Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

World War Changes: Glory Decay

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • World War Changes: Glory Decay

    In preparation for the upcoming matchmaking changes to World War, we’re introducing a new system that will identify inactive Alliances and decay their Glory. Beginning soon, routine system checks will identify these inactive Alliances and pull their Glory back toward the starting value of 12,000.


    Inactive Alliances are identified as those who have not participated in a World War in the last 15 days and/or those who have fewer than 10 members (from the time the check was initiated).



    More matchmaking improvements will be introduced over time, and layered on top of the Glory decay. Let us know what you think it the comments below!
    Follow Us!
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thebighugegames/
    Twitter: @BigHugeGames

  • #2
    What will be the rate of decay?

    Comment


    • #3
      Glory Back Good system

      When will the attack patch be made?

      Comment


      • #4
        BeerMan - This pull back, or decay, will be relative based on their Glory at the time of the system check.

        The check will look to see:
        • If your Alliance hasn't attacked in the 15 days
        • If your Alliance has less than 10 members
        If both of the above are true the rate is stronger.
        Follow Us!
        Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thebighugegames/
        Twitter: @BigHugeGames

        Comment


        • Rachel
          Rachel commented
          Editing a comment
          Nothing about cheaters or sandbagging

      • #5
        That doesn't answer if you are losing 1000 glory per failed check, or 10% glory per failed check. It basically doesn't answer the question.

        Comment


        • BHG_Muet
          BHG_Muet commented
          Editing a comment
          The decay is not a predefined value. Since the system is aimed at integrity of the Leaderboard, the loss is relative based on your Alliance's Glory. For example, a decayed Alliance that had 13k will lose less than a decayed Alliance with 14k. But, the decayed Alliance that had 14k would still result in a Glory value that is higher than the decayed 13k Alliance.

        • Persia
          Persia commented
          Editing a comment
          He said it’d be relative based on glory, so not the same for each failed check. At least we know it’s a per cent.

      • #6
        Glad to hear more changes to war matchmaking are coming... can you tell us what kind of changes or how soon we can expect them?

        Comment


        • TinSoldier
          TinSoldier commented
          Editing a comment
          We don't have an ETA yet for the next steps in matchmaking. We want to give these changes a chance to take effect first. We'll be sure to announce all future changes both in-game and here on the forums.

        • phil_dee
          phil_dee commented
          Editing a comment
          Why would matchmaking changes and this sort of glory decay be related or connected such that the implementation of one relies upon first observing the other? I thought the game was moving toward an ELO-driven system?

      • #7
        So basically you did nothing you people just don’t get it

        Comment


        • #8
          Sometimes we do a winter and summer break as we do not have enough players ? We have 20.000 glory so will this be reset ? How many times will you perform such routine checks ?

          Comment


          • #9
            I’m glad leaderboard and matchmaking are finally being addressed. Thank you very much Tin, Joe 😎 and crew ! I have a question though. How do you prevent alliances from making 10 dummy accounts (or use old sandbags) and parking them in the alliance while moving active players back and forth between the alliances every 15 days? Do those 10 accounts have to be active and gaining xp? Because I would bet that we will see revolving doors on those inactive alliances to preserve their glory if all they have to be is placeholders. Just sayin’
            Hobbit Zombies is not just another alliance... It's an experience. Don't miss the next zombie apocalypse or the second (pancake) breakfast which usually follows.Now accepting GP and EA players to war with us.

            Comment


            • Manifesto
              Manifesto commented
              Editing a comment
              Good question.

          • #10
            If an Alliance parks 10 or so 'placeholder' accounts, they will still need to go to War within the 15 day window of the check. Otherwise they will still receive some of the Glory decay (relative to their starting value).
            Follow Us!
            Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thebighugegames/
            Twitter: @BigHugeGames

            Comment


            • GailWho
              GailWho commented
              Editing a comment
              So the 10 placeholders all have to be in the last war (or one in the 15 days) before the active warring players move to the other alliance otherwise there will be decay? Do they have to attack? Or could they just be 10 inactive sandbags? Just curious and trying to imagine how alliances will work around it.
              Last edited by GailWho; 12-05-2018, 02:48 PM.

            • TinSoldier
              TinSoldier commented
              Editing a comment
              They'll be 2 separate measures. Even if an Alliance have 10 placeholder bases, they will need to still take them into World War or risk the possibility of Glory decay.

            • GailWho
              GailWho commented
              Editing a comment
              Cool thanks 😊

          • #11
            Originally posted by TinSoldier View Post
            If an Alliance parks 10 or so 'placeholder' accounts, they will still need to go to War within the 15 day window of the check. Otherwise they will still receive some of the Glory decay (relative to their starting value).
            Alliances like Samurai and KA will make the effort to keep their many iterations active, but I think there will still be benefit from this change. Some of the alliances are truly abandoned, and we will see those gradually drop off.

            Comment


            • #12
              Ok this is good stuff but just a minor thing, it does not solve the broken gameplay we have.

              This is what you said Muet:
              previous Wars were too often about “who didn’t 10-star”. Changing the definition of success to a range of stars should create a more interesting dynamic between Alliances

              i can tell you it created a more boring dynamic between alliances. The gap between alliances got bigger. The stronger alliance has a much bigger chance to win. Where before rebalance we could defeat a bit stronger alliance by coalitions donations and trying to beat them with a better time. That is all gone now. Its all pretty logical.

              there is much more wrong with his game but give offence back dude, our alliance only had boring wars since rebalance.

              Comment


              • #13
                Originally posted by BeerMan View Post

                Alliances like Samurai and KA will make the effort to keep their many iterations active, but I think there will still be benefit from this change. Some of the alliances are truly abandoned, and we will see those gradually drop off.
                Doubt it. Nobody gives a crap about glory these days....why should we when Nexon protect Garuda Sakti and Top Killers rather than our investments in the game.

                Comment


                • #14
                  The only improvement I want to see to eliminate sandbagging is restricting the number of attacks to ONE per player per war.
                  Thor the Good

                  Comment


                  • Fords
                    Fords commented
                    Editing a comment
                    That's a really bad idea. One person can't login due to RL issues or has connection issue during attack and war lost.

                  • sileepuppee
                    sileepuppee commented
                    Editing a comment
                    You would have to give a clear definition of what a sand bag is whether it's a certain lvl, hasn't logged in in a certain time, and so on. We have lvl 40's players in war and while we call them our sand bags, they aren't the iron age ones and the actually attack though they can't do much other than go after iron/some classical bases.

                  • Cannibals
                    Cannibals commented
                    Editing a comment
                    I like multiple attacks per player, but only one counts.

                • #15
                  Thankyou for this decay feature. It’s been asked for a long time, and is appreciated seeing it.

                  lets see how it changes the leader boards over next couple of months,
                  Leader of - ORDER 66 0SH

                  DomiNation Gaming Gurus. Perfect communication, perfect teamwork, rocking the top 100 list.

                  Join today, Add "NoVelcro" in the LINE app. I will get you into OUR LINE rooms TO MEET OUR OTHER domiNation gurus and addicts.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X