Well t he logic is pretty silly. You don't get loot so you don't let the other guys trying harder not get get loot.
In real life its like a part time worker complaining that a full time worker is being paid more and he too should work part time.
Printable View
Well t he logic is pretty silly. You don't get loot so you don't let the other guys trying harder not get get loot.
In real life its like a part time worker complaining that a full time worker is being paid more and he too should work part time.
I don't really understand what OP's problem is.
Is he saying that there is no loot because the super active players are taking it all?
If so, I'm not sure if this is a valid conclusion. It's undeniable that more active players will tend to have more loot, but there are some players out there with loads of wins but have yet to get their gold grab achievement.
Until the issue is stated better, there isn't much point to debating the solution.
One point to note though, 1,000 wins per season in G2 would bring 8.4m of gold and elixir into the game.
I don't see why people are getting so mad over this imo this is great idea that shouldn't affect anyone or barely anyone that atleast plays fair. Last season there was a chinese player in gold1 or 2 can't remember that had 1600 wins, all 4 of his barracks wereboosted constantly with lv6 giants and such, he had a 1,5b~ gg and was winning 200 attacks a day.. how? who knows
This will never work, the players with high attack figures are the ones that are boosting there barracks and buying gems to do this, your basically asking SC to cut there income.
Also players need to raid more than they lose, if there limited to certain amount of attacks a day they may not achieve this and with the limitation people may get bored of waiting for the next time they can raid, so they move on to another game that doesn't have limitations.
Why not make troops training time longer. Makes as much sense as limiting the number of attacks you can do. Just so people know, I am being sarcastic.
Why do people keep argue about the the limit of people? It's NOT about one, or a few season. It's about the whole community. One person can do 2000 or 20000 in one season, it doens't mean he can always do that. The big number matter. For example, if the data of attack of the whole community spread out like this
1, 10, 20,100, 200, 101, 102, 105, 200, 200, 1000, 1000, 1000, 3000
The good limit number would not be 200 or 800, the good limit would be mostly around 1300. 1000 is outliner and should not be consider in it. With the limit of 1300, we would be confident that 95-99% of the number of attack per season is way below limit. That's the whole point. What one individual or a few individual can do in one season doesn't matter. As long as the range cover > 95% of the community, even as extreme as 98 99% of the community, it work.
Come back to the speed limit example. Most people drive around 100km/h. If the Gov decide to set a speed limit of 200km/h to prevent people who drive more than 200km/h, would you or the community care? The one who can actually drive 200k/h would care, but they are in the 1%, and they probably only do it one a twice the whole time they driving.
A ceiling number absolutely is not a stupid idea. Set it low would be stupid, but if it's cover 95% of the number of attack per season of ALL PEOPLE, it's fine.
number of attack per season of ALL PEOPLE example: 10 people doing 10 season, then the number would be 100. And if the limit is greater than 99 out of 100, it should be acceptable.
In other words, it would only affect people who are winning raids EVERY 30-45 seconds NON-STOP 24/7 WITHOUT STOPPING TO SLEEP OR DO ANYTHING ELSE!
I don't see why people can't understand this....
So it will affect no one, because no one is doing that.
Just so you know, 45 seconds per attack continuously without stopping for 1 season is 26,880 attacks.
The current record is 25,500 attacks.
So what's the point of implementing something that affects nobody?