• Upcoming Maintenance
    On 10/29 from 11am EST - 3PM EST DomiNations will be down for a brief maintenance period. This maintenance is to address backend compatibility updates only. There are no bug fixes or feature updates included.

April 2017 Design Spotlight

Quali

Approved user
Joined
Dec 22, 2016
Messages
230
So I am very interested to see how this change affects war - strategies will have to change, that's for sure. I'm not sure this change can be done in a vacuum without address war match ups. The randomness of match ups at this point were often evened out by people developing attacking strategies for attacking up, typically involving sabotage. With that strategy now gone, if match making stays the same, there are going to be a whole lot of pointless wars for people out there. I'm not sure that is everyone's definition of "fun".

However, if this is happening in tandem with some changes to how things match, I will be cautiously optimistic.
 

Scuba

Approved user
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
66
This is like someone hammering a nail in with their face.

What purpose it serves punishing the "average" main player base who rely on tactics to take out usually 40 levels above themselves in world wars.
These guys still spend money just obviously not as much as the guys at the top.

Personally I think it's great but I easily 5* way above my station and will make it more challenging but that's not the majority.
This will massively effect 90% of the alliance I'm in.

I struggle to see where the devs actually get their ideas from.
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
So I am very interested to see how this change affects war - strategies will have to change, that's for sure. I'm not sure this change can be done in a vacuum without address war match ups. The randomness of match ups at this point were often evened out by people developing attacking strategies for attacking up, typically involving sabotage. With that strategy now gone, if match making stays the same, there are going to be a whole lot of pointless wars for people out there. I'm not sure that is everyone's definition of "fun".

However, if this is happening in tandem with some changes to how things match, I will be cautiously optimistic.

Totally agree. I could accept and work with these changes if there were fixes to matchmaking (sandbagging). But, it appears to shockingly be happening without that. On a positive note, when we meet sandbaggers, which is nearly every war because its so rewarded....we wont have to worry much about crowning ntgs for coalitions, or any of the other things we do now to increase our chance at fending them off.

The only deciding factor in most wars will simply be who has sandbagged more effectively, or who has purchased more troops/zook towers. And, both of those are done before a match even hits planning day.
 

Arya_Dominations

Approved user
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
31
I do appreciate any effort to make defense meaningful (otherwise why work on my defenses at all ? if my whole base will be 'frozen' anyways), and to balance nations.
The british empire is way too overpowered with rifle spams and ad libitum sabotage.
 

SebQuattro

Approved user
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
163
Nation, not Empire. Using the term 'British Empire' leads people to assume you advocate slavery, colonialism and racism. As a Brit, I find it pretty offensive.
 
Last edited:

jmemira

Approved user
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
55
I'm sorry, but one of the best things about this game is that you can play it in so many different ways, using different nations, compositions, upgrade, and drop strategies. Now we are being faulted for using one that works well for us? If you don't like that people don't use the first aid or barrage tactic, then change them (why do I need first aid when I have supply carts, why do I need barrage when I have so many options to kill troops that are way better and more long lasting than a tiny area of archer fire) - doing this isn't going to stop people from using sabotage or protect. If you think that shooter nations are too overpowered why don't you address some of the things that people have been bringing up in the forums for months, making Japanese and Greek more viable. Instead of fixing imbalances you make problems for people who play the game as it was meant to be played. I welcomed the new coalition changes, I think they have made the game much more interesting and it made them viable to boost them with upgrades and offer the additional armies on offense and defense, taking something away because people are using it too much is the opposite of listening to a very vocal community.

And by adding this time component to perfect score stalemates (a very common outcome in our alliance) you incentivize sandbagging to the point that we are being punished even more for having a well-rounded group of real and active players; and it shows how little you care about most of the teams in the game outside of maybe 5% of players on the top teams. We work so hard to stalemate teams that have a huge level disadvantage, and consider it a win when we can pull it off. It takes all our attacks, coalitions, strategy, and troop tactics and we still love to play the game. If we know we are going to lose anyway what's even the point in even trying in these wars, or warring at all. You've completely ruined war in one update (laughably not the update that brought us the plight of sandbagging in the first place).
 

ColdestRage

Approved user
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
131
Let me tell you something BHG.
IF sabotage , protect, and betrayal will take 2 spots instead of one you'll kill the game .
You are killing this game with each update.
You want bigger profits, or do you want to earn less?
With the direction you are going ALL players that spend cash from time to time will leave since what should be their reason to stay when you go POFU (pay or f... u) way .
Noone else than huge whales will stay since only they will enjoy this game.
That's the direction you wish to go?
To vanish from market in about max 3 months from now?
Congrats on another excelent idea... not.

