Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 138

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Alternatie Idea for Legend League 8 attacks

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by dmoore1998 View Post
    I'm not speaking on the variable suggestion because it has been discussed ad nauseam in other locations (specifically the thread which announced OBS as a sneak peak if you're interested).

    I thought I was being rather nice to comment on your stance, given that you could have found plenty of discussion and rebuttal of your idea had you taken a moment to search the forum for this very topic that's been discussed for a week rather than starting another thread on a topic already discussed in multiple other places.
    If you're not speaking on the topic at hand, why comment? Also, I didn't start the thread, just pointing out that this current argument against the OPs idea is weak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tosti111 View Post
    Well, lets take it to a logical extreme then. How about we have a limit of 1000 a day? Would skill even matter at that point any longer? it would be all about the account sharers yet again wouldnt it? You may not like the limit of 8, thats fair. You may want it higher or lower, thats fair. You want it to be variable for everyone? no longer a level playing field.
    What does a 1000 attacks/defenses per day actually do? Your % net trophies should be identical in a theoretical world so the best attackers who invest more time in actually playing the game rise to the top?

    Sorry, that still fits my definition of fair. All games, including this one, should be rewarding players given their position on a dual spectrum of time played and general skill at the game. Once again I'd like to point out that I think SC's issue wasn't with players playing for hours, it was that they weren't really playing. Hence the guard update. (I could've also missed a larger statement on how SC interprets top level play & what they are looking to reward, if anyone remembers such a statement, just let me know)

    I agree there are limits, but I don't think a variable option actually destroys those limits to any degree. I'm confused on your jump from "Some people get to attack and defend 16/day" to "Inherently unfair to me, who opted out of playing for that extra 24 minutes today".
    | Clan: BEST IN 'BOAG | Rank: Co-Leader | Current League: Legends |
    | Level: 172 | Townhall 12 | King: 53 | Queen: 60 | Warden: 22 |
    | Gold Grab: 2.00B | Elixir Escapade: 2.00B | Heroic Heist: 13.10m | Friends in Need 109.01k |


  2. #22
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,708
    Quote Originally Posted by ProjectThirteen View Post
    If you're not speaking on the topic at hand, why comment? Also, I didn't start the thread, just pointing out that this current argument against the OPs idea is weak.
    So you're asking why I responded specifically to a very specific statement you made and highlighted the specific statement so that it would be clear what I was responding to? I was only supposed to respond to other very specific statements you made, and not the one that was the most obviously flawed?

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by JessVN View Post
    The update came out a few hours ago and i am already out of attacks today. and just short of being able to start 2 upgrades... so i am twiddling my thumbs and thinking...
    1) How many trophies do you have? 5200 is far different that 5700 which is far different than 6200.
    2) How many attacks were you making while searching the clouds? Figure on average per day and how long you'd usually spend searching for those bases.

    For me at 5500 trophies yesterday I got lucky and found 7 bases. It took me most of my work day to find those bases (minus time spent in meetings). So looking at 7ish hours in the clouds. Most days for me I got less attacks than that. So the 8 attacks per day is an improvement and I get to take them when I want to/have time rather than hoping I find a base in x minutes. There's someone higher up in trophies than I in my clan and they were lucky to get 4 bases to attack even while searching all day. So this update effectively doubles their playing time while also reducing the amount of time needed in the game.

  4. #24
    Forum Veteran michelms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    1,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix1027 View Post
    Because then legends still becomes about who has the most time to stay online. Supercell is moving legends away from a viable place to farm and instead making it a competition for the most elite players for a spot on the leaderboards. It's really not possible to have both.
    Hey! I'm farming there !! 😂

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by dmoore1998 View Post
    So you're asking why I responded specifically to a very specific statement you made and highlighted the specific statement so that it would be clear what I was responding to? I was only supposed to respond to other very specific statements you made, and not the one that was the most obviously flawed?
    You ripped a statement out of context. Your statement, in the grand scheme of the conversation, seems unnecessary and doesn't quite add anything on its own. So yes, I expected more than that.

