Controversial mercenary war tactic condoned by PG

I don’t think that PG should allow and even condone allowing a team (once war has been declared) to have a player(s) leave and bring in ringers. I have now seen this happen numerous times and to me it is exploiting the poor design of the game! In other words ‘It’s cheating!” A team declares on us then kicks a couple low level players then brings in some ringers. Then they kick the ringers out and bring back the original kicked players to do their attacks.

PG is aware of this and says although they don’t find it to be fair, no one is exploiting the game. They’re aware of this and don’t plan to do anything about it. So PG determines what is exploitation and what isn’t based on what? Those who exploited the forge loophole were banned from the game but nothing happens to these folks?

When looking to declare war (or when war is declared on you) you strategize how to defeat your opponent. How is one to do this if the opponents are allowed to change? Some have asked how is PG supposed to stop this? Well there are several ways. When the war is declared and a copy of both team roosters is taken that becomes the base. If a member leaves the team then not only will they loose five flames but the team looses one attack. So if the team was at 50 when war was declared and then a player leaves putting them at 49 (even for a moment) that team then can only perform 49 war attacks.

Additionally PG can use an “array” in their code to ensure that only team members from the origional rooster join in war attacks. This would stop the use of ringers! When war is declared both roosters should be frozen and if a player leaves and is replaced by another that other is not allowed to participate in that war.

In short PG seems to talk about fair game play and not exploiting game loopholes only when it suits them and doesn’t affect them making money! This game inadequacy has become commonly exploited yet PG does nothing!


We all understand the situation. But what solution do you have? They can’t stop teams from bringing in new players during wars. There are ALWAYS wars.


Yes but just as when new players can not participate in PVP events PG can do the same for wars.


the other team that is recruiting higher level player is already risking a free 5 flame points. it’s really not much of an exploit to be honest.

higher level player that joined after the war can only assist if he willingly wants to and cannot directly contribute flame points.

there’s so much to lose on that player, but he accepts it and helps. also, if you can’t beat them, you might as well keep on gathering defense points in case it goes 250-250


They’re bringing in much higher players that have dragons far above our and the rest of their team’s levels. You can’t successfully defend against that. The whole thing focuses around PG’s bottom line.


Why do they stop new players from participating in PVP events but not wars?


you dont need to actually defend. just get the defense point. if your team can defend against 50 of the attacks and you got more defense point than them, then you can win by that as long as you make it tie.

your 50 team member can attack 49 of their members. 1 of their member is free 5 flame points due to the exchange of team members.

so if you both team defended each battle, it will become 50-49 and it’ll be your win.

contribution is disabled on both war and pvp event. the main attacker which is a member of the team before the war/event started is contributing while the hired mercenary just helps without gaining anything.

I don’t agree with swapping in players for war either but I would suggest doing the same thing. If they can, “legally”, then so can yall. BUT, you definitely have a point with the forge exploit! Forge glitch didn’t hurt anyone but PGs wallet but they were quick to fix it!


The point is that whatever strategic advantage you had when declaring is nullified by the use of ringers. We had a few players they should not have been able to beat. They waited until we took out a lower level player then kicked him and replaced him with a ringer to take down all our high levels then brought back the lower level player. We had already defeated the lower level’l Base so no flames were forfeited.

PG origionally told me that our player that had earned the five flames against the player who left should be able to attack again. We tested this and proved them wrong! They then reminded their statement and simply said it’s part of the game.


All im suggesting is that wars are treated the same as PVP events!


Saying they should be treated the same as PVP events is a mistake, as you can bring in ringers during PVP as well, they just don’t earn points for the team. Yet they can assist every single attack if they so choose to.

I agree, it is dirty to bring in a ringer, but honestly, if you can’t beat em, join em. I don’t see PG fixing it, but it would be interesting if they did.


well, they are treated the same to be honest.

new player on team can’t contribute flame points for the team as a main attacker.

new player on team can’t contribute event point for the team as a main attacker.

both can assist their team mates if they are willing to waste resource like inner fire, healing potion, boost and time itself.

1 Like

Didn’t know that about PVP events. I have morals and don’t believe in two wrongs make it right.

For example just cause one player exploited the forge loophole should everyone else? PG wouldn’t like that cause it effects their bottom line!

I have a programming background and all PG needs to do is to create an array of the players and insure that the only ones in every attack are those origional members from when the war was declared.

PG just doesn’t want to do anything about fixing this because it doesn’t effect them making money.


I agree to this and to make it clear what he trying to say and I have seen too -

  1. They kick a player and bring in a high level to support on war
  2. They again kick the high level player and bring in the low level player
  3. Then the low level player completes his attack and it still counts.

Ideally when you kick someone that means you should be 5 points down .
So I find it unfair


Exactly they’re not five flames down you just have a player that does not need to attack, and if they kicked their lower player after you defeated their base, they don’t loose anything!

1 Like

Making the player unable to join battles would solve it. Like what happens when there’s an update and people are on different versions. Just a thought.

1 Like

I also have a background in game development and I assure you that it may be simple, but if it gets implemented and played by thousands of players, it will break down.

no matter how simple it is, when it gets played by a lot of people, other codes will tend to break down and have to re-do other parts of the code to make the new feature go nicely.

if it is being played like 5-10 people, you won’t notice much since those 5-10 people are not creative enough to go and play around the game to try and break it.

So you’re suggesting not fixing anything cause of PG’s crappy programming skills? EVERY time PG puts out an upgrade they break something else. Their application testing is non-existent! I used to program for DOD (Department of Defense) and could you imagine where’d we all be today if we tested like PG? Need i say more?


uhh no.

I am saying that adding one feature isn’t simple and will have to go to a lot of quality check and test.

it is not a 1 day job that if someone suggested “hey, let’s just disable this and it is 100% solved”, they can implement it in a few hours.

1 Like

I’m trying to see your point here but I can’t. Please explain. I’m hearing “If they make a new code and its used, it could screw up other ones and we just can’t have that.”
I really hope that’s not it. :joy::joy:

1 Like