Time to restart the Glory League.
- Thread starter Hammer
- Start date
Nakfarfar Titi
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 35
ColdestRage I'm afraid getting constant perfect-perfect or near perfect perfect against alliances same our strength, or double our strength, and being recognized but all these alliances one year before the glory crap, is far from 'self proclaimed'.
And P.S nah, we're against adding 15+ irons, because now we can't get a match with those alliances. We just add the necessary to get a match.
And P.S nah, we're against adding 15+ irons, because now we can't get a match with those alliances. We just add the necessary to get a match.
jmemira
Approved user
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 55
I doubt they would ever do this, no troop cards in war would cut off a huge income source, limiting the number you could bring in would be beneficial if they would let you throw some in the inventory - which would be good for people with too many which causes scrolling issues in deployment 
jmemira
Approved user
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 55
My alliance has never used sandbag accounts and has worked very hard to be able to perfect those who do, this whole thing has made us a lot stronger as a team and I don't want glory to be reset after one very minor fix. Until perfect score stalemates have glory reward (I agree with 40%, same as loot) we will continue to stalemate very strong teams, iron age accounts included or not, and have it be detrimental to our glory (6/10 of our last matches have been perfect score stalemates, having it be glory neutral hurts any team not manipulating the matchmaking and makes it very difficult to climb the leaderboards . Matchmaking for top teams is another issue that needs to be fixed too, waiting over a week for a match is just not how the game is meant to function. If there is going to be a glory reset its a long way off.
Wendy
Approved user
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2016
- Messages
- 200
are you actually so afraid of the possibility of the glory reset jakob?
What about the time of skilled alliances that don't happen to have great shoppers or lots of high level players?
this improoving skill thing is bll sht. Again, what can i learn from a sandbag alliance? how a GA player can 5 star an enlightment?
I already said that if i had to improove my skills, top sandbagging alliances are the last i'd ask a suggestion. I'd go to top alliances like HZ, PT or LOL because i know they win wars with fair or stronger matches.
Want to learn something about the game? come to us. We perfect score almost every war too, but alliances way better than us. It took a bit to adjust,tons of lost against "top teams" ( we are sparta, rus army, ares army barritus grimm and many others have our points, go, search for us and for them, and tell me if those are fair wars) but results are clear now that the matchmaking has changed.
We are meeting more fair matches against sandbagging alliance and they are just not able to perfect us because they are used to play against weaker alliances. And if we lose? we give them almost no points so our last weeks of winning won't be wasted for a mismatch.
I had to search for 8 hours yesteday, so be it. at least if i win the next war it will be by skill and not ruining the game to a IA/EA alliance, because this are the match we'd be finding if we were sandbagging.
What about the time of skilled alliances that don't happen to have great shoppers or lots of high level players?
this improoving skill thing is bll sht. Again, what can i learn from a sandbag alliance? how a GA player can 5 star an enlightment?
I already said that if i had to improove my skills, top sandbagging alliances are the last i'd ask a suggestion. I'd go to top alliances like HZ, PT or LOL because i know they win wars with fair or stronger matches.
Want to learn something about the game? come to us. We perfect score almost every war too, but alliances way better than us. It took a bit to adjust,tons of lost against "top teams" ( we are sparta, rus army, ares army barritus grimm and many others have our points, go, search for us and for them, and tell me if those are fair wars) but results are clear now that the matchmaking has changed.
We are meeting more fair matches against sandbagging alliance and they are just not able to perfect us because they are used to play against weaker alliances. And if we lose? we give them almost no points so our last weeks of winning won't be wasted for a mismatch.
I had to search for 8 hours yesteday, so be it. at least if i win the next war it will be by skill and not ruining the game to a IA/EA alliance, because this are the match we'd be finding if we were sandbagging.
Nakfarfar Titi
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 35
jmemira Great thinking.
Wendy You're channeling your negative energy towards sandbaggers to the wrong group of people.
Our group fight alliances that have similar or higher strength than us, even double strength sometimes.
And we didn't start at glory, we've been fighting super tough wars since last year. Actually glory messed it all up for us. Now we can't match with alliances we use to play with, because they have sandbags and only way to play with them is adding sandbags as well.
About improving your skills, you might wanna get a reality check; We saw some links from these alliances you mentioned. Good attacks, good place to start, but they're strategies and styles we used more than 1 year ago. I don't mean to be a jerk, but they're (not all of them) one year behind concerning strategy. Good luck anyway
Wendy You're channeling your negative energy towards sandbaggers to the wrong group of people.
Our group fight alliances that have similar or higher strength than us, even double strength sometimes.
And we didn't start at glory, we've been fighting super tough wars since last year. Actually glory messed it all up for us. Now we can't match with alliances we use to play with, because they have sandbags and only way to play with them is adding sandbags as well.
About improving your skills, you might wanna get a reality check; We saw some links from these alliances you mentioned. Good attacks, good place to start, but they're strategies and styles we used more than 1 year ago. I don't mean to be a jerk, but they're (not all of them) one year behind concerning strategy. Good luck anyway
Nakfarfar Titi
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 35
8 hour is good. Try searching for 2-3 days and play with the same 3 alliances forever.
So much fun
So much fun
Europeos
Approved user
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2015
- Messages
- 146
As always, some imagine our alliance has made its way up in a way which couldn't be further from the truth. Tell me, if we've constantly been fighting alliances with players 1 or 2 ages below us as you think, why haven't we ever matched you or the other anti sandbag alliances which have been so vocal in the last few months? The answer is simple: because 9 times out of 10 we've matched teams the same strength as us.
Last edited:
Jakob_888
Approved user
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2016
- Messages
- 60
Wendy. Im not saying your team is not skilled. Im sure you are. I never played you and probably never will because our level will not match.
We only hit teams with relative high level. Very few mismatches has occured.
We faced most of the teams on top of the leaderboard. And I must say that I know these teams are very skilled. It is like seeing Mozart at work when you hit teams like Korea Army, Korea Soul, Good People and UA Obsedian.
There are other amazing teams too like 1st Vikings (but them we obviously will not hit because they are one of our teams
). The list is long of great teams.
I dont mind the stalemates to be honest (many of my teammates probably do). So I dont include +10 iron bases to get easy matches. Im perfectly happy matching the same teams as we always could and did.
I love hitting great teams and sometime see a bit of Mozart
You asked if I was afraid. Of course not, im a very calm guy. It is just a game on my iPad.
We only hit teams with relative high level. Very few mismatches has occured.
We faced most of the teams on top of the leaderboard. And I must say that I know these teams are very skilled. It is like seeing Mozart at work when you hit teams like Korea Army, Korea Soul, Good People and UA Obsedian.
There are other amazing teams too like 1st Vikings (but them we obviously will not hit because they are one of our teams
). The list is long of great teams. I dont mind the stalemates to be honest (many of my teammates probably do). So I dont include +10 iron bases to get easy matches. Im perfectly happy matching the same teams as we always could and did.
I love hitting great teams and sometime see a bit of Mozart
You asked if I was afraid. Of course not, im a very calm guy. It is just a game on my iPad.
Last edited:
Wendy
Approved user
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2016
- Messages
- 200
I appreciate the way you answered Jakob. I imagine you are not actually afraid, i just don't get why saying that big skilled alliances would have wasted time if the leaderbord is resetted. again what about our time? haven't we wasted time the past few months slowly gaining glory and suddenly losing it all in once against a overweighted alliance? please note that my tone doesn't want to be rude.
Because, if i look at the leaderboard i see a lot of alliances we lost with during the past few months. Alliances in wich i'd be number 10/13 ranked in war, but i have to face as number 1 in my alliance. Am i able to 5 star n1 and 2 in those wars? sometimes yes sometimes no, but for sure i can't ask my number 25 enlightment age to take 10 stars against 2 global age targets. On the other hand i've constantly watched them destroying us with number 1 or 2 that had to go 5 star our Gp age players with their second attack.
So let's take a little step back. try not to think about whaterver may have been said before.
We have a 160/170 n 1 player (me as many in my situation) that every war has to 5 star two 198 targets, with no possible mistake, because if he does 4 stars the war is lost. On the other hand we have a number 1 level 198 that with first attack goes on that 160/170 target with no pressure because he knows that whatever may happen, there are 12 other people that could try that target. With his second attack, this is my exerience talking, he goes on number 17 EA or whatever hasn't been 5 starred yet. without knowing the alliance and player history, who would you honestly say is the most skilled player?
If you are sure of your skills a reset of the leaderboard would have the same result: you leading the ranking. With only one exception. All the alliances that are where they are because they have only fought easy wars, would be out of the equation. Wouldn't you be happier to be the first of a real ranking instead of being the first of a fake one?
A little reality check for Nakfartiti now: I don't know your tattics i only know your attitude. whatever old tattic they use, they show it and are helpful and try to improve the game for everybody. For now what i see you doing, is just claiming you are better than them and us, but i see no clues, no strategy, nothing that has ever made me say: wow this guy is good. At this point i believe you just think you are, as nothing constructive or helpful has ever been said from you.
That said, the new matchmaking is good, i like it. We have been smashing stacking alliances for the last few weeks, because 90% of them are just not prepared for a real war after months of easy wars. And if it happens they are good, no problem, stalemate! I have no problems with stalemates
Because, if i look at the leaderboard i see a lot of alliances we lost with during the past few months. Alliances in wich i'd be number 10/13 ranked in war, but i have to face as number 1 in my alliance. Am i able to 5 star n1 and 2 in those wars? sometimes yes sometimes no, but for sure i can't ask my number 25 enlightment age to take 10 stars against 2 global age targets. On the other hand i've constantly watched them destroying us with number 1 or 2 that had to go 5 star our Gp age players with their second attack.
