Forums-->General game forum-->
| Author | Events now with fixed number of wins |
|---|
So it was a simple change that they made that has sort of slipped under the radar in terms of the consequences, which are to my mind significant for at least two main points.
Firstly, the change means that in any given event the number of battles involved to complete has increased in practice. This may be only by a small margin for those close to a 100% win rate. However, if you lose half of your battles, then this is effectively doubled the event battles. I would imagine people would be more vocal in their condemnation if they changed it to 24 battles per day (win or lose).
Should they change the number of victories per day to reflect this de facto increase in battles?
Another aspect is then how to be the "best" in any given event, now has an increased element based upon how much gold and real life time you are willing to commit. If you look at the top runners in the event they have A LOT of losses. However, if you just keep playing until you get sufficiently lucky(combined with skill and strategy etc of course), you can grind your way to a very high score, that would not be achievable by anyone who does not want to lose 4 out of every 5 battles.
Is this a good change for the players? (I can see the admins may like it since it takes more gold to maintain this, and I think this game is financially supported primarily from a low to medium number of players who donate a lot, rather than lots of people donating a little)
What are other peoples thoughts on this change in trend on event set ups? | Another aspect is then how to be the "best" in any given event, now has an increased element based upon how much gold and real life time you are willing to commit. If you look at the top runners in the event they have A LOT of losses. However, if you just keep playing until you get sufficiently lucky(combined with skill and strategy etc of course), you can grind your way to a very high score, that would not be achievable by anyone who does not want to lose 4 out of every 5 battles.
Yeah, I don't like this change at all.
I think they made this change with the precise intention of events now draining lot more gold from those who can afford it than others. In the fixed-games system, cost to everybody was within a 2x factor if they were to finish event, now the ratio is unbounded.
A well designed game should take as much money from the whales as possible, so kudos for that.
On the other hand, ..
Actually, I don't see any upside at all for casual players who aren't aiming to be the best. | One aspect of this change is how much it encourages riskier builds. You can always keep rolling the dice till the battle is in your favor. I think that's precisely what the people at the top are doing right now.
So random builds like Ghosts/Appa or 7 shooters will be excellent in this new meta.
Another aspect is that if you can build army that sure beats 1 faction but loses to other 3, now is a great time to do it. This is a privilege for those willing to burn the cash, but not for the rest of the players. | Bad change for sure.
I was unsatisfied with the old system that favoured safe play rather than pushing difficulty to the maximum and taking risks. This new system however is worse as highlighted already. In retrospect, that old system was pretty good actually. | am i happy i did not even start this even to much hissle :)
and for what u spend 24/7 on this event not worth it
adicted or not if the admins comes with crap like this hi wil cure all the adicts :) | since the gold reward was always based on score (thus wins), I think the win counter has allowed players who slip up at times to get better scores and rewards overall, improving their ability to participate in the event.
However to get in top 100 is certainly about grinding out those low percentage wins, which makes very little sense for the average person, but for me personally, the top 100 doesnt offer much apart from prestige, so it doesnt really matter. Most of the times it takes about 5%-10% battles extra to get the X no. of wins if I play it safe, which isnt that much in terms of cost.
But if a person is willing to spend real life money, a lot of his time and energy on it, I think an advantage is only fair, the guy is supporting the game for all freeloaders like me.
Actually, I don't see any upside at all for casual players who aren't aiming to be the best.
I think you meant downside, considering the rest of your statement?
am i happy i did not even start this even to much hissle :)
true that collecting gems was a hassle, but I was able to get around 4.1k crystals in min AP for event with just 1 mega, 1 upgrade and rest all base creatures, 96 wins in 105 battles, very easily doable if one is going casual and not aiming for top scores. |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
Back to topics list
|
