Alliance Wars Needs Improvement 2.0

Muninn has every right to monitor the forums. The conversation was escalating beyond control. It was not a conversation anymore, it had become about spreading anger, unsubstantive claims, and false words mistaken as truths.

Granted, I definitely didn’t want it to be closed. I loved how it was evolving. Let’s continue that here.

@forums: We are in day 3 of war now and I’m gathering my own form of note taking as wars are continuing to be able to add something to the conversation other than ‘jeeeeez, this suckssssss.’ I should have something substantial by the end of the week. I suggest everyone else continue to do the same to help aid this topic further along :slight_smile: Remember, describe how you’re feeling when certain things are happening!


Agreed Some parts were getting out of hand but closing posts outright and deleting others off the forums for nobody to see is just as disrespectful as the people saying they want X or Y to happen and complaining. Agreed as a dev he has the right to do what he wants but that does not mean that he SHOULD always exercise that power. Restraint and selectively responding would have been more appropriate imo


You posted a really good thread, not too long ago, on your feelings/thoughts on war and the burnout that many in top alliances feel from it. Can you link me to it? I’d actually like to reread it, because I wasn’t in a top alliance then, so I remember having a different viewpoint of it than I do now lol.


Okay. But that’s another topic. Let’s continue this one about why Alliance Wars may need ‘something’ else. And what we all are currently feeling about Wars now, even if that differs.

1 Like

@Raz There’s a huge difference in the amount of work put in as a War Coordinator versus a Contributing War member. You should know this as you’ve also done both. One of your prior post said so as much.

Your current experience is as a single contributor at Extac. Being main war planner is vastly different. Like Ghastly said previously, we need time to reload rosters and take a mental break from constantly staring at a map looking for sneak attacks, thinking of what your enemy is going to do next and what your counter will be.

There are other things that can take place of WAR such as the new co-op pvp, or alliance versus alliance co-op pvp tourney.


I believe this is the post you are looking for but I am not entirely sure


I’ll continue my feelings from my last post then, war has become the same routine of Airstrikes on day 1 and that decides if you win or lose. This has been the same for nearly 7 seasons now and needs to be shook up like how adding improvements for the first time where

It is vastly different commanding a war versus only playing in one. It’s shocking how diverse the roles are. In EXTAC, there are multiple war planners, so it aids us all. Day shift, night shift, that sort of thing. We have a couple at the top who are THE war commanders, but many of us pitch in. Usually our suggestions are met with discussion. The same could be said for REAVE in its current state.

I say this because I have been lucky to be in alliances with some form of balance within leadership. Letting it fall on one person creates the burnout I think Ghastly has referred to in the past. I’ve seen this firsthand in some other alliances. But Ghastly can only speak for his own experience…

I agree with you, pilfer, on many points that you have mentioned.

First off, I wanna say sorry for causing drama on the last post, as well as getting it closed. I wanted my opinion to be heard but took it too far and it got out of hand. I didn’t intend for that to happen, I spoke before thinking. ( @xUsMarinex )

With that out of the way, I wanted to say my own opinions about war. In most alliances I’ve been in this past few months, including my own, I’ve been leading war. I’ve never been much of a contributor, I’ve always enjoyed leading war. But it does frustrate me and many others for several reasons, and I wanted to point out one of those.

Surprise Attacks - This is probably the biggest complaint people have had about war. When war first came out, it was always fun racing to the middle to capture all the sectors before other alliances can. But with SA, other alliances can block you off from certain sectors, preventing you from capturing them. This honestly causes more frustration than the fun we used to have. To resolve this issue, I think there should either be a delay where you can’t use SA on the first day, or players shouldn’t be able to rush upgrades on the first day. Let me know what you think…


@OfficialGodlante 100 agreed with Sneak Attack taking the fun out of war. It’s why i proposed blocking ‘build rush’ the first hour of war or even limit it to only certain characters being able to participate in sneak attack. Limit Sneak Attacks to only characters that can go stealth such as Prophet, Mandrake, etc…


Never thought of only letting certain heroes be able to SA. That would be neat :).