So let's take a little step back. try not to think about whaterver may have been said before.
We have a 160/170 n 1 player (me as many in my situation) that every war has to 5 star two 198 targets, with no possible mistake, because if he does 4 stars the war is lost. On the other hand we have a number 1 level 198 that with first attack goes on that 160/170 target with no pressure because he knows that whatever may happen, there are 12 other people that could try that target. With his second attack, this is my exerience talking, he goes on number 17 EA or whatever hasn't been 5 starred yet. without knowing the alliance and player history, who would you honestly say is the most skilled player?
If you are sure of your skills a reset of the leaderboard would have the same result: you leading the ranking. With only one exception. All the alliances that are where they are because they have only fought easy wars, would be out of the equation. Wouldn't you be happier to be the first of a real ranking instead of being the first of a fake one?
A little reality check for Nakfartiti now: I don't know your tattics i only know your attitude. whatever old tattic they use, they show it and are helpful and try to improve the game for everybody. For now what i see you doing, is just claiming you are better than them and us, but i see no clues, no strategy, nothing that has ever made me say: wow this guy is good. At this point i believe you just think you are, as nothing constructive or helpful has ever been said from you.
That said, the new matchmaking is good, i like it. We have been smashing stacking alliances for the last few weeks, because 90% of them are just not prepared for a real war after months of easy wars. And if it happens they are good, no problem, stalemate! I have no problems with stalemates
Nakfarfar Titi
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2015
- Messages
- 35
Wendy, no attitude here and didn't mean to hurt you or your friends.
You're the one who said you wouldn't learn anything in top alliances and implied the listed alliances are better than the rest.
I simply said a mechanical and unemotional observation that I saw some replays and noticed the earlier strategies. Nothing wrong with that, thumbs up that they're helping. just that your initial statement is not accurate.
Good day now
You're the one who said you wouldn't learn anything in top alliances and implied the listed alliances are better than the rest.
I simply said a mechanical and unemotional observation that I saw some replays and noticed the earlier strategies. Nothing wrong with that, thumbs up that they're helping. just that your initial statement is not accurate.
Good day now
ColdestRage
Approved user
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2016
- Messages
- 131
@Nakfarfar Titi
Well I do get you, really .
Alliances (plural form is intended) I'm in tend to get Stalemate after Stalemate , and we do include in one of those alliances some accs that said they are unavailble for war once we need to make up numbers if we have f.e. 33 willing to do war and need to include 2 more or drop 3 of those that want to participate.
Though they are at least GPA , not Iron
Well I do get you, really .
Alliances (plural form is intended) I'm in tend to get Stalemate after Stalemate , and we do include in one of those alliances some accs that said they are unavailble for war once we need to make up numbers if we have f.e. 33 willing to do war and need to include 2 more or drop 3 of those that want to participate.
Though they are at least GPA , not Iron
MonsterMMORPG
Approved user
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2016
- Messages
- 66
100% supporting this reset
Tenacious D
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2016
- Messages
- 60
Newsflash: If your top player is lvl 160, you do not belong in the Top 100. If your alliance isn't composed entirely of global and atomic age players, you do not belong in the top 100. The original broken glory system rewarded weak alliances since they never stalemated and punished strong war alliances that faced other strong alliances. Those weak alliances have been complaining ever since. If 1st Dynasty isn't at the top of the leaderboard, the system is broken. Until they started sandbagging, they weren't even in the top 100. That is how flawed the glory leaderboard was.
Tenacious D
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2016
- Messages
- 60
I agree with this. I think 90% of the top 10 belong there. But 25-100? Boy howdy. Many do not belong.
Europeos
Approved user
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2015
- Messages
- 146
I get your point, but I quite like the fact that middle weight alliances also have the chance to make it in the top 100. It takes a lot of skills. What wouldn't be right though would be if they were advantaged by the fact they can avoid stalemates almost entirely.
Again, both matchmaking and stalemates must be fixed.
Again, both matchmaking and stalemates must be fixed.
Tenacious D
Approved user
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2016
- Messages
- 60
Actually it takes no skill at all. These alliances only need 4-5 strong attackers at the top. They can 5 star bases 1-10. If your #8 is responsible for 15/16, your #12 is responsible for 23/24, then it takes no skill at all. If there is a spread from global to medieval -- and they all have that -- their opponent who is more concentrated has no chance. They never complain about this version of sandbagging.
Christopher-Outlaws!!
Approved user
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2016
- Messages
- 296
Are you really crying about diverse Alliances being awarded? Wow. And associating it with stacking? And saying that only Atomic and global Alliances should be in the top 100?.... What is wrong with you folks? It's intended to spot competition, not reward p2p or extreme tenure. I'm not arguing those Alliances aren't skilled. But get real! It should be a weight class system. Average xp of 180+ is heavyweight 160-180 middle class etc etc...
And the system needs a makeover and a reset before it's taken seriously.
And the system needs a makeover and a reset before it's taken seriously.
