• Leonard Smith Discount Error
    We are aware of the Leonard Smith Event discount not working properly for players. We will reactivate the event once we correct the issue blocking the 15% Discount.

Some objective thoughts on the rebalancing.

ThunderCrane

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2018
Messages
11
I normally don't comment much, partially I don't want to engage in an angry conversation. At the same time, I totally understand the reasons players frustrated.

You made a very long explanation, but honestly I think it little out of touch.

Firstly attack and defense can't be compared. You manually attack, and auto defense thus losing in attack will feel much harder than a win in defense. Make the game harder to attack, Nexon systematically make the game more frustrating, nobody like to be pissed. What good games do is to make a game everyone can play, and an option for players if they want to become hardcore. Make the game harder, Nexon chopped casual players who just want to progress because need I remind you, the game need to attack to progress.

People said drop rank, but when a game systematically changed, no rank drop will help. Beside it promotes brute force and kill the smart play.

Secondly, the way you compare troop performance is little convincing. There are massive hidden variable in games namely university and museum. The only thing can I say I am global age lv 184 and used to take down CWA lv 220-230, now I can't even beat bases with same lv... the game just made me more stupid and it isn't a good move.

I understand the game needs some adjust, and I don't think anyone mind if the game is little harder. But I really think Nexon and BHG butchered this game. People said the update favour whales, but believe me no whales liking this.
 

SiuYin

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
540
I maxed in attack, and I can say that,
before re-balance,
to get 5-stars on a max defender, it need many trials, and only really good player able to do so with some luck

After re-balance, it is no way to get 5 stars on a 250+ players (roguhly half Atomic, half CW defense)
 

KniferX

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
186
Well, yes. Outside of AA vs AA and CWA vs CWA (and other combinations of those ages) things are different. Attacking lower ages is arguably easier with better planes. I can't comment on the state of lower ages like GPA and EA as I don't play there. It's just that on equal terms in high ages defense is way overblown against offense. His conclusions don't quite reflect this, with conclusion like shooters still being viable and bazookas being better than before the update.
 

Manifesto

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
1,920
My shooters are still fine after the update, relatively speaking.
Maybe because I'm British?
 

Centurion96

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2017
Messages
83
Nice analysis, but IMHO completely wrong. We can't change army composition before MP attack (even if doable before ww attack, it is too much expensive). We can't make effective army compositios (e.g. tanks and shooters protecting each other), because of the Missile Silo. We can't effectively deploy more than 3 - 4 kinds of troop. And what't the most important, we can't directly control our troops on the battlefied. It's more about attacking AI vs. defending AI. While we can support attacking AI by using war tactics and planes, please note, that our attacking AI can be also eaeasily hindered by easy tricks in the base layout.

Anyway, any alalysis is completely irrelevant if the game fails to fulfill its purpose in the end. Developers are free to make any changes to the game, but there's no way how they could force players to enjoy it.
 

Seraph

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
27
Again as Festivus said, you're global age... Look at the rebalance stats, CWA defenses were pretty strong before hand. Towers for instance jump up in health and damage so much from global age that the additional health and damage from the rebalance causes a huge shift in power. Landmines dealing over 30k damage now means that my tanks die in one land mine. My tanks have roughly 30k health even with them being maxed out in university and now one land mind can ruin them possibly changing the whole course of my attack.

Don't forget also, walls jump up from level 13 to level 16. The increased health on all defenses combined with maxed out walls and such make bases hard to crack. I have a 250 base.. Only defenses that I have that aren't maxed are garrisons and I've seen the difference in wars. People used to get like 50 % on my bases now they either don't attack or get like 20 something unless they throw out elephant archer troop cards and even then I have not seen a 100% in a really long time (since balance patch 1).

Also yes you need NTG in wars usually and with 5 star becoming so much harder to get it shifts the whole nature of the game.
 

MisterLaxx

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2016
Messages
27
So I'd like to say nice thought out post. Im sure that wasn't a 5 minute type up.

First things are when you said that attackers with good habits/comps will find these changes a little challenging and played with poor habits/comps will find it unbearably difficult.

So those players complain about multiplayer, it really isn't that much harder. I raid in empire league and have occasionally crept into dynasty league(before/after rebalance 3). You need to have skill, you need to be focused and disciplined. I was using HT in empire when I had no Leo stats or plane artifacts, for a few months (pre rebalance). It was harder then. Now, I have to plane a few factory/bunker HT, but it's not bad at all. SO JUST GROW UP, ACTUALLY TAKE RAIDING SERIOUSLY & FOCUS. ITS NOT HARD.

If you're an apc/Zook/howitzer player, there are ways to still raid in empire+. I have clanmates that do it because they trained for it. Stop complaining and adjust. Multiplayer rant over

2) So this pay to win aspect. It is here to stay, but it is unfortunate for those who can't afford it. I can't imagine another way for the company to make money, since this method is so Effective so far. Morally asking players to spend money to have a higher chance of winning, is just not right. There is a player on YouTube who is making top hits with HT but they are using EA stable with 3 EA cards & 1 crab tank card. Max level generals and they are having a lot of success. So far I've seen 1 video after rebalance 3 and this player is still pushing on. The point is that they are using an event building that costs money to do this... Players who don't spend will have to practice way more to do what paid players achieve. Normal players will probably quit because this mountain is to enormous to climb. Not everyone is or has a sugar daddy.

​​​​​I do like the emphasis on defense though. This game prior to rebalance was becoming easier. Decoys were king, p2w still existed, but overall defense was not as strong. There are many videos online of players 5* with EA cards. Few without. I could successfully 5* all Rose/5 box layouts in challenges. They had a specific formula & each variation was predictable. Now, I'm having decent success. I'll keep messing around with challenges, but the changes give a player like me something to keep playing for.
 

LitanyOfFire

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
20
I get that there is an emotional impact. Anyone can clearly see that spread all over the forum. But I'm just not interested in participating in another circlejerk where everyone insults the developers and put forward pipe dreams that this game isn't going to charge money anymore. The developers of this game will be much more interested in tactical conversation about the game rather than hyperbole and letters from folks about how they're going to quit the game. That is why I am deliberately not putting forth my opinion on whether I like the rebalance or not. I get that a lot of folks see that as a tacit approval of the changes, but that is not necessarily the case.

I am receiving a lot of flack for being global, so I just have to put out there that this is a very long game. I will spend more time playing this game in global than I will spend time playing full length $60 games. So it's absurd to thing that no one is "really" playing the game unless they're max cold war and playing super competitively. Those players make up a tiny, tiny percentage of the overall game population.

What I am seeing a lot of people mention is that they are not satisfied with CWA vs CWA base attacks, and due to the scaling that may be an issue. What I know is that the re-balance seems to be fine at my current age. It is certainly possible that the rebalance achieved its intended purpose for the vast majority of ages but that it did not work as intended in the CWA. In that case, the most useful thing to do would be to identify specific points in the rebalance that are making attacks overly difficult. Is it traps? Defender hitpoints? Increased tower damage? Old strategies "just don't work anymore"? Lots of people are complaining about it, but no one is offering specifics. I am extremely interested in what exactly makes these bases so impossible to attack now.
 

LitanyOfFire

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
20
This is a good point, but in MP you also have much greater freedom to pick your target, so you do have the option to scroll through opponents until you find someone easier, or drop down leagues for less intense competition.
 

Manifesto

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
1,920
When the incentive is there, high rss/easy layout. The defenders are still tough no matter the base design.
It takes much more concentration now. If it was during a war match l wouldn't complain but mp isn't supposed to be like this. Fun is now more serious.
 

Festivus

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
268
You do realize that this has all been discussed at other points - multiple points - on this forum? We've already addressed what is making the game virtually unplayable at the higher end. I've already told you myself precisely why it's not worth the time anymore.

It's tedious. It was already difficult enough to take higher bases, but to do so in war you HAVE to have high level coalitions. That means lots of raiding for NTGs, which have actually become more difficult to get now that we can't raid continuously back-to-back anymore.

You also MUST use decent troop tactics in war if you want to have any hope of 5* against advanced CWA bases. You have to pay more $$ to do this. Which is of course the actual purpose of the "rebalance" effort.

As for what specifically is causing this, that answer is simple: EVERYTHING. The entire "rebalance" is an effective nerfing of all offenses. The defensive building HP increases are absurdly high. A small tweak would barely have been noticeable and might have achieved Nexon's stated goals (although not their unstated goal, which is to get people to spend more $), but the massive boosts we've seen in stages 1 and 2 are just dumb. They turned a fun game into something that's annoying. When HT Mk4 defenders are taking out maxed HT Mk7s, then something is waaaaayyy off.

They screwed up. They should have made incremental, minor tweaks here and there. Instead they dropped the largest digital turd possible on the player base all at once, and a LOT of people aren't going to put up with it. Like me, they're taking their business elsewhere now.

The only thing they could do at this point to *maybe* regain some of the lost player base would be to roll back the stage 2 and 3 rebalance changes, but honestly it's probably too late. Like many others, I've already effectively moved to another game. They shot themselves in the foot, and putting the spent casing back in the gun isn't going to fix their foot.
 

KniferX

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
186
This is the problem here, you're using the absolute maxed out most viable MP troop composition with some very powerful artifacts on top of that, along with having tons of time to play, and you're telling other players it's not hard in Empire. What about the other 98% of the playerbase who doesn't have this elaborate setup that takes a good part of a year to obtain at best, if one hasn't been investing in HTs before.
Because there is this one combo that performs well with the enormous help from artifacts for MP, means these updates are completely fine? What if players don't like HTs or get bored really fast using the same combo? No, switching air units around doesn't constitute as varied gameplay.

The matter of fact is, if you want to play high medals
you shouldn't be limited to one composition and relying on museum RNG. If you want to war, you gotta go low medals to find easy bases as attacking bases equal to your age goes out of consideration as you'll be losing tons of units and tactics.
Game variety is being butchered, everyone has to go to 1 or 2 troop compositions to even have a chance at something, forcing them to play in one specific way if they want to participate in something as basic as wars. Killing player choice is never a good thing. Other players mentioned here, it's becoming like a job, instead of a game.
One more thing, not everyone in the game is like you and me, ready and willing to research everything about it, dedicate hours to it. These updates kill their fun by making it very hard to do anything in wars. It's not just hardcore players here.

A couple of things about the p2w. There are other ways to earn money, it's just that applying p2w mechanics is the easiest and least risky/most profitable. It erodes the game, but it gets the job done, looking at the perspective of gamers as customers to extract maximum revenue from. Monetization is what separates good games from great games, or, well, turning them into bad games eventually.
Let's not even elaborate on the rampant cheating problem which is making spending for p2w items pointless..
 
Last edited:

Rogue Squirrel

Approved user
LV
4
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
202
Awards
1
I Like this post and pretty much agree with everything you said.....I've spent a lot of time methodically building up my defences and feel that I'm finally being rewarded for the time and effort I spent

There seems to be three main arguments against this latest re-balance:
  • Some people have spent a lot of time (and money) following a specific path through this game, rushing through the ages without building up their defences, and selectively upgrading certain troops to be able to attack with only one strategy. These guys feel as though the rug has been pulled out from under their feet because now they have to go back and improve their defences and upgrade a lot of troops to be competitive - I can understand why they're angry. But when Nexon first nerfed the tactics and then introduced the silo I realised that it was better to upgrade all your tactics and troops - even the ones you don't currently use - to be ready for any eventuality
  • There are others who say that it's now impossible to take down strong CWA bases in war without spending money on troop tactics and to get the necessary diamonds and NTG's for mercenaries and coalitions, so winning wars has become even more pay-to-win. If some alliances want to spend hundreds of pounds (dollars for all you yanks) just to be at the top of the rankings in a game then that's fine by me, that's their prerogative.
  • And finally there are some saying that attacking in multiplayer has become much more difficult and the latest re-balancing update has taken all the fun out of the game. I can only speak from personal experience, but despite losing a few more troops than before, I still have no problem 5 starring bases and getting all the resources, NTG's and diamonds I need in the silver league - in the dynasty league it might be another story but that's the price you pay for climbing up the medals' table.
Fight me! ……..hahaha
 

unhappy

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
9
Rogue Squirrel;n637071 [* said:
Some people have spent a lot of time (and money) following a specific path through this game, rushing through the ages without building up their defences, and selectively upgrading certain troops to be able to attack with only one strategy. These guys feel as though the rug has been pulled out from under their feet because now they have to go back and improve their defences and upgrade a lot of troops to be competitive - I can understand why they're angry. But when Nexon first nerfed the tactics and then introduced the silo I realised that it was better to upgrade all your tactics and troops - even the ones you don't currently use - to be ready for any eventuality


What age and level are you? That will tell a lot about where you are at.


You do realise with this rebalance they have considerably reduced the amount of effective troops don't you? Max troops or not most of them are not going to get you decent stars on a high level AA or CWA.


MP battles are basically the same. Bit harder but who I don't care. What they have done is made it basically impossible to get more than 3 stars on level 250+ CWA without using 4 cards. Even then it can fail. I consider myself a reasonable player and don't mind a challenge in war. This is completely screwed up though and is not fun. If i want a real challenge I will go back to university and do a PHD. I play games for fun.
 

pckrn

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
666
ive been playing since when industrial was the max age.
currently cwa. in dynasty2. didnt spend anything.
i have HT mk7 researched but i dont use it.

did i cover all the stuff that would cause people to tell me im not qualified to comment on this matter?

i feel the game has become more strategic and promoting variety than ever before.

all the while the game still allows less strategic and more casual play for those who want that, by making it easier than before to attack weaker bases in the lower leagues.
 

pckrn

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2016
Messages
666
i disagree with the first point. i rushed through the ages without building my defenses, and the rug was NOT pulled out from under my feet. rushers will have a better airforce than non-rushers and that alone makes up for any imaginable downside
 

MisterLaxx

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2016
Messages
27
Players need to realize that this game requires time and practice to be good at. If people wanted to play a game where they could be good instantly, try something like candy crush saga. Its a nice waiting-in-line type of game that requires no real skill to play casually. You can play this game casually but lack of practice in something like world war will show with POOR RESULTS. The museum is a LOTTERY. It is super unfair to a LOT OF PLAYERS, I AGREE. Still, playing a lot of the game would allow you to work on museum and hopefully get a good a good setup.

As far as troop comps in multiplayer, anything will work as long as you dedicate time and attention to details in MASTERING IT. I was using heavy tanks during a time when rifle nations were EXTREMELY common and successful. I spent a few months in gold league, then jumped to kingdom. I spent a weekend getting dynasty and noticed how easy empire league was. I PUSHED MYSELF to LEARN and ADAPT. I GOT LUCKY WITH MUSEUM, SURE, BUT HAVING THE TOOLS WITH NO SKILL MEANS NOTHING. Look at the cheaters who have maxed out everything and cant hit 2 ages under them. You need to perfect your skill to profit yourself. Thats what this game requires...LOTS OF TIME for those people that struggle. SOME CAN PICK UP GAMES AND BE ALL STARS IN A WEEK OR LESS. OTHERS (like me) NEED TO PERFECT THEMSELVES.

SO STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW DIFFICULT THE GAME IS. IF YOU LOVE THE GAME ENOUGH, YOU WILL ADAPT AND FIND WAYS TO BE BETTER.

I even give back and teach the art of heavy tanks during my livestreams/videos. I put my experience back in the hands of players. I like this game too and i dont mind giving back, but to complain about something being difficult and not trying to improve is just pathetic.
 

shukra

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
355
i was also here when industrual was the top age. cwa now.

i think whatever the real problems, the radical rhetoric does not comport with the reality i see.

so full credit to OP for the analysis; it's the correct conversation to have.

my current opinion on the rebalance: i find it inoffensive. so a minority position.
 
Last edited:
Top