141 replies to this topic

[Sev]

Just a quick post to let you know that I will be disabling the "Alliances" targets tab in the next update.

 

As a lot of you know, this was originally the only targets list there was.  It searches for alliances that are around the same rank as yours and lets you dig through its members to look for a target.

 

The problem with this list was that it was very inefficient and quite often wouldn't return a good set of targets (if any).  This is part of the reason that we worked the alliance system and added in the "Individuals" target list.

 

The plan all along was for the Individuals to replace the Alliances list, but I left them both in until I was sure that the new lists were workings.  Then I accidentally forgot about it... my bad.

 

I had some people raise some concerns about some unfair point scoring practices that I believe this list is contributing to, hence I have come back around to the original idea of removing the tab. 

 

Nothing else has changed in regards to alliances.

[Aubrey Dickson]

ah so this must be what that maintenance is for

[Con]

ah so this must be what that maintenance is for

 

Nope. Unrelated. 

 

This change will go up at the next scheduled maintenance.

[Aubrey Dickson]

Nope. Unrelated. 

 

This change will go up at the next scheduled maintenance.

ah ok then so what was this maintenance for?

[Sev]

Some of the servers were playing up and people were having trouble connecting.

[Wurstl]

will that remove the option to view memberlists and onlinestatus of rival alliances? this is very important for war. we cannot all send spys to enemy alliances

[Gabacho]

Individual Lists is very slow to show targets & requires constant refreshing during war. Alliance list for targets is not redundant, but necessary (especially for close rounds). If you eliminate alliance list atleast bring back recent enemies list please. This allows us to attack rival alliances during war for multiple reasons. Individual lists is incredibly slow to show targets, please reconsider leaving Alliance lists... Or like I said atleast bring back "recent Enemies tab" (for war points). Thanks

 

 

: ) I guess I understand the issue you are trying to solve.... but unfortunately I often look at individual targets and see maybe a few 60 point raids & oodles of 40 pt raids.... If I check alliance lists I see many targets 80-100+ points.... is there a way to have these targets show faster in individual targets? And I swear there are some Players that rarely or never show up in individual targets... I always have to find them from the alliance list.

Edited by Gabacho, 17 March 2017 - 03:56 AM.

[BLACKDRAGON]

so after disabling the "Alliances" targets tab then how to check other alliance member online or not? 

[Gabacho]

But Seriously.... this video shows exactly what I am saying

 

Individuals - Max 57 point target

 

Alliances -  Tons of targets over 80 Points

 

Edited by Gabacho, 17 March 2017 - 04:10 AM.

[BLACKDRAGON]

there is only one way using compound list and enter, but will not get any war points.

[BLACKDRAGON]

gabacho i understand your point. attacking low point is wasting my survivor. its hard to see high points like 80-100 in individual tab. mostly i search in alliance tab.

[Invincible_Jo]

I agree with Gab. Frequently, if I look at the individual list I might find one or two targets that are 70+ points, but when I look at the alliance list I can usually find an acceptable target. I definitely think you should keep the alliance list. 

Also, the one or two 70+ targets that are on my list are usually SON/FXU/ERA. Without the alliance target list, my points will go way down on my big alts because I don't do the island and don't have island guns. My one M-107 and M-417s don't fare too well against island guns for either raiding or defense. If you get rid of the alliance target list, you're going to have to redo the individual target list so that we have a larger choice of high point targets.

Edited by Invincible_Jo, 17 March 2017 - 07:16 AM.

[Cherry]

I keep it short .... this is a very very bad idea.

 

You would have to increase individuals list and give us another option to see members of alliances.

 

You are going to ruin the whole war thing if you remove alliance list.

 

Your game, your decision ... 105% disagreement on my side.

 

 

Just a quick post to let you know that I will be disabling the "Alliances" targets tab in the next update.

 

I had some people raise some concerns about some unfair point scoring practices that I believe this list is contributing to, hence I have come back around to the original idea of removing the tab. 

 

I sent some ideas via email to avoid low point farming for nearly no exp which make more sense than removing the alliance list.

Edited by Cherry, 17 March 2017 - 06:06 AM.

[Wurstl]

we must need to know where other players are. how should we ever find them if they are in other alliances and not in our compound lists?

you guys must find a solution for that.

the scoring or smashing is not the point the targets will show up in individual list anyway but dont cut the option to view memberslists and onlinestatus.

For alliancewars knowing your enemies is a basic factor for all planing and all strategy. This goes for every approach in RL to defeat any kind of obstacle as well.

 

We win or lose wars these days by organized pushes and the reaction to them, those alliances with better intel about memberactivity of enemy alliances are winning wars. We all watch these lists all the time, if we see many rivals online we must push harder to react before the problem becomes a problem. There is so much more strategies involved into that.  I cant remember any war in years noone was considering them.

 

If memberlists get taken from us we all must use spys or fail, there is no way around it! More spys everywhere around the game will create only more paranoia and more drama and annoy many players.

 

[Zingman]

Before you disabled/removed the "Recent Enemies" list, I'd (as a white flag player) would use that list to see who was online for some alliances.   When that was removed, the alliances tab wasn't quite as useful, as it was keyed to target alliances in similar standing, so the alliances i wanted to check  and see who was on weren't always there.

 

It would be nice if there was still some way to easily see a list of the members of an alliance.   See who's on/offline if your looking to talk to someone.

 

In my perfect world, on the war tab, you'd be able to click on any alliance in the top 100, and it would bring up the member list for that alliance, and perhaps show how much points they had this round.  No attack/view button, just a list of members.   Perhaps add a search function by alliance tag for alliances not in the top 100.

 

That's probably a lot of work though, and I'm not sure it's worth it.

[BLACKDRAGON]

what is the main reason to disable the alliance tab?

[Godzyra___]

I had some people raise some concerns about some unfair point scoring practices that I believe this list is contributing to, hence I have come back around to the original idea of removing the tab. 

@Blackdragon

[BLACKDRAGON]

unfair point scoring? you mean hacker?

[Cherry]

Okay here is my solution I sent to Con as well.

 

Alliance list is mostly abused by players who farm low pointers 20-41 with one man raids.

 

If exp gained for survivor kills is decreased by 20% and a banner gives as much exp as 2.5 survivor kills there will be no disadvantage for players who raid high pointers with 5 men but the low point farming will make players level up due to exp gained from banners taken.

 

This way it won't be possible anymore to be level 15 with 2000+ banners taken.

 

Makes more sense in my opinion than removing alliance list.

[Godzyra___]

Unfair point scoring is mainly scouting for one man raids, so you know everyone is gone before attacking.

I agree with Cherry's solution.

Side Note: if you remove alliance tab that means you make raiding horribly unfair for 99%, cause then we are 100% dependant on what the target list deals us, and usually it deals us crappy targets (40-57 pointers) instead of the 80 pointers that Gabacho mentioned.