Raiding for 4* mats

Why not have an all-in riskier raid option to spice things up.

Since people like to complain about lack of ascension mats.

Those who are willing will enter their hat into the ring at the watchtower.

Cost of entry is a SINGLE x 4* or 3* ascension mat that will only be refunded if you win the raid match. And perhaps a minimal (?) gem payment.

(Is this any different to paying 100 gems for the now-discussed raid challenge or is this more acceptable @Brobb)

This special raid option is only available once every two months per player.

(This is important from SGs point of view, otherwise it would be too easy for players to get mats)

Browse opponents and search/filter for ascension mats they have.

Two players must agree to the match, as they want what the other is offering.

A raid battle or match begins. Player A raids first. Player B raids next. Whoever wins or defends (or one of each) two raids in a row wins. Whoever wins takes the other person’s mats and their mat is refunded.

The loser has an option to revenge two months later but the opponent may put a different mat on the table.

Revenge will have a new meaning.

Perhaps this is an old idea? Or superceded by the raid challenge.

@zephyr1 @Rigs @Kerridoc

Interesring for sure. I kinda like it. Now you do you roll your opponent or hand pick them? Alt accounts would be my biggest concern with this

1 Like

This could be great fun. I like that it’s a longer form, kind of like a tennis match.

Probably needs to require a 3*-3* match or a 4*-4*.

If you allow players to seek each other out, this is open to abuse. If i can fight my alt, i can throw the match and transfer a 4* mat to my main. If instead i put up a dart and tell the system, “i will do battle for a telescope” then i might find anyone looking for the reverse trade.

But then there’s the problem of tiers. Top players with powerful teams could suck yet more mats to themselves. But a whale could also cup-drop into platinum then offer a 4* raid, lilely demolishing the gullible platinum counterpart.

1 Like

If both players have to agree for the match to happen then couldnt the concern in the last part of your post be relieved or at least minimally concerning?

1 Like

Yes, but then you’re opening the door for people to duel their alt to transfer mats between accounts.

1 Like

If the opponents are rolled similar to the regular raid system?

1 Like

And i keep refusing each offered match until my alt comes up?

2 Likes

Limit the number of rerolls?

1 Like

With a full two-month timer until you can try again? Might work.

2 Likes

Another thing is idk about most but if matching system uses same or similar raid match system(i would rather the matchups use “war power” in this scenario though) then that could limit the factor of alts as well. I know my main hangs much higher than my alta but i’ve also retired my alts for the most part so that limits my current relativity to your scenario

2 Likes

Hmm I’m trying to think about the alt problem.

Would the risk be mitigated if you can only raid someone online and in the same alliance as you

Or does that create a whale elite problem

Doesnt help. I already play on two devices, and in the hypothetical worst-case, we have a player in an alliance with a bunch of alts all farming the rare quests.

3 Likes

Its like some other postes in here, live pvp. But the extra bet sounds like it would make a fun twist.

It could be a new actual live PVP mode, but @FrenziedEye seemed to be suggesting a modified “best out of…” series using the existing Raid system, where the winner was determined by multiple consecutive wins:


That approach wouldn’t require as much new design/programming, nor would it need to be real-time.

1 Like

this thread and 2 others is kinda the same thing in the end so its not a new thing.

Think there more about it

I don’t see the main point of this idea being about the live/real-time PVP though, do you?

The central point seemed to be the premise of wagering a 4* mat.

It’s actually not clear to me that this would be real-time at all.

1 Like

It didn’t occur to me to make it live pvp but sure, why not

Main thing is betting a 4* mat as @zephyr1 said

Still thinking about the alt account obstacle…

1 Like

I think the only way to keep this fair would be the players choose their battle team without seeing the opponents defense (there would be a limiter, where you need to be in a power range of 900-1100, 3800-4200, etc). But if you are 2nd to go you will see what they attacked you with (little insight into their team n troops) Then, 3rd round that opponent sees what you revenged with.

2 Likes

I really like this idea actually, a blind draw. No stacking :joy:

2 Likes

I think the only way to minimise the risk of alt account exploitation is to have no rerolls or to have only 1 reroll as @Rigs said . This won’t guarantee a non alt account opponent but it would make it likely.

A blind draw is probably better as @poopcorn said

You only select the ascension mat you are after and you get randomly assigned to someone with that ascension mat

I’d argue that the ‘once every two months’ dimension to this raid system makes the risk of exploitation even smaller.

@Kerridoc @Rigs

1 Like

Cookie Settings