sorry to disappoint. although not that sorry :D because unlike the numerous amounts of threads on DE thieves, mine isn't exactly specific to lightning striking. I just put it in there because i could.Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonTheEpic
Printable View
sorry to disappoint. although not that sorry :D because unlike the numerous amounts of threads on DE thieves, mine isn't exactly specific to lightning striking. I just put it in there because i could.Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonTheEpic
Having the shields only work against new attacks & not against revenge attacks would change the game but also improve the flow of resources around the game as people will no longer be able to attack multiple players then hide behind the shield they get from the first attack.
If a shield was needed against both new attacks & revenge attacks they could sell them for gems as a way to raise more money.
i raised this in another thread & the general reply was to stop whinging & just attack other people. I guess those responses were from those that like to hide behind their shields. If a player is confident in their ability to defend what they have then there should be no need for them to need the shield & they can attack as much as they want with impunity. As it stands now the concept of revenge in this game is laughably non existant & one could argue the button is falsely raising a players hopes.
As to the poll being run on this thread, given the number of people that have failed to understand anything that was written after the original title I don't hold any hopes that the result will be anything other than a donkey vote.
I like the concept of that idea, although there are flaws in it to the extent it may unbalance the economic aspects. example being, a player has just boosted for 2 hours battling non stop and at the end of that imagine the backlash of everyone revenging that player. not to mention everyone would just revenge everyone rather than searching, spending gold looking for a decent base to attack, only to then get revenged from that player. i think these are the issues SC are trying to avoid. however my idea resides specifically in the fact that, the only way you will get revenge on the 1,2,3 players remains on the basis that you are online. and in my opinion that is the key to make this not blow out of proportion. because if you are not online, those players that you have tagged get attacked and get another shield. which is quite fair on their behalf.Quote:
Originally Posted by FairlyBad
True, but spending gold to search for a base to attack removes gold from the in game economy. Also, eventually once you revenged against everyone you'd either need to find others to attack or just sit & wait to be attacked again so you could revenge
Despite my attempts to request an unbiased opinion on the matter. yes the title was controversial, but why are people so quick to judge. It's beyond me i guess its all about being either a Lamb or a Shepperd. It is good to see you are a Shepperd.:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by FairlyBad
Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyRogdawg
you ask for an unbiased opinion, yet deliberately made the title controversial. your whole plan was to gain the support of people who suffer from zapper attacks, that's about as biased as it gets, now it has backfired and are biased against the people who didn't want to read the post cos of the zapper title
unbiased would suggest there is nothing that would lead people to make an assumption, and this post does anything but
With the ... is part of the game -argument you could simply give up developing the game any further. Obviously everything that is in the game atm is part of the game. The fact that something is now a part of the game cannot be used against ideas for improving the game. So the people who are defending zapping should be saying "I like it the way it is", preferably followed by a valid and justified argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by XxDjPewdsxX
Back in the early days it was part of the game that wall breakers went for studs in the wall. It was part of the game that defending cc troops were trapped inside own walls. It was part of the game that heroes could be lured out to the corner of the base to be slaughtered. It was part of the game that giant bombs did the same damage to hogs as all the other troops. It's part of the game that de can be zapped...
It's part of the game is not a valid argument.
I didn't deliberately make it so, I made this thread for a solution to what the title was saying. That is why I requested an unbiased opinion on the revenge idea because i knew people would just vote on what they assumed to be another zapper post. at the end of the day, the title speaks for itself, its really just asking the question and the thread is providing a solution to that question.:facepalm: in hind sight, i probably would not have used that title, although at the time I was new to the forums and wasn't aware of the hate towards that issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ectar
What a *****. 5 or 6 raids. I work so hard to get de and some one comes and takes 1k from my base with lightning spells. Whats the point of all the defences then. If u want my fe be a man and come with an army and try and take it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyRogdawg