Then you can't call it War. If people are of the impression that Alliances are entitled to their spots because they spent the most and therefore deserve the top, and no one will catch up to them, then shut War down because that's not a competition. It's a monopoly. People aren't being really measured by their performance. They're taking Squatter's Rights for their spot. We pay the most so we deserve the most? Right. By your logic we should just hand World Series to the highest spender. The spending gives you an advantage, a large one but you can still lose spending the most. The reality is if you do not spend you will have a very hard time, that is true of anything competitive.
Then you can't call it War. If people are of the impression that Alliances are entitled to their spots because they spent the most and therefore deserve the top, and no one will catch up to them, then shut War down because that's not a competition. It's a monopoly. People aren't being really measured by their performance. They're taking Squatter's Rights for their spot. We pay the most so we deserve the most? Right.
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have.
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear No. They weren't getting byes. They were fighting Alliances with strengths in the same range as their own.
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear No. They weren't getting byes. They were fighting Alliances with strengths in the same range as their own. No one cares if they were the same "strength" if they had to span 6 tiers to find the match
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear No. They weren't getting byes. They were fighting Alliances with strengths in the same range as their own. No one cares if they were the same "strength" if they had to span 6 tiers to find the match They didn't just jump ahead. They earned their Tier based on their own Wars. You win, you go up. You lose, you go down. Same as anyone else. The fact that people keep holding on to this archaic view of how the system used to be and should be, but doesn't apply to Seasons, is ridonkeylous to me.
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear No. They weren't getting byes. They were fighting Alliances with strengths in the same range as their own. No one cares if they were the same "strength" if they had to span 6 tiers to find the match They didn't just jump ahead. They earned their Tier based on their own Wars. You win, you go up. You lose, you go down. Same as anyone else. The fact that people keep holding on to this archaic view of how the system used to be and should be, but doesn't apply to Seasons, is ridonkeylous to me. They absolutely jumped ahead by never matching people in their own tier. There are absolutely some ridonkeylous things in this thread and probably 99% of them have been said by you
Just when I thought AW was starting to make sense this happens. What numbers was this matchup based off?
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear If an alliance has a lower war rating than their enemy and win the war that shows that they earned their win and that they were skilled enough to take down the defenders.Why should lower war rating alliances not be matched with higher war rating alliances they earned their points if they lose too bad if they win then good
The whole reason we're here is because people worried about what others have. No we're here bc people were betting byes all the way through the tiers while never facing anyone in their own tier. Please try to keep up dear No. They weren't getting byes. They were fighting Alliances with strengths in the same range as their own. No one cares if they were the same "strength" if they had to span 6 tiers to find the match They didn't just jump ahead. They earned their Tier based on their own Wars. You win, you go up. You lose, you go down. Same as anyone else. The fact that people keep holding on to this archaic view of how the system used to be and should be, but doesn't apply to Seasons, is ridonkeylous to me. They absolutely jumped ahead by never matching people in their own tier. There are absolutely some ridonkeylous things in this thread and probably 99% of them have been said by you They Matched people in their own Tier. People just don't like that lower Alliances had a higher Tier.