Raid Mode “ONLINE issue”


#1

You guys really have to change that Raid Mode.

You can only raid somebody if he/she’s offline for more than 5 mins. Especially in the top 20 it’s a very huge issue everyone has. There are some players who are constantly logged in so you absolutely can’t raid them.
I’ve got more than 4 revenges open against the player who currently is #1 but how can I use them if this person is the whole day logged in. And when I finally could use them, the revenges got expired.
It’s not fair against players who have to work hard and almost don’t have time. Unfortunately I work very much and I travel a lot.

You really have to change something for that “online” thing. At least that you can use your revenges even if the player is online.


#2

Yes definitely! I think revenges should be allowable online or not. OR there could be a limit for how long staying on protects you, like four hours maybe.


#3

What if they make it like kinda speed chess like, with 5 min for the 2 player and after that the tierbreaker kicks in and you maybe get 10-20 see to make a move.

If the enemy is online


#4

It’s quite ridiculous for revenge to expire in the first place… I do however worry about someone staying online for that long :grimacing: Not exactly healthy…


#5

I do agree as well with the topic…if you want to revenge someone, you should be able to do it whether they are online or not…there are people you just can’t get it since they never leave the game…lol.


#6

Would it help if the log in the Outpost were simply increased by a large amount as I assume this is what you mean by revenges expiring?

IIRC this particular design was modeled after Clash of Clans, and while I recall it’s being an issue there (I’m not a highly ranked player here or there FWIW) the revenge log stretched days, whereas mine in this game doesn’t get anywhere close to that.

While this is admittedly something of a first-world problem, it should be addressed in some fashion.


#7

I don’t think that would really help when some stay on for nearly 20 hours or more. That’s a guess I haven’t timed people personally because I can’t stay on that long but signing off for a few is extremely rare. Even with more space in the tower they could still potentially drop off. It’s a bit cowardly to play the win by never giving someone a chance game in my eyes honestly. I think the only way to really solve the problem is to allow a revenge while the person is online or have the online protection time out after they’ve been on for so many hours.


#8

This was discussed among the top players a long time ago but no consensus was reached how it would be handled. I don’t understand why they couldn’t allow attacking online players. @mhalttu had an idea to implement a forced log off for a few minutes per hour. But I don’t like it. Really not nice if you can’t play as much as you want. And still people would have to sit there trying to catch that 5 minutes window where they can attack.

I like to hang in the game. Farming, following chat etc. Wouldn’t be cool in the middle of a discussion to be thrown out just so people could attack you. There has to be a better solution. Also the attack-defense balance isn’t right either. The attacker has a huge benefit. That is why the more you stay online the higher you rank.

Also the cups system isn’t good. You shouldn’t lose more cups from revenge than you gained. The raid pairing system gives a lot of lower cup players. Attacking them is a losing tactic. You get 15 cups for the win and then you get revenged and lose 50. Maybe lower strength players can lose an attack or two, but the ones you lose will take so much cups, it is hard to stand your ground jsut by defense. The team power has very little to do with real winning chances because the game is so strongly tuned to attacker wins. Maybe 5x80 team vs 1x80 the chances go from 95% to win to 90%.

There is something wrong with the reroll system too. When I drop from top 10 it is hard to get right targets. It keeps giving 30-50 rank players with over 200 less cups than me. Same names come again and again, but no top 10 players. Really frustrating. Can’t rise from there fighting lower ranked players because like I said you get 15 cups per win and lose 50 when they revenge you. So drop even lower.

The ranks fluctuate a lot. Beating a certain player can give you 20 or 50 cups, depending on where they stand at the moment. Mostly depending on how long they have been logged off because the more you are off, the more you lose fights and the more you lose cups.

I think the amount of cups you get and lose should be smaller, to make the ranking fluctuate less.


#9

I agree that attacking online players should be allowed. Feels weird not being able to do that :slight_smile:


#10

I agree 100% with opp you should be able to complete your revenges if they are online or not its becoming an absolute joke with some ppl logging on for ridiculously logg hours and then the revenge getts pushed out of your tower it an easy fix and will stop alot of frustration for many top players so please make this simple change to improve the game


#11

The cups system is based on Elo rating, which works well. It’s based on matches, it doesn’t care if it’s a revenge or not. The problem in this game is that the attacker has an advantage (which is a pretty difficult problem to solve, I guess).