    Obviously 24 minutes/day is a totally reasonable expectation for players in the top end of the game. We're having a larger conversation about the definition of a level playing field and what qualifies as equal opportunity. Maybe you missed it.
    | Clan: BEST IN 'BOAG | Rank: Co-Leader | Current League: Legends |
    | Level: 172 | Townhall 12 | King: 53 | Queen: 60 | Warden: 22 |
    | Gold Grab: 2.00B | Elixir Escapade: 2.00B | Heroic Heist: 13.10m | Friends in Need 109.01k |


  6.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #26
    Quote Originally Posted by ProjectThirteen View Post
    Don't confuse the goal of the update. The goal was to eliminate clouds, not level any kind of playing field.
    You should tell that to Supercell. They aren't confused about what the goal is, but unlike you, they don't think it has to be limited to a single goal. You'd better go tell them they are wrong.

    They quite specifically said when first announcing what the changes were going to be, that they had looked at various options, and strongly wanted to avoid a solution which resulted in those with most time being the only ones who could reach the top.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  7. #27
    New Bloke/Chick
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    40
    Mainpoint is iím bored and i canít attack

  8. #28
    Forum Champion BloodyIrishman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Dublin, Ohio
    Posts
    5,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Ddddddddddd View Post
    Mainpoint is i’m bored and i can’t attack
    Play an alt?

    Level 18
    - 9,363/18,500| Master I
    BloodyIrishman - TH12 [Level 206] - #2 in TH12 Hall of Fame
    Follow this link if you're interested in joining!

  9. #29
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,848
    Quote Originally Posted by ProjectThirteen View Post
    If you're not speaking on the topic at hand, why comment? Also, I didn't start the thread, just pointing out that this current argument against the OPs idea is weak.



    What does a 1000 attacks/defenses per day actually do? Your % net trophies should be identical in a theoretical world so the best attackers who invest more time in actually playing the game rise to the top?

    Sorry, that still fits my definition of fair. All games, including this one, should be rewarding players given their position on a dual spectrum of time played and general skill at the game. Once again I'd like to point out that I think SC's issue wasn't with players playing for hours, it was that they weren't really playing. Hence the guard update. (I could've also missed a larger statement on how SC interprets top level play & what they are looking to reward, if anyone remembers such a statement, just let me know)

    I agree there are limits, but I don't think a variable option actually destroys those limits to any degree. I'm confused on your jump from "Some people get to attack and defend 16/day" to "Inherently unfair to me, who opted out of playing for that extra 24 minutes today".
    It really comes down to choice. If SC chooses to allow some players to play more than others, it isnt level. If the PLAYER chooses to play less than others it is fair (think of it as a forfeit). The only way for it to be fair is if all players are offered the exact same number and that is what SC has done. YOU control your forfeits.

    If you want to say that you think 8 is too low, fair enough, it can be higher FOR EVERYBODY. You want it to be lower, fair enough, it can be lower FOR EVERYBODY.
    Last edited by Tosti111; June 18th, 2019 at 07:02 PM.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post
    You should tell that to Supercell. They aren't confused about what the goal is, but unlike you, they don't think it has to be limited to a single goal. You'd better go tell them they are wrong.

    They quite specifically said when first announcing what the changes were going to be, that they had looked at various options, and strongly wanted to avoid a solution which resulted in those with most time being the only ones who could reach the top.
    That's interesting, something I must've missed. I'll still stand-by the idea that trying to avoid a system that disproportionately rewards playtime isn't equivalent to leveling the playing field.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tosti111 View Post
    It really comes down to choice. If SC chooses to allow some players to play more than others, it isnt level. If the PLAYER chooses to play less than others it is fair (think of it as a forfeit). The only way for it to be fair is if all players are offered the exact same number and that is what SC has done. YOU control your forfeits.
    That's an interesting bit of game theory we have going on. Why do we not consider the variable option still a player choice? Not being sarcastic but I'd like to understand your line of reasoning.

    The way I see it:
    SC: Gives set of options
    Player: Picks one

    Therefore player had a choice and it was fair.

    That's not to say I think the current system is unfair. Truthfully, I think it's fine/I'll have to see more before I pass any real judgement. I just am not sure this current proposal is unfair.
    | Clan: BEST IN 'BOAG | Rank: Co-Leader | Current League: Legends |
    | Level: 172 | Townhall 12 | King: 53 | Queen: 60 | Warden: 22 |
    | Gold Grab: 2.00B | Elixir Escapade: 2.00B | Heroic Heist: 13.10m | Friends in Need 109.01k |


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •