War loot needs to be seriously increased.

[The Regulator]

The cost to throw 2 full weight attacks with generals and mercs, troop cards and regular troops VS the return is way out of proportion.
It costs me for one battle (if I lose all troops) for example about 5k oil just for generals and planes each attack, and usual return for a war win for 2 attacks is at best a touch over 5k.
Food return is neglible, really the only thing I end up in front with is gold, trade good returns don’t come close to the cost of heavy mercenaries.

Im sure many of you have the same thought, but why persist for a massive loss of resources?

especially when in a regular multi battle a good target can yield over 1m each of gold and food and over 10k oil.

 

[Bedlam]

Yep I agree

 

[Berny]

It's even worse if you have trash your HT raiding army before the attack. And it's annoying (opportunity cost) to have to interrupt raiding until WW army is built, and then until raiding army is built.
WhatI think would be a better solution, and has been proposed before, is to have a separate WW army that you can train instantly and for free.

 

[No Angel]

Increase war loot! Amen!
(Especially oil and rubies ☺)
You might be able to attract bored players again!
Oh yeah, what if the winning teams get troop chests?

 

[Lordzeus]

When you see that you can lose a war the best you can do is not participate. In a lost War the loot that We earn from 2 battles is so small that doesnt cover the resources we spend for just 1 battle. Also they must add supplies in the War loot.

 

[Quovatis]

Yep, I can use 14k+ oil per attack if I lose all my HTs and planes. Even if you lose nothing, you still spend around 3k oil just to train the generals. The war loot is ridiculously small.

 

[Tsamu]

I agree with all of the above comments. except if we can't win a war, I still attack, but I choose a target that won't cost me any oil. There's usually an Atomic base where I can destroy the TC with a bunch of tanks, or that is weak enough I can wipe it out with few losses. I rarely train more than one general.

I don't change my troop composition much for war attacks, but having a separate army for war would be awesome.

 

[rremmy72]

Absolutely!! Oil cost alone for 2 attacks: 466x4 (4 lvl 10 generals) + 360x2 (zeppelins) + 280x2 (biplanes) = 3144 . Average oil loot if a win: 2000 .

End result: Wars aren't profitable at all.

 

[Manifesto]

None of you are making sense. Surely war was designed for fun, not for resources?
Just ask any of the devs, they'll confirm it!

 

[Arminius]

Maybe, but then the developers should take care, that war is fun, and not a massacre. Simply by implementing some kind of match making.

 

[FrostMr]

There isn’t a single player who wars that will disagree. It only took 3 months of carry on to get Marco focus fixed (nobody asked for it to focus Andy how). I’m not optimistic about war loot getting revised while the Mu$£um and purchasable artifacts are hot

 

[Cannibals]

Beware the military industrial complex as it wishes for war to become a profitable venture!

 

[Danix den Andre]

hear, hear, although as a player, i spend more on war than i get, usually. So it is in fact a viable opinion that war loot should be increased, for the losers.