Don't Kill the WW competition; Limit Extra Troops to Multiplayer Battles Only

[Osmanz]

We all agree that upgrading our bases costs a lot of ressources and time spent keeping our devises on hand, and this is a reality we all deal with unless we are cheaters. We deal with, because we like the game, we like battling against each others in order to be among best players the game counts and help as much as we can to bring our alliance among the top. Since the World War (WW) race started, the game took another dimension as competing shifted from the total medals owned to the capacity of alliances to just gain a 24H war involving strategies, planing, leaderships,.... Going back to the competition itself, I genuinely think that the amount of extra troops being offered to be used in WW is just killing the beauty of it. While I dont have any problem of having those extra ressources being used on our daily gaming, but for WW? I can't swallow it, sorry. I can't because, it is just like doping in sport, or a 22 Vs 11 in a football game, how it can be fair or even called a competition. How people can deploy all what they have to upgrade their defenses, to end up with an inevitable result; Just get cleared because of extras, it is just endless of stalemates in prospect. I had to say it, because I don't have any problem to lose against much stronger as it is my fuel to keep progressing and playing, and as a competitor I don't perceive the good part of the extra troops story within the WW competition.

 

[Jakob_888]

Agree. 100%

 

[Stronghold]

On point, I agree with you Osmanz. Nexon please NO EXTRA troop for WORLD WAR.

 

[JuDomines]

And you exclude players who pay for upgrade too? How different is it from paying from extra card?0

 

[Osmanz]

well I dont have any problem myself regarding upgrades as far as it costs something to the player (Time or Money), unless it is cheating. I just don't think making 5 staring easy as it is now serves the overall principle of competing or upgrading. My point of view

 

[Quovatis]

Agree. War should be about skill attacking and defending. All the upgrades and money in the world won't be able to defend against an attacker with 20+ extra troops

 

[Europeos]

I agree, extra troops shouldn't be used in war

 

[QuébecGlory]

Agreed, no extra troops should be allowed in World War. Hooo cares about multiplayer attacks...

 

[Tenacious D]

I would support this idea.

 

[Motaz Tarek]

I don't think they will do it since it's the main drive for whoever buys them and spend money on them
if they limit special troops to multiplayer nobody will buy them

 

[Master Contrail Program]

I think card armies should be allowed in wars, but on a limited basis. Maybe pick 2-4 on planning day. Or 1-2 before each war attack.

Limiting them to pvp makes them largely irrelevant to the majority of the player base that aren't chasing medals. How often do you use mercenaries, generals, and most tactics during raids?

Or maybe allow it to be an option before setting up a war search. Hell, that may actually be a good idea for the truly hardcore. Allow the option to allow/disallow card armies/mercs/coalitions/even tactics. Then the wars can run the gamut from casual to ultra hardcore. Sure the matchmaking would probably take longer, then again, maybe not.

Either way there needs to be an attack/defense log for World Wars, while the quantum physics and super string theory of war replays are still being worked out.

 

[Zipo06]

I don't agree. I spend time in view to get extra troops and i use them only in ww. These extra troops are my only chance to beat stronger player than me and stronger teams. All players can use them if they want and don't use them if they don't want.
Use these extra troops in online battle is the most stupid thing i saw...
Before forbide the use of extra troops in ww, nexon should better ban the cheating teams (those who use weak players to decrease the opponent level).

 

[British Coffee]

TBH only troops that actually mattered as extra troops was elehant archers and maybe supply drop event helicopters and heavy tanks. I personally agree with no extra troops in WW unless they are from expedition but that would literally make buying troops for money useless, thus Nexon will never make this happen

 

[JuDomines]

I think card armies should be allowed in wars, but on a limited basis. Maybe pick 2-4 on planning day. Or 1-2 before each war attack.

Limiting them to pvp makes them largely irrelevant to the majority of the player base that aren't chasing medals. How often do you use mercenaries and most tactics during raids?

Or maybe allow it to be an option before setting up a war search. Hell, that may actually be a good idea for the truly hardcore. Allow the option to allow/disallow card armies/mercs/coalitions/even tactics. Then the wars can run the gamut from casual to ultra hardcore. Sure the matchmaking would probably take longer, then again, maybe not.

Either way there needs to be an attack/defense log for World Wars, while the quantum physics and super string theory of war replays are still being worked out.

I really like the idea of limiting their Numbers in wars, a la coalition badges. It achieves 2 things: a) give A chance against big wallet boys and b) avoid weird hoooooo attack (referred at simply throwing the dozen cards you have in stock and simply watch the base collapse)

 

[Veldan]

I agree. It's too easy to clear bases right now. Something goes wrong? Oh, just pop a few extra armies. I have so many heli, APC and machine guns stacked up from the supply drops and airlift depot that I could probably clear a few high globals in war, even though I'm in EA myself. This makes no sense and I support the idea of limiting them to multiplayer.

 

[S_How]

Im neutral on it. I will say that the card armies are probably a big money maker for nexon, like the $5 army sales they have. So, you'd probably have a better chance of advocating for a limit like what was suggested above of just a few per battle. I think that is probably a good compromise.

 

[TOP melisma]

I agree 100% absolutely~. We don like to play meaningless ww.. Because it is juse time waste.

 

[Blacknife686]

I have never bought one of troop sales and 90% of the time I have no issue clearing a base in WW. The real issue is not about your offence, but your defense. A good layout and trap/ building placement can stop an attack no matter how many extra troops somebody used.

​​​So my five cents is that there's nothing wrong with using these extra troops, it just tells you that your base has some flaws

 

[Inhumanfrog]

avoid weird hoooooo attack (referred at simply throwing the dozen cards you have in stock and simply watch the base collapse)

Can we make "Hooooooo attack" a thing? I want my teammate's shenanigans to become a term

 

[Quovatis]

I have never bought one of troop sales and 90% of the time I have no issue clearing a base in WW. The real issue is not about your offence, but your defense. A good layout and trap/ building placement can stop an attack no matter how many extra troops somebody used.

​​​So my five cents is that there's nothing wrong with using these extra troops, it just tells you that your base has some flaws

Sorry, but there are no layouts that can stop any attack, with or without extra troops. Just ask some of the many alliances that have 100s of perfect-score stalemates against Atomic/Global bases.