In what way is it false? Players have defeated 12k% in Guild Battlegrounds, and that's a number that's impossible to achieve in our own armies
Because having Rogues targeted first in a PvP scenario means you'd have to reach 12,000% boost to have a chance against current Age which is a much easier opponent than higher Age would be, and that's an impossible number to achieve in our own cities
https://prnt.sc/qjefmh
12k% against specific cherry picked defending armies or using above-era troops. A player chosen defending army wouldn't need to get that high to pose a potential problem. Though at the time player defense-levels were so very low anyways in general so no they wouldn't present a challenge. Even allowing people to use the nullified rogues and still think they were working well
While not being rogue centric because of different AI (incidentally still stupid AI, but different-stupid) is a nice change of pace, the "No AO/Kraken/Virgo/etc" rules they started tacking onto various types of combat I'm really not a fan of. It's awfully arbitrary to still use some bonuses (like boost) from the main city, but exclude others. Kraken and Virgo were niche pieces anyways - restricting them from places you *might* actually want to use them effectively makes them trash.
And there was so many fundamental problems with PvP arena that it was a bad joke anyways, and balance in it hardly mattered. I mean top players just sit around beating up on fixed "bot" armies anyways. And as you can't lose points more than 5 times a day (again a player request, but a really stupid one to acquiesce to), there's no reason to care about your defending army and *if* you viewed it as a competition it just turns into "who spends the most diamonds on extra attempts for hard fights?" Incidentally it turns out as we started to get high defenses for GE, it actually *harms* you in PvP arena by lowering the points for your offensive victories - simply brilliant. It also does a poor job of instilling a sense of competition for anything other than 1st because the prizes barely change until the top 3. Oh you're now top 50? Have a small amount of medals and 20% chances for 20 extra diamonds and 10 extra goods than if you were *500th*.
It was a half-baked feature that got sent back to the drawing board, came back barely changed and still deeply flawed, and pushed to release regardless. I expect QI to follow its example (well perhaps without the back to the drawing board part - as they've learned that doesn't necessarily help
).