In a real war, can you imagine sending in butter, dreadnaught or savage behind enemy lines for a sneak attack? They would fail miserably, lol.


I definitely agree that something should be tweaked about Surprise Attack. When you are blocked from moving really anywhere on Day 1, it can be extremely frustrating, and almost guarantees your ending rank, in my opinion. It becomes very tiring and exhausting to complete in wars when this happens continuously. I don’t have a problem with Surprise Attack. I think it’s a good feature, with its pros and cons, like everything. The first couple minutes of Alliance War are always my favorite. Watching my alliance rush to the center and 2*s brings me joy and satisfaction. But what ruins that feeling, is when we reach the center only to see that a neighboring alliance has blocked us in. That joy and satisfaction turns to frustration and anger. Then the alliance has the gut to ask for a truce, it’s rather annoying. :wink:


I feel like if Sneak Attack were removed completely, something would have to take its place. And I was wondering about the implementation of a system that could allow even the lowest ranking alliance of the day being able to somehow gain some ground, points, or become formidable?

Too many times I’ve seen an alliance simply give up and stop doing anything when their base becomes overrun on day 2-3. The frustration is very real. I would entertain the thought of scaling power the longer an alliance is at the lowest rank? I have no idea how this could work or if it’s feasible or if it would create more issues than not.

But what I’m entertaining is allowing even the lowest ranked alliances a glimmer of hope to be able to come back. Everyone loves an underdog!


I’ve always been more casual in regards to war, but always found it strange that the HQ upgrades were made so quickly available right off the bat. Perhaps folks are frustrated about how immediately those upgrades go into effect and how often they can screw other alliances over so quickly.

As for truces, the harsh reality is that is that as long as free communication exists between players, there will always be truces. Another thread alluded to this, to which I agree. As Doc wrote, “War is political, war has wins and losses, war is gruesome, war can sometimes be boring, sometimes exciting and take all the creativity and skills you have to survive”.

(P.S. This was one thread I wrote regarding some issues a ways back; I believe the conversation was a healthy one because the post largely just focused on the issues, not potential solutions. In other words, we fought the temptation to talk about our solutions, no matter how logical they appeared to be, we just talked about the problems themselves.)


As much as I enjoy using SA, it’s super frustrating having it used on me instead. I’ve had wars where my alliance and another alliance will just SA the whole game, wasting points, cutting each other off from everything, and lots of arguments in war chat and pm’s. As much as I love using it, I have to agree with you @Raz… maybe it needs a replacement.

While we’re talking about it lol, I think many improvements could be replaced with something better. Every war, alliances always buy the same 6 or 7 improvements. They need to make it hard for us to choose lol. Make some improvements that are better than others for different scenarios. Make us spend all of our war coins. Improvements such as Improve Scouting, Longer Scouting, Build Faster, and Risk = Reward are almost never bought. I believe I mentioned this on an older post as well, but personally, I’d love to see an improvement that is similar to reinforcements that allows you to edit defenses on sectors that are under attack.


Yep, I agree, usually the same improvements are used over and over again because they are the most effective in war. Surprise attack is annoying when used against my alliance, but sometimes it may be the best option to prevent being trapped by an enemy’s surprise attack. Maybe improvements that use featured heroes more would be nice, since usually only the new heroes get a huge point bonus. Perhaps an improvement where featured heroes get more power, or attack teams with same faction get an attack boost. As for limiting surprise attacks, maybe limit the range of surprise attacks to a certain number of tiles (scouting still unlimited) which would be indicated by the scouting popup.

However, war in its current state is still quite playable, its not very rage inducing and as long as your enemies aren’t too high-powered. The rewards are great, not too bad, and it light be annoying if your alliance is locked in an area by a bunch of shielded enemy zones, but that’s usually where a surprise attack works best. Improvements just don’t seem to do that much except for surprise attack IMO.


Agreed. Would love shorter aw with more bp.


I agree,
It needs to be shortened.
I also think accommodating players in different time zones would be great.
The duration of war could be shortened to two days(48hrs).
Increase the reset amounts to every 12 hours not 24 hours.
Similar to the pvp reset system.


We need an improvement which can remove shields on shielded sectors