Proposal for PVP Alliances changes

Feature Requests and Game feedback
1

Take PVP offline and dissolve all alliances while the changes are made.

Make Alliances sizes Mandatory membership within 10% size of each other. So, if everyone tries to jump in one Alliance on the first day, freeze membership until all other alliances are within 90% capacity of largest.

Make each Alliance get bonuses on a specific class / color type.

Give each Alliance a specific advantage over one of the other alliances

Example:

Dark Order 20% stronger with Undead, Daemon, Monster, Doom, Naga classes. 15% damage increase from members of the Golden Forge.

Bright Empire 20% stronger with Elemental, Fey, Elf, Merfollk, Mystic Construct classes. 15% damage increase from members of the Wild Horde.

Enchanted Grove 20% stronger with Beast, Centaur, Dwarf, Gnome, Dragon, Stryx classes. 15% damage increase from members of the Dark Order.

Wild Horde 20% stronger with Wildfolk, Orc, Taurus, Naga, Raksha, Giant, Urska, Wargare. 15% damage increase from members of the Enchanted Grove.

The Golden Forge 20% stronger with Divine, Human, Knight, Rouge, Mech Classes. 15% damage increase from members of the Bright Empire.

Immortals, Bosses and rainbow Dragons would receive no Alliance bonuses.

2

Never gonna happen, dead on arrival

3 Likes
3

You’re asking for a huge change when they already messed up alliances and they ended up unbalanced. Doubt they’ll bother trying to fix them now.
Besides, most people fall into 2 groups - 1) I want to be on the winning team 2) that one has a flag I like, I’ll be on that team. Neither one wants to be forced onto a certain alliance because it’s currently got the least people. And neither one wants to be forced onto a certain alliance that they don’t like the look of.
It was already pointed out that they should have given them all similar designs and randomly assigned people. Otherwise people will have preferences and go there, making them uneven. Some are obviously cooler than others.

4 Likes
4

Well, its a bit more then “just want to be on the winning team”, when the always winning team gets showered in precious goldmarks 5 days a week like clockwork. And with those precious goldmarks we can buy Dragonite [in case of egg-dragon hunt] or the infamous random Books of Deeds [to level up our kingdoms]. Both things we kinda need for improvement on the F2P front.

Fighting for goldmarks in the weekly PvP brackets (reaching rank1-3) is often hit and miss, depending how many bot-users might linger around. Winning GW for daily goldmarks, is depending on the work the entire guild puts into it. So that leaves an awful lot of people with only the weekly Alliance PvP win income on precious goldmarks. While I would love to see the PvP system work “better” and being in one of the loser alliances not being a punishment, as long as the goldmarks have such a huge benefit, a “Alliance rework” would have to make sure that the cards are better mixed here and every Alliance would have “equal” chances on goldmarks. Or else a lot of people would get rightfully pissed, if they would be forced into a new alliance which only might get 2 days worth of goldmarks each week.

3 Likes
5

Out of everything in GoW, over any bug or half-baked feature, PvP Alliances are easily the biggest failure in my mind. I simply don’t understand how the Alliances we got were allowed to happen. The inevitability of players forming one Alliance to rule them all was brought up early in the Beta. Here we are years later and the Dark Order has NOT ONCE lost a single war (to my knowledge).

Alliances as they stand serve no purpose except to reward players who notice which Alliance wins every time and choose to join it.

I like the idea of limiting Alliance selection to the few with the least players, though I absolutely would not want stat advantages per Alliance. If Alliance-based stat advantages existed and players COULD chose any Alliance, they would mass together to boost the primary meta troops. If stat advantages existed and players COULD NOT choose a specific Alliance, then people would be randomly assigned to have advantages or disadvantages depending on the current meta.

2 Likes
6

The only reason I play pvp is for gold marks for books. Take that away and there is 0 incentive to play

10 Likes
7

Well, they did address this issue. They nerfed the alliance rewards from a fixed payout for winning to a payout scaled down by alliance size. So I guess from their point of view everything is perfectly fine, they removed any benefit the community could get for collaborating, whether the gameplay makes sense wasn’t ever on the table.

Fun implementation fact, weekly voting is just visual fluff, the server picks the weekly restrictions at random.

1 Like
8

It annoys me so much. A lot of dev and test effort went into building Alliances, and it was all basically wasted effort because no thought was given to the human factor: the player base is very good at maximizing rewards, and the very clear maximal strategy here was for everyone to pile into one super-majority alliance.

6 Likes