Dirty little trick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macduff79

If their goal is to get you to spend more gems, then why would they keep this a secret? They are open about wanting you to spend gems, so why not advertise this advantage if it were true?

---

They'd keep it a secret because if the boosters are getting more abandoned looks, the non-boosters would be getting less. I'm guessing there would be an uproar from the non-boosters. This is one of the reasons there has been such a dramatic decrease in loot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNA

Seems pretty unlikely that SC could prioritize nice loot bases after you booste

---

Seriously? You don't think there is anyway they could possibly program it to increase the number of inactive looks you get? They obviously have a system that removes inactives from the que or at least puts them to the back, how hard would it be to prioritize inactive towns for boosters.

Again, just try it. Count the number of inactives as a percentage of looks boosted vs unboosted. This is an objective finding......

Thats because supercell is actually the illuminati!They are also said to have had a hand in 9/11:rolleyes:......Honestly bro there is no truth to your conspiracy!I would say a vast majority of players arent gemmers,why would they put the majority of their player base at a disadvantage?it makes no sense at all,using your logic why not give the gemmers wose loot so they would have to buy it?they can afford it right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elph

Seriously? You don't think there is anyway they could possibly program it to increase the number of inactive looks you get? They obviously have a system that removes inactives from the que or at least puts them to the back, how hard would it be to prioritize inactive towns for boosters.

Again, just try it. Count the number of inactives as a percentage of looks boosted vs unboosted. This is an objective finding......

---

Do you know what objective means? How about sample size, or statistical significance?

I have noticed this... At the one gem boost Christmas special, my clan blew up, everyone talking about how they're coming upon a bunch of inactive bases.. Very, good observation my friend.

Yes because spending gems on baracks opens a secret door to narnia and then if you buy more gems the ultimate door unlocks and you get the rare charmander water troop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete82

Do you know what objective means? How about sample size, or statistical significance?

---

Agreed no one can make large general assumptions based on their observations alone,even as you said if you were to make a poll it would have to be statistically and scientifically valid with no bias and a large enough sample size for it to be relevant.I think some people underestimate the difficulty of getting true statistics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smalls

Can you tell us what you mean by "plenty"? That's a very general statement. If you farm a lot of course you will find "plenty" of these but the fact remains that you find nowhere near the amount that you did all of 2013. Everyone knows supercell did this on purpose to slow down the progress of the game in hopes selling more gems and lengthening its life span.

After 2 months of constant complaints supercell has said absolutely nothing on this issue. So we all just have to face the fact that they want less loot in the game. So we all have to make a decision on whether to keep playing or quit.

I for for one just plan on keeping playing but not buying any more gems.

---

Pleanty in terms of enough to have helped me fill my gold storages twice in ten days. So yes, in my comment, "I" have found pleanty.

Considering that you are speaking for 'everyone' in regards to SC's intended direction with the game, please clarify why they would contradict themselves by purposely limiting loot with the hopes of lengthening the games lifespan, yet in doing so, force us 'all' to make a decision on whether to keep playing or quit.

Although it sounds far fetched, lets not completely dismiss it. Never forget the time bug that has been proven.

These guys can do stuff like this and there are no laws against it. Personally I would consider doing stuff like this if I was working for SC, because it sounds like a money spinner to me. All that aside though, it's very hard to prove what your saying OP, so I wouldn't have gone ahead and created a thread on it myself.

This is an utter crock.