This time you Nexon'ed it (thanks for that phrase Christopher) totally
 
Last edited:

Motaz Tarek

Approved user
Joined
Apr 19, 2015
Messages
545
i really cant believe there are players who are with the tactic change, don't mean to interfer with ur opinion guys, but 90% of players are subject to quit this game after this change
this change makes 3-4 troop tactics use the only way to 5 star a lvl 220+ base with 3 defensive coals which is already difficult to 5 star
they want to make this change so players use other "useless" tactics but that's not gonna happen, they will still use the nerfed tactics in the new capicity which is still gonna better than using 6-7 of these stupid useless barrage healing demolition tactics
anyway time will show u how grave the effect of this change on gameplay and hence, players numbers..
 

Empire

Approved user
Joined
May 28, 2015
Messages
1,000
I am very disappointed to see the change of key tactics from one to two slots. Thank you for making wars virtually unplayable with your changes. Even with every tactic it takes everything for us to 5 star some very high level AA players. Now you go ahead and do this? How is barrage or first aid going to help me against a maxed out base? You've made demolition useless with the introduction of the university buff for mortars.
 

snowleopard

Approved user
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
108
So basically new update simply means that you won't be able to 5 stars the base higher age than you. This is totally fine with me. However, in the world wars, if you get slightest of the mismatch, you are basically doomed and won't be able to 5 stars an atomic base.

The biggest benefactor buildings of this change are Mortars and stronghold. If you don't have enough sabotage/protect your foot troops/rifleman are essentially going to hammered by them. That means we'll now have to use MK tanks for ww every attack. Go figure!!
 

ColdestRage

Approved user
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
131
IMG_4261.JPG
Guess that's how BHG rolls .
They hear only opinions of whales , and have rest of community there where sun doesn't reach.
You'll see BHG , that after a week's time at least 25% of players will leave.
With next update you'll have only either hardcore players, masochists, or whales, your player pool will shrink so much that you'll start crying over lost income you could earn , but you won't thanks to you another Nexon'ed update that shows clearly that you don't care to lose custommers over such trivial things like them being too poor to fill your pockets with each war attack they make.
 
Last edited:

Arya_Dominations

Approved user
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
31
I play defense. I spend hours to come up with creative bases, and to review the bases of my allies. Still it is discouraging to spend half a month on a mortar uprade, when the whole base is going to be sabbed anyways.
Now defenses, warbases layouts will be even more crucial to win wars. Good move.
And wars are never static, in the real world. Technologies changes, thus strategies change.
Intelligent players will make the best use of what they have.
They will adapt.
I expect to see a lot of decoy usage, and some demolition.
 

SebQuattro

Approved user
Joined
Aug 19, 2016
Messages
163
It's not like they will take any notice is it? They had lots of negative feedback on the Stronghold and still went ahead with it.
 

Muschristian

Approved user
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
196
Sabotage, Protect and Betrayal... 2 spaces...

Great, so along with the poor war matches and pay to win players as a pretty much maxed Global player, I have no chance of making a decent war contribution. And we will probably lose a war based on just the top player being unable to 3 or 4 star an Atomic whilst he/she 4 or 5 stars you....

There's a reason people dont use the other War Tactics, and its not because these 3 are overpowered, the other ones are just pants! You can't take demolition to war as you never know if its powerful enough unless your brain is a super computer fortune teller, evaluating the unknown uni buffs, and calculating with this thd coalitions.

I dont think I am going to be enjoying this for much longer now. Its just getting silly.
 

Scuba

Approved user
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
66
My good golly it just hit me.
Where do the devs get their ideas from?
This is so simple so apologies if I'm slow.

Balancing out barrage, first aid is so easy they could do it with their eyes closed.
They just don't want to and they know that nobody is going to use them even though other tactics will require 2 spaces.
Affectively they have cut tactics in half and will be looking for more troop card sales from players to compensate for it.
Simple as that.
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
I dont even know what the end goal of the tactic change is? It makes no sense? You will just piss off players. It doesnt change the fact that first aid/barrage/demo are basically useless in almost all situations. People still wont use them.
 

Quovatis

Approved user
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
yeah, I can't envision any use for those tactics in a war situation. Takes 2 demo to take out a mortar, 3 for anything bigger than that. First aid is only useful for heavy tanks, and even then only 1 is sufficient. Barrage could be useful, but the damage area is too small, and it doesn't reliably kill howitzers, especially with unknown uni upgrades. Decoys is about the only un-nerffed tactic that can be useful.
 
Top