how supercell could boost the supercell economy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLadyAnne

I see this suggested a lot. But what I don't know is if this is a reasonable suggestion. Does Supercell currently "hold back/limit" the amount of inactive bases? Is there any proof? I have no idea which is why I ask.

Also if they do limit the amount of inactive bases in match making, I'm curious as to what defines an inactive base? I'd guess it would be based on how long it's been since a player logged on. But how how many hours does it take for someone to be inactive?

---

Anne, others here have said that either the SuperCell reps or mods have admitted that inactives are either pulled from matchmaking or pushed to later in the queue, but I haven't found that post myself. Several people on the forums have noticed that when they go inactive (usually with a second account) and come back on a week or two later, their log only shows attacks during the first couple of days. At this point, both of these points are circumstantial evidence, but hopefully someone else here has more concrete information (e.g., link to the rep/mod post).

Based on the reports of people who have gone inactive, SC's definition seems to be based on how long since the last log-in, and it's on the order of a few days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tankgirl

Anne, others here have said that either the SuperCell reps or mods have admitted that inactives are either pulled from matchmaking or pushed to later in the queue, but I haven't found that post myself. Several people on the forums have noticed that when they go inactive (usually with a second account) and come back on a week or two later, their log only shows attacks during the first couple of days. At this point, both of these points are circumstantial evidence, but hopefully someone else here has more concrete information (e.g., link to the rep/mod post).

Based on the reports of people who have gone inactive, SC's definition seems to be based on how long since the last log-in, and it's on the order of a few days.

---

Very very interesting. Thanks for the info even if it isn't "concrete" lol

wow i didn't realize that they took in-actives out. that's god damn frustrating

I dont really like the idea of forcing players to upgrade a specific building. Achievments or rewards for upgrading collectors would be a better solution imo.

You think SuperCell would increase the loot? That's the funniest thin I've seen all day :p
Not being mean, just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teaas

ok, so first off... loads of people are complaining about how there is no loot, and everyone is just searching forever... well.. this will result in people quitting, therefore less gems to be bought therefore less money for supercell.... so, supercell could do both themselves a favor and us. How?

1. Make it so that they have to max out their collectors before upgrading their town hall.
2. Make a level 12 mine/pump, or just more of them

I think these would be very effective, especially no.1, however both together would make a good combination.

What are your opinions?

---

This thread is 5 months old. And its should be locked and die. Forcing the players to play a certain way will wreck the game. Another collector level would provide too much loot, making the game to easy.

Mods lock the thread please :3