Limit number of attack per season

Back to my first reply to your thread, yes I agree that something needs to be done to stop the ♥♥♥♥♥ that people are using to keep them online, build troops and raid for them, (Yes i mentioned that thing we can't talk about, hopefully this nonsensical thread will be closed) but limiting the amount of raids someone can do is not, in my opinion right or wrong, the way to go about it. If someone can che@t the system then someone can che@t the che@t. Supercell should clamp down on this but limiting the amount of raids someone can do could cost Supercell money through people gemming troops, spells, heroes and other things.

round and round and round we go.
no solution and no-one knows.
a limit wont end the frustration you have.
and the che@ters are having a really good laugh.

let it gooooo.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evadykaens

You see it as opposing, but i see it as "no need for it", it's quite different.

The OP had been edited like a million times, i saw his suggestion of 1200 attacks per season limit, then he said to set the limit in a way that it affects only 5% of players, then suggest that if it only affects 1% of players it should be okay.

Read the OP again, then decide for yourself whether you whole-heartedly agree with his suggestion.

---

1. I edit it many time because many people seem don't understand that the limit won't affect the majority of the players.

2. 1200 is an math example to show people that it's hard number to get to if you farming, even if you sniping TH (for pushing, of course- if you snipe to get number of win you can do much more). It was never a suggestion. My suggestion was set a ceiling. A number that can be a ceiling MUST be the result of the data analysis, which I don't have.

3. If the number cover 90% to 95% of the number of attack per season, it is actually good enough. It's not depend on my opinion, it's science. Basic statistic say that if your confidence lv is at 95 percentile, your estimate is really good. 98 or 99% is just an extreme, to show people that it almost doesn't affect anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paddy1888

Back to my first reply to your thread, yes I agree that something needs to be done to stop the ♥♥♥♥♥ that people are using to keep them online, build troops and raid for them, (Yes i mentioned that thing we can't talk about, hopefully this nonsensical thread will be closed) but limiting the amount of raids someone can do is not, in my opinion right or wrong, the way to go about it. If someone can che@t the system then someone can che@t the che@t. Supercell should clamp down on this but limiting the amount of raids someone can do could cost Supercell money through people gemming troops, spells, heroes and other things.

---

If it's just about they keep their acct onl, I won't go through that trouble. Staying online is... yesterday news. Now they can do much much more :) It's really hard to persuade people when I can't say the real reason behind it, and many people doesn't know it.

And as I mention in many many of my post, and edit on the OP, a ceiling is not bad, as long as it cover 95%-99% of number of attack in one season of everyone. If 10 player play clash of clan and all of them raid 100 times every season for last year, but 1 guy raid 10000 times in one of the seasons, 10k should not be consider in the ceiling. A ceiling of 200 won't bother anyone. See my point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o0oAnnyo0o

If it's just about they keep their acct onl, I won't go through that trouble. Staying online is... yesterday news. Now they can do much much more :) It's really hard to persuade people when I can't say the real reason behind it, and many people doesn't know it.

And as I mention in many many of my post, and edit on the OP, a ceiling is not bad, as long as it cover 95%-99% of number of attack in one season of everyone. If 10 player play clash of clan and all of them raid 100 times every season for last year, but 1 guy raid 10000 times in one of the seasons, 10k should not be consider in the ceiling. A ceiling of 200 won't bother anyone. See my point?

---

If you read all of my post you would notice that I mention more than staying online. I also mention that this thing we can't talk about builds troops and raids too. So yes I do know what you mean and I am still not persuaded this is a good idea. Yes I see your point, but no, I still don't agree this is the solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paddy1888

If you read all of my post you would notice that I mention more than staying online. I also mention that this thing we can't talk about builds troops and raids too. So yes I do know what you mean and I am still not persuaded this is a good idea. Yes I see your point, but no, I still don't agree this is the solution.

---

Sorry, too many people discuss, too many name. I probably missed it. It's good that now we know we talk about the same problem.

Well, so may I ask what do you think the solution is? I know part of the function behind it, and it's undetectable. So how SC could prevent it? And, as I said, I don't think it's the solution, either. It's just a band-aid, which need to be done as last resources. I would rather to see something to be done than nothing as the time bugs.

In addition, why doesn't it work if it doesn't effect any, or only effect very few honest player out there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o0oAnnyo0o

Sorry, too many people discuss, too many name. I probably missed it. It's good that now we know we talk about the same problem.

Well, so may I ask what do you think the solution is? I know part of the function behind it, and it's undetectable. So how SC could prevent it? And, as I said, I don't think it's the solution, either. It's just a band-aid, which need to be done as last resources. I would rather to see something to be done than nothing as the time bugs.

In addition, why doesn't it work if it doesn't effect any, or only effect very few honest player out there?

---

I have discussed all your questions on my previous posts on this thread which you clearly don't read through properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paddy1888

I have discussed all your questions on my previous posts on this thread which you clearly don't read through properly.

---

It's a long thread. Sorry. Do you mind quote yourself? I just skim though all the pages, and I saw that you stated that the limit is not the solution, but I don't see you mention a solution anywhere except for a sarcasm.

Plus, I don't find a post that answer my question, that is if a ceiling which doesn't effect any, or only effect very few honest player out there, why doesn't it works?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o0oAnnyo0o

It's a long thread. Sorry. Do you mind quote yourself? I just skim though all the pages, and I saw that you stated that the limit is not the solution, but I don't see you mention a solution anywhere except for a sarcasm.

Plus, I don't find a post that answer my question, that is if a ceiling which doesn't effect any, or only effect very few honest player out there, why doesn't it works?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paddy1888

Yes, let's stop supercell making money from people gemming instant armies. I do agree the problem you mention that we cant talk about needs addressed, but this is not the solution.

---

My posts on this thread start on page one, yes with a sarcastic comment because i believe this is a nonsensical solution, not sure if troll or not.
I feel if you really cared about finding a solution to this problem you would read, not skim, through your thread. This leads me to believe that you don't want to have a constructive discussion about this problem, only to have people agree with you.
It is not up to me to find a solution, it is Supercell that has to come up with a solution to this problem.
Why do i feel a ceiling is not the answer? It could stop people spending money buying gems to create instant armies etc. which does not make good business sense for Supercell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o0oAnnyo0o

If it's just about they keep their acct onl, I won't go through that trouble. Staying online is... yesterday news. Now they can do much much more :) It's really hard to persuade people when I can't say the real reason behind it, and many people doesn't know it.

---

This is stupid, just say it and let the moderators cut it out. It's making this thread a whole bunch of ? ? ? :confused: where no one gets the point. Might as well close this thread if you don't say. How are you going to convince or have any support on here when nobody understands your point?

You keep hanging this clause over us and you're making a lot of us confused. I'm trying to grasp what you're saying, and I may even know what you're talking about, but I don't see how any of this appies to ♥♥♥♥bunny.