Edit: on further thinking, maybe the attacker is not advantaged in general (for the 300K or whatever players). Depending on how smart they are, some attackers feel advantaged and some feel disadvantaged, because the defender’s skill doesn’t play much role.


#12

Many of the people struggling to attack when they are lower down is from not having a large stable of 4-5 stars to choose good attackers. My alt F2P account has drawn the following four stars: 2x Boril, 2x Li Xiu, 2x Little John, Gormek, 2x Rigard, Melendor, Kiril, Cyprian. Winning raids is really hard with that team unless I throw out a cup-tanking defense team (all level 1 guys) and find teams with 2-3 3*s to beat up on. Whereas my son’s account has Caedmon, Grimm, Gormek, Chao, Thoth, Sabina. guess who has an easier time filling raid chest?

Once you get up higher where most people have 1-2 good attackers per color, the attacker has the advantage.

Also, there are a few players near the top who seem to be logged in an inordinate amount of time, beyond what is normal for a single user (i.e. not going offline for 36-40 hours. This is a significant advantage since attackers have the advantage). (no Arien I’m not talking about you). So rather than have to deal with this type of breaking the terms of service (either a phone bot, or bluestacks hack, or sharing the phone with multiple people), simply making it so people can get attacked while online would be so easy. All you need to do is change the cups won/lost message from a pop-up to something you look at in the watchtower (i.e. a red notice flags just like getting a new hero or item and you check the status there). Then I think you’ll see cup ranking reflect team power and player skill, rather than factor in who can stay online the longest.


#13

I didn’t really think this was a huge issue when I posted in this thread originally, but even casually checking some of the leaderboard over the past two days it’s patently stupid.

SG does need to change it somehow, I don’t really understand why the prohibition against online attacking is in this game in the first place; my gameplay thought on that front is that people might be changing teams at the time they are attacked… but really this should be a non-issue, or if it is, just allow us to have 3 additional teams so that swapping 5 around and not touching the standard defense team can be done.

Outside of that my only theory is it’s something awkward in their application infrastructure… and if so, fix that SG.


#14

I’m guessing it’s just because of the trigger page that pops up when you win/lose cups. Easy enough to disable and put under the watchtower.

As for teams, if you’re moving your defense team around, there’s an “apply” button. Defense team doesn’t change from previous until you click apply. Done.


#15

This will have to go away if the trophies begin to matter (and SG mentioned they will, no?). Otherwise we’ll have people keeping the app always open for rewards (always attack, never get attacked) and completely dicking over those that have to work and turn the game off.


#16

What about new players? Will they become discouraged if they are continually bombed back to the Stone Age before they have a decent team to compete for those cups?


#17

As their team grows, their cups will go up. Not sure what the problem is. I’m also totally in favor of limiting who can attack whom at the bottom end of things.

But in general, a ranking system based on ELO designed to rank COMPETITIVE players, should be structured to be balanced at the top, not the bottom. It shouldn’t be unfair at the bottom, but if you’re at all competitive, you’ll move up out of that as your team grows. Competitive rankings should be designed for competitive players, not casual players.


#18

Why would it matter for pretty much any of them? They aren’t staying on continually, and there are so many targets down there that the odds of their being pulled repeatedly are virtually nil.

I don’t see how allowing online people to be attacked changes the game for new players at all? They aren’t staying online 24x7 to keep their cups when they are at 200 trophies.


#19

In favor of making a cap hour limiter to online people.
Don’t know why we can’t revenge at all online people for now, but i guess there must be some kind of reason.
But it’s not fair that some people never get revenged.

So allow revenge on people that are online many hours seems for me the better solution.
Bof… Every 4 hours?


#20

I was thinking of folk who drop cups and target all and sundry: if we could be attacked at any time, then newbies could be attacked continually (yes assumption), and I know if I just started a game and got utterly slaughtered all the time, that isn’t “fun”.

I’m just thinking aloud.


I’m perfectly happy with older players being subjected to attacks. :grin: