With heroes getting stronger, boosted HP, devastating etc, I do hope SG actually look into increasing the time length required especially during Rush War/Tourney.
Have faced say;
MN-Ludwig-Alfrike-Other-Heimdall
Alberich-Ludwig-Alfrike-Prof Lindenbrock-other
Or any other above combination with Proc and Overheal.
It’s another topic whether they can be defeated (yes they can), but often with Rush war; MN/Alberich or coupled with Ludwig making Proc way too often and eats alot of time to take them down.
I lost due to time 3 times this week tourney not because my heroes died, but because I simply ran out of time, Ludwig making MN scream more than I can ever do, MN kept reviving and Alfrike kept firing.
RNG aside which I totally get it (and I’ve learnt how to deal with it actually), time is often the determining factor and in rush case is totally unfair given the above circumstances.
I disagree with a time limit increase for tournaments. If the match goes long the tiebreaker kicks in which makes ending the battle easier regardless of team. To me timing out on raid is the user’s fault. Or I could consider playing more quickly to be a skill.
As for war it’s different since there is no tiebreaker. I’m indifferent but lean against it. Again, if you take the full time knowing there is a time limit then that’s on you. It’s equally fair to all players since everyone is affected (yes certain heroes lead to this more than others). But I’m also okay with people not playing hour long war battles without giving up
Swipe all you want, MN kept reviving with Ludwig mana and VF boost. I’m no slowpoke if that’s what you’re implying repeatedly.
At least make it slightly longer to even it.
Well, as you mentioned you think it’s people’s fault, there’s nothing I can say.
If you’re playing quickly and not winning, what will more time do? Unless you think giving yourself more time to analyze is the weakness here (it certainly is mine when I know I’ll be in for a long battle).
I’d be more for the tiebreaker popping up more quickly or popping up in war so we do get an outcome rather than time out.
I think many players would like a longer time, but I’m not one of them.
Tiebreaker proposal then. There’s no need to blame other people style to show superiority.
I think playing quickly is a skill. There’s also a skill in playing slowly and doing more analysis before you make a move.
I don’t claim to have both of those skills.
I don’t think my post/proposal shouts inequality, just being tactful and trying to add some value. I don’t even blame RNG, nor starting boards, nor game meta etc like the majority of forum post with exclamation mark. With response like this, it’s no wonder the forum recently becoming more toxic.
1 Like
I’m sorry if I offended you. That wasn’t my intention.
I don’t agree with adding more time to battles. I believe there is a skill to managing time.
If the problem is the defense is too strong defensively then I don’t see more time as the solution. I thought we both agree the tiebreaker increasing damage works as a potential solution.
