggestion. In my opinion, it is detremental to reward activity as at the moment you are at the best position if you choose an good alliance and as a result noone good will attack you in fear or respect of your majors, i hope this changes over the course of the season but we will see.



FireflyDivision #3 Posted 08 October 2018 - 04:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

Very abusable, don't you think?

 

In the times when I was posting my massive "OMG WG FIX CW" topic all over the forums, gold income on the global map was negligible compared to the usual income, and clans were forced to do missions to get extra gold. What happened? Clans just made deals with each other, and agreed stage fake battles in order to complete missions. Yes, it still seemed like there was action, but it was all fake action. It was just clans, landing, leaving map, landing, leaving map. 

 

There was also a form of FF provinces back then, but it was different. There were like 3 areas with high income, far away from each other. What happened? Each top clan took 1 such area and never fought each other. 

 

About alliances... we used to talk about alliance feature on the forums a loong time ago. But I never imagined it to be what is it like now. At this point, I don't know if this is WoT or some history channel subject involving a family tree that goes back into 500 BC. I don't think most clans know who's in their alliance anymore. 

 

I imagined the alliance system much simple, like...

- 1 clan being allowed to invite up to 5 other clans. Srsly, that's it. I didn't imagine that clans could create a family tree leading into 500 BC with endless of clans.

- delegation of battles still possible

- I never thought of a tax system. But if WG wanted it anwyay, then they should have allowed the alliance leader to set some hierarchy. Imagine CSA setting hierarchy like CSA > FAME (RIP, you will always live on in my heart), GX, FEST, RMBLE, TRIGG. CSA gets tax from FAME, GX, FEST, RMBLE and TRIGG. FAME gets tax from GX, FEST, RMBLE, TRIGG. Etc. 

 

Back to your main point... the action...

 

When I proposed FF provinces, I meant it as an extension of the global map we created after our massive 2016/2017 forum feedback. You know, the map where high value provinces were on the left, and low value provinces were on the right. Seriously, I think that setup was and is better. Why? Because it keeps top clans on the left, and allows for a playground for other clans on the right. And such a playground did exist to some extent. But suddenly, WG randomly decided to spread out the high value provinces all over the map (I heavily protested against it) and pushing the low value zones to the edges (just 1 or 2 lines of provinces!). This led to top clans spreading all over the map and not even being close to each other at first. Remember the previous season? FAME was all the way on the left, MVPS was all the way on the right. Some top clans were far from being near to each other. Average clans were pushed to the edges with nowhere to go and no way to fight each other (because one part was on the northern edge and the other part was in the southern edge for example). 

 

So anyway, I suggested leaving the map as we created with our forum operation and adding FF provs here and there sometimes. And we were supposed to have them both on the left and the right. However, those on the right would be less profitable. Reason: I wanted to stimulate top clan v top clan fights and average clan v average clan fights. You don't get much from forcing top clan v average clan fights. Just look at the map right now. WG placed the latest FF zone in the mid of average clans. They got wiped out in 2-3 days, and now the same clans which fought each other a week ago on the left are now fighting each other on the bottom right. No difference. Just change of location, with average clans as victim.

 

Also, interesting point: I proposed the idea as "stronghold" provinces (which caused some confusion as you may understand). Adding sh provs sometimes and giving clans points per day for holding them, and at the end giving clans a gold reward at the end of the event depending on their position in the leaderboard per sh. It was a very elaborate idea, including ways to prevent abuse and to make sure you saw top clan v top clan and average clan v average clan action (long story short, for example, it would be more profitable for a top clan to keep sitting on normal provinces on the left than attacking an sh on the right. However, for those clans on the right, the right sh would still be more profitable for them. 

See it as a mini-event in the middle of a normal season. It would be an extra incentive to fight, not the main incentive. All provinces would keep the income they always had. It was just those few SHs (I thought like 4-6) being different. 

 

Why? Because there is one key thing everyone needs to understand. 

