It would be improved if players were stopped from deliberately dropping influence (dismissing troops) to get easier opponents, only to train them all each week. This to me is cheating the game. Also smaller clans may have more chance if a level 40 from anywhere couldn't wipe you out of your siege with 1 hit. They should limit siege hitting to opponents only. Although more often than not we're hitting checkpoint 15 in first day to be annihilated on siege points by 1 l40 as our opponent. How can we console our players each week?

0

0

Thank you for your detailed feedback, X Hawkstorm X, it has been forwarded to the developers for the further consideration👍

Feel free to share all your ideas and suggestions with me🤗

All of this highlights the real problem with this game. With recent developments big players are not only untouchable to other players but to whole clans. 

For me there is only 1 solution to improve game play for all. Kingdoms should be split into different groups and massive clans and players should be limited to their group and other players would be in a different group and neither would ever meet.

Jot is the worst example of how bad this game has got. As a small player I went there a few weeks ago and lost 80% of all my troops through being attacked once. It's virtually game over for me. How do I learn or experience new things in the game when the odds are stacked so massively against me?

Blackadder.  Your notion that losing most of your troops is game over for you is a mistake.  It is a popular misconception. 

Your buildings, knowledge, hero, shaman/s, hero/shaman skills and equipment are all undamaged.  Those are the things that you have spent time and effort to develop.  Of course it is unpleasant to be zeroed but all that is lost is troops and rss, both readily replaceable.  Within a very few days you are back to where you were.

You are right that the game divides between those who come to the site to shop and those who play Vikings:War of Clans.  But the core element of the game is the shield (together with the very limited damage sustained when it slips) and that makes it perfectly possible to ignore the shoppers.

I also agree with you that Jot is not a place that a player is likely to visit much, not so much because of the risk of being zeroed as experience teaches you to keep that risk very low, but because there is nothing to do there.

plarium have been moving in the direction you suggest by setting high influence limits to various aspects of the game - such as Helheim.  Perhaps they will do more to segregate the players and the shoppers but, for me, it need not be a priority.  Finding targets suitable for the level of power that you have been able to develop is the main skill of all games of this type.  The very wide range of towns and clans on offer in this game is an attraction rather than a disadvantage.

There is the problem with a big player joining after cvc matchup so that they can win the stronghold seige catagories ... this just happened to us ... huge player joins after matchup so they get the stronghold seige catagories ... our clan 634B theirs NOW 1.491T 

The big player does not get points for certain things but will get points for the clan or keep us from getting points from stronghold seige so the clan win then 3 catagories to 4 catagories (depending if we do a stronghold seige also).  I think they are doing this so the clan wins cvc AND the big guy gets lots of soul shards without losing much troops.

A late joining high influence person does not score points for the clan in CvC but I agree that they are likely to make a significant indirect contribution.  They can help with the precious dust required; they can fend off any who might otherwise intervene; by reason of their troops participating Jotunn marches may be defeated when the clan would otherwise struggle to achieve such defeats - thus 80% of each Jotunn march is killed and that will surely increase the kills of the participants whose points do count; and higher level Jotunn troops are likely to be killed.  My clan kills tier IV to tier VI Jotunn troops but unaided does not as yet kill any tier VII.  With help we would do so and that would make a big difference.

I suspect that experience might teach ways further to skew the points result.  For example if the late joining high influence person contributed tier VI troops to the defence while the point scoring reinforcements were tier VII then that would certainly save a lot of the point scoring participants troops but, I suspect, would also raise the proportion of kills attributed to the point scoring participants.

In the, sadly unlikely, event that the developers were inclined to pay some attention to this exploit a simple remedy that suggests itself is to provide that those who join clans after an hour or so before CvC, Jot or Helheim events are announced are suspended from play until the result of the events are published.  No doubt there are other, equally simple, remedies available.

Rowena, Scottpuddy: I am in a small clan and we are often put against a one or two person clan that has twice our combined influence, but one thing a one person clan can't do is play non stop 24hrs /day - I  often farm without domain shields during cvc while our oponent is offline at work or asleep. I farm small and since no one else gets points for hitting my troops my troops are seldom attacked. And if I do get attacked I automatically win the defence category, even if I lose more troops than he does. Or if he holds a sh siege and I attack it I automatically win attack category, even if I only kill a couple of his scouts and lose most of my attack troops. Our problem is that  if he does have a sh siege then his stronger troops get many more points than we possibly can and we lose.  (And he usually has the resources to train many more high level troops).

Blazebo: Wouldn't an alliance with a clan with big players have the same affect as a big player joining late. (Or is the influence of an alliance clan included in the match up?).

Those are good questions, pipkin, and I hope might attract an answer from the forum admin - although their training does not seem to provide them with much, or any, knowledge about game mechanics and they seem not to be allowed to make internal inquiry to find out the answer to such matters.

My clan allied with a larger clan and our CvC draws have stayed the same so I suspect the answer to your second question is that an ally's influence is not counted.

As far as I can see a high influence ally's co-operation in a siege would have the same effect as that of a high influence late joiner.  We have not, as yet, sought the co-operation of our ally in a siege so I do not know from experience what is possible nor how it plays out.  For myself I would regard any advantage gained from such co-operation as legitimate - after all it is open to all clans to form alliances.  Wider opportunities for co-operative clan play seem to me a good thing in the game rather than the reverse.  Clearly there is scope for abuse but that is true of many aspects of gameplay.

ty