As Intended..SC keeps using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means

[pullmyfinger]

Hahah, so funny. According to you:

I don't have to take several breaks after 4 h of non-consecutive play and no shield.
I don't have to lose my war CC troops if I get kicked out just before war attacking.
I don't have to refill my clan mate's war CC troops when he lost them to an attack because of lack of shield.
I don't have to hurry a war attack so I won't lose my war CC troops.
I don't have to wait for another 45 min to war attack after donating a golem to my clan mate who just lost his war CC troops to an attack.
...
I could go on forever all the new unpleasantness that this update has brought (and I'm only talking about the war aspect of the game) just because we have to play now the way the game was 'intended'.

You definitely have to do some of those. The pbt sucks, but you can still raid and make loot continuously without gemming or an army.

[TheRealchrism]

What point do you think the OP IS trying to make? He is giving me very confused replies that are close to contradictory, so it would be great if you can help me understand.

I'll at least say the OP is wrong, as it basically says the changes were made so people play 'as intended' merely for the sake of it. Anyone with the slightest bit of sense would know that isn't the case. Unless you got a different interpretation of the OP and it's irrational focus on the word 'intended'?

Ok, since you don't get it.

SC thinks they are right, very bad business model. Customer/Consumer is always right.

Caveman speak - maybe more understandable

SC - not think good, make update, game play did not go as they wanted, make consumer mad, consumer no likey likey game much now, consumer not happy with how SC wants consumer to play, consumer attention drawn to new game, play new game like we want, money leave SC.

There are no defined rules on how to play, SC has positioned the game to force us to play as they want "intended" us to play. Us, the cash cow, are not happy and refusing to do it. So why not tweak the update to make the consumer happy? Isn't this like the 5th time I have said the same thing a different way. They changed the game to force us to play as they intended the game to be played, we don't like it, we are not going to do it, fix the update, let us play our own way with some tweaks. make that 6

[TheRealchrism]

The game as intended ... how i see it:

1)Don't care about trophies
2)Cheer on someone attacking your base that they will get to 30%
3)Spam cheap troops to grab what you can, then quit, who cares if you win or lose.

Working great for me! Can't spend loot fast enough!

lol, me too. And this is the result of forcing us to "play the game as intended"

Gem-Anonymous member since Dec 11, 2015

[Genos1213]

Not sure what I admitted too, but I am not going to push cups, spend money, stay in a higher league, raid with full out attack armies once every 3 hours, place the entire stake of the game on what league level I am, settle for league win bonus as my loot, accept lower war bonus because they failed to predict that when redoing the war weight. I will still attempt to play it the way that is fun for me and several others. I don't care about sniping, cheap shields or hiding in a lower league, raiding for 8 hours, placing th outside and getting my cheap shield. All of that can still be manipulated, the game is not solely comprised of cup pushers and gemmers, but that is how SC has geared the "intended" game play with this update. It was suppose to balance the game out, which it has far from done, it really has backfired on SC. People are "not playing as intended" just to buck the system. Trophy dropping, still have TH's outside, making 30% bases. This is not what SC "intended", they wanted more competitive leagues/attack strategies. What did they get? Gob/Arch milking, trophy dropping, people leaving the game and the gap between casual and pusher is so wide. I can go from silver to champ 1 in a day, without trying. So, we are still not playing as SC "intended" the game to be played. They can either give in and tweak their update to suit the majority of players or stay the course and cater to their paying players which are slowly dwindling down in numbers. SC already said it is their game and they do not care what we want. - rough very rough quote.

When you are playing in a sandbox, the worst pat of it all is not the sand getting all over you. It is grabbing a pile of cat poop covered in sand and not realizing it until it is too late. You can change the toys in the sandbox for new ones, it does not change the fact that every once in a while, you have to clean out the cat poop and put toys in the sandbox people will play with, the person putting the toys in is not always right.

Now you seem to be saying that the update had detrimental consequences. That isn't what I got from the OP or the title. Mind explaining what this has to do with your obsession with 'intentions' then? Again, before you said they introduced the update to force us to play the way they intended, as if you're saying they done it for the sake of it. Now you're criticising the intentions themselves. On the one hand you make it sound like you're against them even having intentions, and on the other it's just that you don't like the implementation of this update. Those are two very different lines of thought.

[Genos1213]

Ok, since you don't get it.

SC thinks they are right, very bad business model. Customer/Consumer is always right.

Caveman speak - maybe more understandable

SC - not think good, make update, game play did not go as they wanted, make consumer mad, consumer no likey likey game much now, consumer not happy with how SC wants consumer to play, consumer attention drawn to new game, play new game like we want, money leave SC.

There are no defined rules on how to play, SC has positioned the game to force us to play as they want "intended" us to play. Us, the cash cow, are not happy and refusing to do it. So why not tweak the update to make the consumer happy? Isn't this like the 5th time I have said the same thing a different way. They changed the game to force us to play as they intended the game to be played, we don't like it, we are not going to do it, fix the update, let us play our own way with some tweaks. make that 6

Nowhere in the op did you say anything about wanting tweaks. Nowhere did you mention anything about about the problems with the update. You just went on to rant about intentions and some sort of handbook. It's absolutely absurd for you to turn around and act like you've been saying the same thing.

[Sh1bby]

Nowhere in the op did you say anything about wanting tweaks. Nowhere did you mention anything about about the problems with the update. You just went on to rant about intentions and some sort of handbook. It's absolutely absurd for you to turn around and act like you've been saying the same thing.

AHHhhh i get it..

You're using the good ol 'play dumb until he can take no more dumb and leaves' trick

well played

[TheRealchrism]

Now you seem to be saying that the update had detrimental consequences. That isn't what I got from the OP or the title. Mind explaining what this has to do with your obsession with 'intentions' then? Again, before you said they introduced the update to force us to play the way they intended, as if you're saying they done it for the sake of it. Now you're criticising the intentions themselves. On the one hand you make it sound like you're against them even having intentions, and on the other it's just that you don't like the implementation of this update. Those are two very different lines of thought.

too many tangents

They had bad intentions, maybe they didn't know it at the beginning, but they wound up being bad. They had to know the backlash, they had to be able to predict this was going to happen. I fully believe this is all intention on SC's part. They are headstrong in making us play the way they intended the game to be played. Either SC is Punking us or they really are that stupid in their business model... Maybe they should hire Master P to write contracts for them..he had good intentions too. Their intent was to make better game play and to force us to play the game as they intended. There is no book on game play, what is the right way to play etc, only what SC wants to make up as the way they intended it to be played. I am all for vision and progress, but know when to cut the losses. Reason/Intent not against them having them, but AGAIN FOR THE 3rd TIME, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Stop the nonsense, say you screwed up, say you tried it, it didn't work, you are going to rework the update and make the consumer happy. But really, they can't tell me that none of this was predicted or calculated. If it wasn't we truly do have the the 2015/2016 version of the "New Coke". Re-read my posts, I do like some of the update....it really needs work tho.

[Genos1213]

too many tangents

They had bad intentions, maybe they didn't know it at the beginning, but they wound up being bad. They had to know the backlash, they had to be able to predict this was going to happen. I fully believe this is all intention on SC's part. They are headstrong in making us play the way they intended the game to be played. Either SC is Punking us or they really are that stupid in their business model... Maybe they should hire Master P to write contracts for them..he had good intentions too. Their intent was to make better game play and to force us to play the game as they intended. There is no book on game play, what is the right way to play etc, only what SC wants to make up as the way they intended it to be played. I am all for vision and progress, but know when to cut the losses. Reason/Intent not against them having them, but AGAIN FOR THE 3rd TIME, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Stop the nonsense, say you screwed up, say you tried it, it didn't work, you are going to rework the update and make the consumer happy. But really, they can't tell me that none of this was predicted or calculated. If it wasn't we truly do have the the 2015/2016 version of the "New Coke". Re-read my posts, I do like some of the update....it really needs work tho.

Updates are usually tweaked even with less backlash. Look at heroes for example, they were overpowered and removed the need to strategy, so they were nerfed and we got lower regeneration time in the end. Tweaks are pretty much guaranteed.

I don't see how you can say their intentions were bad. Is making it so your base is actually raided and you actually need to protect your loot a bad thing? You could say that it is detrimental to casuals or whatever, but that can be tweaked, and it doesn't seem to be related to their intentions. Their intentions were mostly highlighted in the anouncements. Since you have such a problem with their intentions mind saying which one you disagree with? Intentions and implementation are two different things.

I'm still confused about what you're saying though. You start by saying their intentions were bad, to which I said the second paragraph. But then you say that they had good intentions but that the implementation was bad and needed to be reworked, to which I said the first paragraph.

[Vikky]

I completely agree with you. When I first saw those two words, I was confused. Can't we play the game how we intend to play it? Playing it how you intend it is NOT FUN. Still though....As intended..... It means we have the options to not play it as "intended"
Supercell could have locked the TH in the middle, removed trophy dropping, and made gold mines and elixir collectors collect their loot made automatically years ago. But they didn't do it. In coc we still have a choice. We have free will. Coc is STILL their most flexible game. In boom beach, you can't trophy drop. And when you destroy their HQ (townhall) = it's an automatic 3 star. All loot taken. So no farming, and your placed in a league your supposed to be in. Boom beach was really one sided which is why I quit it. But...SC could've done that to coc too. But they didn't. I don't know why. I have a feeling they still want the game to be flexible. It's why coc became super popular in the first place: it's flexibility. They removed some of it but it's still there. You can drop to silver and milk bases. I honestly thought they would remove trophy dropping in the update. It would do the final blow to kill farming. But for some reason they didn't.

Maybe this update was just a huge miscalculated mess by supercell. We are not playing the game as we intended. Opposite actually. Dropping and milking.

Thats it just sharing my thoughts

It is not that they dint do it from the goodness of their heart, What you are comparing (BB & COC) are games of 2 different devs.. SC original & SC + SB. Keep in mind COC became a massive hit & eventually a cash cow to the developers very fast... to mess with such a model would be suicidal... thus they tried to make a version under the nose of SB (boom beach) wanting the changes they wanted in COC put in BB & the result is in front of us... BB is no where near what COC is as a game & income...

This is the first time they have messed up the original cash cow model & taken a chance (besides the slow tinkering of Search criteria, loot caps etc)... lets see where they land up...

thing is they assume these changes (loot changes / caps & search tightening) over the last 2 years is raking in more moolah, fact may be its just the game becoming more popular which is actually doing the raking in...

[sidloves19]

It's a terrible update