You can try what you want, but you're not going to convince average clans to suddenly start fighting top clans. Yes, you might see average clans take on "blue" clans and multiple "blue" clans taking on some 2300 wn8 purple clan. However, you're not going to convince some 1700-2100 wn8 clans to suddenly start attacking CSA/ROIDS. I'm not saying it never happens, but it's definitely not something you should base CW on. It's not a good investment. If anyone wants to fight a better clan, you will see him doing it no matter what the rules are. So there is no need to code CW features based on encouraging such fights.

 

What is a good investment is allowing clans to fight clans of similar skill level. And now we're getting to your Africa point, because this is exactly that. No top clan bothered with going to Africa due to the low income. However, between the clans that were there, alot of very interesting fights happened. In fact, it's Africa where most of the alliance wars happened and it's Africa where the most alliances fell victim. There was even an alliance that controlled 75% of Africa, but got totally eradicated afterwards. Some African clans developed themselves and managed to take some provs in t10 later. 

 

Actually, you can still see the Africa spirit on the t8 map. Most clans are fighting each other and trying to kick each other off. There is no top clan clique holding a monopoly. Average clans are able to wage wars against each other as they wish. Okay, I must say this picture is less shiny now with the current alliance system and the entrance of the European blue alliance into t8 CW, but what I'm saying was very true in the previous seasons on the tier 8 map. 

 

Am I saying top clans shouldn't get huge rewards for being so good? Am I saying average clans should get the same rewards. Not. At. All. Top clans deserve to earn much more gold than the rest of the clans. As such, they can have their top value gold region somewhere on the left of the map. If they still don't want to fight each other even with the little "tricks" we're trying to pull off, that's their issue. Don't spend too much time on it. For now. 

What you really have to focus on at first is giving average clans a proper playground again. Anyone who is very interested in watching the global map knows that average clans generally don't feel reluctant to wage (big) wars against each other. 

As a first step, we should revert the CW map back to the state as we all (including top clans!) proposed it on the forums a year ago. Furthermore, we need to add a large zone of 240 gold provinces to the tier 10 map. Use the east for it. Unlock some baltic/russian regions for it. Do it. You can then add some 600 gold firefly provs here and there to spice things up sometimes. Profitable for the average clans there, but no incentive for top clans to move all the way there cuz their own 1000+ gold provinces that are always there on the west side are more profitable. For top clans, you can keep adding 10k gold provs in the west. 

 

Long story short: clans will only fight other clans of significantly different skill level if they want to, no matter what the conditions or the rules are. If the whole map is full of top clans, most average clans will probably not even bother with playing CW. Therefore, stimulating that is no good investment. Invest in allowing clans of similar skill level to fight each other again as in the past. That's key.

 



mango91 #4 Posted 09 October 2018 - 08:45 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 41948 battles
  • 1,919
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

we as ORKI put all our (average) strength in this season, to try to use this new system.

 

the result is that I can see no improvement, if it's possible things are getting worse. Winning and holding a landing as an average clan is a stress due to the "top clans" taking and their minor power landing spot even if they're on GM.

 

I'd use as example fellow R1SE guys here (no shaming intended, max respect for them)

We've landed in a province which has only border with them and we managed to put a couple more landings on their closer landing provinces before setting the HQ, to put some pressure and try to lower their defences. While fighting on the GM, freezing tanks and losing battles (good tactics, guys) we noticed that they took the spot of their second clan to clean us from the landing and secure their inner provinces.

Great strategy, nice idea, not arguing on R1SE doing it, because they can and it's fair, I'm just arguing on the chances an avg clan has to face a higher tier one on these conditions

 

for sure you're gonna tell me that our major power should have taken some of our attacks, but still the point is that an avg clan most of the times has to fight against much better ones for a little spot on the map, with low chances of success

 

 

for sure we'll carry on, CW's are not meant to be easy, but there's less fun than before



FireflyDivision #5 Posted 09 October 2018 - 09:18 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011
Yeah as alliances are too big, it's too easy to abuse. Anyone could create a subclan, fill it quickly with 200 wn8 players, and use it to take landings with delegate battle function. The guys in the subclan never have to fight themselves.

Anostra #6 Posted 09 October 2018 - 09:20 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 30557 battles
  • 45
  • [R1SE] R1SE
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

Many thanks for the respectful post, appreciate it

 

Your point is valid, i'ts even easier now to secure your borders. Through all the seasons before, if you lost the landing, you had to leave the map. This time around, we can get it back. The system only allows us to help in attacks issued by a alliance partner, but not any defend battles. I'm still curious why though...

 

@Firefly, it would be abusable yes. your most interesting point is that it^'s not really a problem of the alliance system, but a deeper rooted problem of not having incentives for equally strong clans to battle each other. I'ts pretty much the same for us.

 

In regards to the forum campaign last summer, I don't see our inputs taken seriously. So probably quitting the game alltogether will probably be the saddest decision, but it is just getting worse.



mango91 #7 Posted 09 October 2018 - 09:55 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 41948 battles
  • 1,919
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

I'm considering this season as a big beta for the alliance system, that's why I'm posting

the attack transfer could be seen as a "minor" issue tbh, while the defending stays a matter of clan skill. If they also let the swift in the def battles, then they would allow "dark plans". 

 

I'm also sure that WG guys (voulezvous, afaik, in first person) are going to collect the feedbacks closely, as he did before with a great attitude

 

also, to me the big quit is not the way we can face the issues. We all love this game and we all put serious commitment through the years to play it. Some of us had the chance to give direct feedbacks to improve it "technically". What is missing is the old spirit, but there're no chances to have it back through the updates



FireflyDivision #8 Posted 09 October 2018 - 12:22 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostAnostra, on 09 October 2018 - 09:20 AM, said:

Many thanks for the respectful post, appreciate it

 

Your point is valid, i'ts even easier now to secure your borders. Through all the seasons before, if you lost the landing, you had to leave the map. This time around, we can get it back. The system only allows us to help in attacks issued by a alliance partner, but not any defend battles. I'm still curious why though...

 

@Firefly, it would be abusable yes. your most interesting point is that it^'s not really a problem of the alliance system, but a deeper rooted problem of not having incentives for equally strong clans to battle each other. I'ts pretty much the same for us.

 

In regards to the forum campaign last summer, I don't see our inputs taken seriously. So probably quitting the game alltogether will probably be the saddest decision, but it is just getting worse.

 

The forum feedback was taken seriously at first. WG designed the following season exactly as we proposed it. However, after that, they started making bad changes on their own again, instead of building upon what we had created already. Often, no one has any idea what's happening before it's officially announced on the homepage and set in stone. 

Edited by FireflyDivision, 09 October 2018 - 12:25 PM.


hakkie1 #9 Posted 11 October 2018 - 10:41 AM

    Sergeant

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 26322 battles
  • 202
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    08-03-2012

First i think the Alliance feature is interesting for me personally because i like wage and think in a diplomatic way about clanwars.

But to be honest it is not so interesting for many players who just like to play clanwars and know if they win they have succes, and win more even to take land.

 

Let another clan fight battles for me or even get free land from another clan is not giving me a good feeling about clanwars or for many clanwars players.

Clanwars is about fighting and improving on maps and if you do good the rewards benefits you from your own work.

 

The ultimate clanwars is ofcourse play this on tier 10 , but in this system if you try tier 10 you bump more then ever on a high topclan even when you try land on a low gold province and look there for an even strong clan to match and compete with.

If you dont have the good high friends in an Alliance you can forget to have land or just for a very short time, if you have the good friends yes more possible land but not really good fightintg for yourselve.

 

The result is then to try try try or at some point you need to decide to play clanwars on tier8 what is a totally different clanwars.

Many clans are 100% going for tier8 every time and all tanks and crews need to be equiped for that kind of clanwars (no really need grind tier 10 tanks etc)

 

My biggest issue was and is that evolving to become a better clanwarsclan is much more difficult then some years ago, then if you did very good in africa  on tier 10 you could move to spain or portugal to play clanwars against better clans on same tier10.

 

Now many tier10 level clans are pushed to play tier8 clanwars because the chance to reach succes is getting worse.

The action on the globalmap tier10 will decrease more and more.

 

Many cw players are not much interested in getting gold but logo and succes op the map is giving more pleasure by really fight and win against clans in your level.

 

We decided not to join a big Alliance because we want to reach succes by our own battles.

And yes we come to a point that even that we love tier10 we must look and lower tier to 8 but we will see what our members like during this season.

 

In short, make it please more interesting for clans to play tier10 ! 

 



WAAT_Commander #10 Posted 11 October 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20267 battles
  • 304
  • [WAAT] WAAT
  • Member since:
    05-31-2015
Yeah I guess there is room for improvement and further tweaks and hopefully a cap on alliance size.. But I enjoy trying to build up a relationship with other clans and the whole fighting on the global map.. We can get bullied by bigger/better clans but that has always been the case since the first everyday we landed on the global map...

FireflyDivision #11 Posted 11 October 2018 - 11:56 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostLordCommanderSirJ3fr0, on 11 October 2018 - 10:56 AM, said:

Yeah I guess there is room for improvement and further tweaks and hopefully a cap on alliance size.. But I enjoy trying to build up a relationship with other clans and the whole fighting on the global map.. We can get bullied by bigger/better clans but that has always been the case since the first everyday we landed on the global map...

 

Yeah, alliances and diplomacy are a key part of CW and I wouldn't want to see CW without it.

 

However, it has gotten to the point where clans land on the map and then figure out they can't move anywhere because somehow everyone is their ally. Every clan is just inviting minor powers like there is no tomorrow. 



Anostra #12 Posted 12 October 2018 - 12:09 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 30557 battles
  • 45
  • [R1SE] R1SE
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

Well, well, as much as i adore your work firefly, I can't stand your walls of text. If they're bigger than mine, that's a serious mental health issue...

 

So I will summon a presentation!

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1OHlutm-7-uOVpYhB25QfBI3P2Ax4PC2OSUo1Y4CpgBk/edit?usp=sharing

 

Jokes aside, have fun commenting. It was the easiest way to explain this level complexity ;-)

 

Open questions to discuss:

  1. Delegation of attacks: It is a nice idea, but problematic and  an abusable mechanic. The optional rule is even more complex and very strict, but is in my opinion the onliest way to regulate the abuse.
  2. The Topclans are going to sit in the middle of the alliance, only the outskirt fight. The secondary will defend the tertiary. Only during wartime, the Mayor will come out and fight. They pay upkeep for this reason. Will this end in more equal battles?
  3. It’s a very complex system. could it be done easier?


mango91 #13 Posted 12 October 2018 - 01:22 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 41948 battles
  • 1,919
  • [ORKI] ORKI
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

i'll comment your great work slide by slide (someone having a lazier workweek than me uh?)

 

4) I LOVE TOKENS (but I loved them even more back in the days when 1 soldier = 1 token, and min 1 token could be moved on enemy provinces, fake and blablabla)

10) for clans with no alliance maybe the ransack could be enabled - also you cannot get in&out alliances daily

12) I LOVE POTATOES (and in a german presentation it's like if I close my topics with some pasta dishes:P)

 

 

now the discussion:

1. delegating the def could drive to some abuse (ppl paying real money to top clans to fight for them, as someone pays to get in clans during campaigns), even if the bee-nest province/gold format could help somehow

2. It's hard to think that this way someone could reach the core of the alliance. Also irregular provinces shape could lead to the physical impossibility to perfectly surroud the HQ one, so top clan would farm 10% of the gold they're farming now. I guess they're for a big no-no.

3. gotta think, I still have some hours to work try to figure out something

 

PS. Maybe implementing a well thought new concept of leaderboard, not only the "farmer" one, for the most active fighter, could help fuelling the fights 



FireflyDivision #14 Posted 12 October 2018 - 05:09 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

View PostAnostra, on 12 October 2018 - 12:09 PM, said:

Well, well, as much as i adore your work firefly, I can't stand your walls of text. If they're bigger than mine, that's a serious mental health issue...

 

So I will summon a presentation!

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1OHlutm-7-uOVpYhB25QfBI3P2Ax4PC2OSUo1Y4CpgBk/edit?usp=sharing

 

Jokes aside, have fun commenting. It was the easiest way to explain this level complexity ;-)

 

Open questions to discuss:

  1. Delegation of attacks: It is a nice idea, but problematic and  an abusable mechanic. The optional rule is even more complex and very strict, but is in my opinion the onliest way to regulate the abuse.
  2. The Topclans are going to sit in the middle of the alliance, only the outskirt fight. The secondary will defend the tertiary. Only during wartime, the Mayor will come out and fight. They pay upkeep for this reason. Will this end in more equal battles?
  3. It’s a very complex system. could it be done easier?

 

Can't wait for the first CW kick-off clinics to appear :hiding:

 

 

The problems, as I see them are related to:

  • the current alliance system
  • the global map 
  • the gold distribution on the global map

 

The current alliance system is very different to what I expected. For once, I think that we don't actually need a hierarchy at all. In the past, the main reasons for making an alliance were common interests, common targets and friendship. However, I'm now seeing many clans joining the same alliance because they can, just for the sake of joining. Alliances are getting oversized, overview is lost, and it's getting out of hand. 

 

I joined an alliance to cooperate with 2-3 clans that I know. However, I now have 300 allies of which 99% will remain totally unknown to me. 

 

What I had in mind was a different alliance system. Actually, I expected non-alliance related diplomatic features too. Diplomatic features such as a non-aggression pact. How does the non-aggression pact work?

- Clan A clicks on clan B, and then clicks on "Request non-aggression pact"

- Clan A fills out the request. It sets the start date/time (or ticks "instantly" ), the end date/time (or just ticks "indefinite" ), and the "grace period" (will explain later). Clan B can accept or decline. If clan B wants different terms, the diplomats can just talk to each other (in-game/teamspeak, whatever), and then one of the clans can send another request. When a non-aggression pact is created, the clans can't attack each other. To break the pact, one clan just clicks on another clan, and clicks "break non-aggression pact". When the pact is really broken depends on what the "grace period" was set as during the request. For example, you can set a grace period of 3 days, which means the pact will be broken 3 days after you click "break non-aggression pact". 

This feature should be there for individual clans, but also for alliances. 

 

As for the alliance system itsself...

I expected small, simple alliances. 

- Clan A decides to create an alliance. It clicks a button somewhere called "create alliance" and chooses a name and colour for the alliance. The creator becomes the leader of the alliance obviously. 

- The clan can then invite clans to the alliance, and other clans can apply for the alliance. There is a clear list of the existing alliances somewhere. 

- An alliance can consist of maximum a handful of clans, like 5-6 or something. There is no hierarchy whatsoever (except for alliance-leader and alliance-members, and perhaps for taxes which I will explain below). 

- Taxes: I'm not sure whether we even need taxes. I didn't expect such a thing to be honest. But if you want it, I think it should be done in a very simple manner. The alliance leader sets a tax-hierarchy and a percentage. That's it. The leader can decide to set hierarchy like A, B, C, D, E, F, in which case each clan (except A) pays tax to 1 clan. It can also decide to set a tree-like hierarchy. Their call. If you don't like it as alliance-member, you can just seek another alliance. There should be plenty of them if you implement my system. 

- Don't have a delegate-battle feature. Instead, do it the old-school way, but with a little change. This will prevent delegate-abusing. Basically, you don't prohibit clans in the same alliance from attacking each other, but you add a diplomatic effect in cases where a clan attacks an ally. If you put an attack on an ally, then this counts as covering your ally. If there are no enemy attackers, then the battle will simply cancel.

Example:

Clan A and B are in the same alliance. Clan C is not in the alliance, it's an enemy. Clan A puts an attack on clan B. Clan C decides not to put attacks. The only clan attacking clan B is clan B's ally clan A. This leads to an automatic cancellation of the battle. Clan B keeps the province for free.

Next example:

Clan A puts an attack on clan B. Clan C decides to put an attack on clan B too. Clan A fights against clan C and wins, which means clan A successfully defends clan B's province. After this, the battles for the province cancel. Clan A & B won't have a battle against each other. Clan B keeps the province for free.

 

And what if you want to help your ally with attacking? Then you simply put an attack on the enemy, take the province, and then give the province to your ally (yes, the "transfer province to ally" option will still be available).

 

By doing it this way and by not having the delegate-battles function, you require clans to be near each other to help each other. You can no more troll around (or "cheat" ) with delegated battles all around the global map. My method is very close to the old-school/original method. 

 

If my "cancel the battle" idea is impossible or difficult to implement, there is a much simpler method: don't give clans penalty points for missing battles against allies. 

 

And now onto the global map layout. I have explained my thoughts on why we need a different layout in one of my previous replies to this topic, so I won't repeat all of it. Instead, I will simply provide you with a global map layout example. 

 

We now have standard around 250 provinces in tier 10 if I'm right. First step is to design it this way:

distribution1.png

 

Next step is to make the tier 10 map bigger, like this:

distribution2.png

 

And there you go. You give each type of clan a place to settle/start. Equal fights are possible, and the option to attack clans of different skill level keeps existing. Weaker clans can form alliances relatively safely, get stronger together, and perhaps decide to threaten slightly better clans holding slightly higher-value gold provinces. Yes, better clans can push back, but it's not profitable. Max 10 provinces provide income, so if you, as a good clan, are going to push into the 240 golds zone, you won't be able to defend your higher-value gold provinces anymore. 

 

However, as I said before, the main purpose is to allow fights and even larger wars between clans of equal skill level. There are many mid-ranged clans that would form their own alliances and fight against other equally skilled alliances. We saw this happen on the tier 8 front all the time, if you looked at the tier 8 front during the previous few seasons. It still happens today, but not as much as in the previous system (due to the current alliance system). 

 

Then, the FF provinces. Each region will have FF provinces, however, the value will differ depending on region. It will be profitable for you to fight for FFs in your own region, or in a higher region. It will not be profitable for you to fight for FF provinces in a lower region.

 

Let's say that the middle tier 10 section has provinces of 600 income each, and the eastern section has provinces of 380 income. You add FF provinces to the middle with 1200 income and you add FF provinces to the east with 700-800 income. A clan in the middle will never push for the eastern 700-800 FF province because that will not be profitable at all. First of all, it's only 100-200 gold extra. 2nd of all, to even get there, you have to conquer a few normal eastern provinces first, which means you'll lose income of some of your normal 600 gold provinces. So yeah, at the end, you'll make a loss for heading to a FF province in a lower region. 

 

 

Long story short, you need a very clear contrast between low gold and high gold regions. Only that will allow each type of clan to play CW the way it is meant to be played. As a starter 1600 wn8 clan on tier 10, for example, you don't have the slightest chance of facing a top clan when you play aaaaaal the way in the east if you implement my idea.

Turning all the provinces into high-value (or same-value) provinces is exactly what would NOT solve the problem. You don't need top clans to spread all over the map. That's not how you fix CW.

Therefore, I'm heavily in favour of adding more provinces with low income. My proposal gives each clan a place to fight/settle, and it still gives better clans higher rewards than worse clans. This is what CW is meant to be in my eyes.

 

To improve CW for the bulk of the average clans, you need more low value provinces, not more high-value provinces. Landing on a 480 gold province and losing it the next day is not what CW is. CW is landing on a 240 gold province, holding it, taking more 240 gold provinces, and ending up with a stable income and the opportunity to wage wars for more on the map itsself. If nearly all the clans have to fight 4-6 landing tournaments every 2 days, then you've failed with designing CW. Most battles and wars need to take place on the global map itsself. The struggle for more gold needs to happen on the global map itsself.


Edited by FireflyDivision, 12 October 2018 - 05:58 PM.


FireflyDivision #15 Posted 12 October 2018 - 06:53 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 24266 battles
  • 3,917
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011

I had a chat with somebody who regarded my ideas as "playground for bot clans". The way he put it sounded like he thought that I was trying to benefit clans for being "bot". Such thing is not slightly the case. If you read carefully what I wrote, you'll understand. I'll elaborate anyway. 

 

To understand my points, you first need to understand the difference between the following two things:

  • Participation
  • Rewards

To me, these two are entirely different things. To put it in short: most clans deserve to have a chance to participate. Only the good ones deserve to be really rewarded. 

The definition of participating in CW means being on the map, even if you have next to no income. On tier 10 you have many clans who land, take 2 provs, and get kicked off. We don't see anything special from these clans, and to the other clans around them, they're just pesky flies. These clans aren't able to enjoy CW fully. They have no options. Many of such clans spend most of their time in landings. How long can you sustain a clan by playing 4-5 landings daily? Such thing really scares people off. If you want to keep a healthy CW community, you need to bring changes. A healthy CW community is good for everyone. There is more chance of more people entering the CW scene. There is more chance of people becoming good CW players. There is more chance of having more competitive clans in the future. There is more chance for action on the global map. Finally, it's good for WG as a company. 

 

So yeah, back to those two-days-on-the-map clans. There is so many of them. Why not give them a large 120-240 gold zone in t10 where they can actually settle for real and actually fight each other and have alliance wars or regular wars of their own, improve, do diplomacy, fight for goals on the map, etc? Give them a chance to participate in clan wars for real. 

By not allowing such clans to properly participate, you're not building upon the CW comnmunity. You'll just have lone 1600-1900 wn8 landing here and there every now and then. They won't try to achieve much. They'll probably seek alliances and NAPs with everyone instantly because most people around them are better. It just leads to a massive stalemate and an ever growing number of non aggression pacts and alliances. 

 

Let me put it again:

Participating = being on the map. Even if it means next to no income.

Earning = getting a good number of gold for being good. 

I want clans to have a bigger chance to properly participate. However, I still want only the good clans to really earn. You solve multiple problems by understanding this difference and incorporating it into CW in a proper way. 

 

Participating doesn't mean earning. 

 

Am I trying to remove competition? Nope. On the contrary, I'm trying to add competition. First of all, I'm trying to make the CW community larger and more motivated. 2nd of all, is a 1600 wn8 clan attacking ROIDS really "competition"? It's not. It's a steamroll. Competition is if 1600 wn8s get the chance to fight each other. Some of them will turn out to be better than others. The losers, in turn, will try to improve. They will have the motiviation to improve, because they're preparing to beat counterparts or slightly better clans, and not top 5 clans. Some of them will try to conquer higher value provinces in the future if they feel they're becoming good in their own area. And so, a shift towards the top-value provinces will start to happen. In the long term, this will lead to more competition in the higher-gold zones.

 

And again: being a top clan will always earn you more gold than other clans. But my idea is not about income. I'm not asking to give weaker clans more gold. I've heavily argued against such thing. All I'm trying is giving more clans the chance to participate in CW for real, using all what CW has to offer (diplomacy, wars, etc). This used to exist with Africa back in the days. Why shouldn't it exist today?

 

And yes, I'm aware there is a tier 8 map. However, there is nowhere where clans who want to make a switch from tier 8 to tier 10 can go without facing vastly superior opponents. We are putting a big massive wall on a clan's road to improvement. 

 

 

 

 


Edited by FireflyDivision, 12 October 2018 - 07:22 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users