Limit number of back ups by each team member


#222

Reverse projectiles + invincible then swap to someone else :laughing:

But this is off topic :sweat_smile:


#223

Equipped death gaze and a farm base?


#224

:scream: those take ten hours to forge! I try to never use them outside of war runs or Atlas runs.


#225

Added incentive not to join a too low league for your level.:tipping_hand_man:t3:


#226

And who determines what level goes with what league?


#227

:laughing: I don’t have that issue as a lvl 261 player up in D2 :rofl:


#228

Really, like you want me to quantify it? Okay, instead of league, based on the team’s weighted average player level? Let’s say there’s 47-49 players whose weighted average player level is 50, so maybe not higher than 3-4x that number?


#229

Since you’re the one suggesting that you don’t join a league too low for your level, yeah, I expect you to clarify what you mean. And I have a problem with you limiting the ability for players to play the way they want to play (within the guidelines set by PG).


#230

I’m not limiting you or anyone else from doing anything. If you’re reading all the posts I basically say just ignore it and make up for wars lost by declaring on the other teams in your league.:man_shrugging:t3:

Was having a pleasant converstion over the possibilities and options available to offset the issue if that solution wasn’t acceptable. Didn’t mean to offend.


#231

Sorry, that response came off a bit snippier (if that’s a word?) than I intended.


#232

Deleted by author


#233

Reaching level 600 without spending a bean…

Wasn’t aware that was possible at this point.


#234

Ok, so getting some serious deja-vu here. This convo is almost repeating the tagged convo posted above about mercs from a while ago. @Morreion , @TheRedDelilah possibly mentioned 300 not being allowed in plat because that was a staple of that convo 1 yr ago, 1.5 yrs? It’s hard to remember, I have been here a long time.

During that convo, I was a 300 in Platinum. Was it because I was sandbagging? Trying for easy war wins? No, that was my team, my family, and I was leading them. That was the league they belonged in based off their strength and I stayed with them. I’m not going to bail on my family because others felt I didnt belong in a certain league. Back then we flew for fun, we flew to increase our skills. We would give away defend points because “We wanted to try it and see what we could do.” Period.

Did I back every run, hell no. If my players struggled I would step in to help out but it was all about growing as a team. Getting others to back their teammates and learning how to fly better.

We got declared on by a team with a 462 player. I was the biggest on my team at 300 and next highest was 230ish, a bunch of mid 150s and a few below 100. We won that war through teamwork. My players knew my base, they helped me build it from level 11 up, they knew the best towers to activate in defense because we were a team and played together. We defended my base against that 462 and cheered together every time we took him down, 20+ times. A well thought out, built and defended base beats size any day of the week. Especially size without skill.

That isnt as true these days with Surts and 600s floating around but that is how the game is evolving. Players keep gaining levels but no new tiers have been made, it’s still bronze through Diamond. Where else are they to go but filter down, especially if they belong to a team they dont want to leave, friends they have had for a long time.

I see 2 different discussions here. The original is about a 600 and 49 1s, which we have all decided is an exaggeration but similar to actual possibilities. I agree that PG should do something about teams that are obviously gaming the system/sandbagging/whatever you want to call it. Does that mean all teams should be limited by the new backing rule? Absolutely not. What can PG do about it, I’m not sure but a blanket ban affecting all teams would be unfair to those not using those tactics.

My team liked difficult wars. We would declare on teams we might not beat. They have a 350, I’m a 300 with a 230 backer. We might make it in one run, it might take us 12 runs and half the night to get his base undefended and get our 5 flames. Under the proposed backing system I lose my backer after the first 3 failed runs, that’s not ok. We arent doing anything wrong. So to put a blanket ban on the number of follows allowed would be skewed and unfair.

The other part of that original discussion would be limiting flames, etc. That’s simply not possible. There were times we were declared on by teams that had zero chance of winning. They wanted to lose and be knocked down a tier. With the flames adjustment, they might end up winning instead due to our differences in level and end up going to a higher league that they are definitely not prepared for and didnt want to go to. That would be unfair to them and to teams with stronger players warring up from bronze after creating a new team with their friends.

The other discussion branched off into who is allowed in what leagues and let’s face it, that’s not gonna change. We arent putting caps on different leagues. Players can play where they want to. If a 50 wants to play in Diamond and a team is willing to take them, will that be allowed? Then why not a 600 in plat?

I have already talked too much but hopefully I gave you something to think about. Everyone has their own individual take on what should be based off their current experiences. I agree there is a problem with the scenario posted, however, the solution does not fit the issue at hand as it would affect many more in a negative way. The solution has to be some form of reporting behaviors and PG acting on those reports individually, it cant be blanket bans on game mechanics.

My 5 cents (we discontinued the penny in my country :grin:)


#235

Off-Topic:
I once got “Do 90 million damage with Frigg”. I forgot he was in my roster :joy::rofl:


#236

But then it’s no problem, and a backup limit wouldn’t hurt at all.

I don’t think I ever explicitly stated this, but I would imagine this system should limit the number of bases you could assist with, not the number of tries you could do on that bases. So if you flew backup for, say, 10 different bases already, you can’t help with an 11th. That would at least require a team to have 5 people capable of defeating something.

I do think the amount of effort it would take to build something like this and make it work reliably is probably not worth it compated to the relatively small size of the problem.


#237

You may not have specifically said it, however, the majority of comments seem to lean this direction. I’m not calling you out, just saw your discussion with Red and thought I would add to it from my own experiences. I’m surprised anyone read that novel :grin::joy:


#238

I’m still 100% against putting a limit on teamwork. I was hoping this thread would have died already. There is so much more important stuff that needs addressed before something like this should even get looked at to begin with. As far as taking flames away for having a backer fly there dragon then guess what, you would need to do that as well for events when people back lower players for points. If they cant hit a higher player in war with a backer they shouldn’t be able to in events either. I don’t know about you but personally like trying to hit as high as I can why should I get penalized for doing so if I stretch a little too far and a teammate cleans the rest up? What some people have suggested here will cause players to hit at their level and never try to get any better because they will be too afraid of screwing up and costing their team flames. Do I agree sand bagging is an issue for some big accounts? Yes I do but limiting teams from backing each other is not the way to fix any of it.


#239

Hey Boss,

Nice to see you back on the forums. I remember the war you speak of and it was a fun challenge.

I agree that we should not add an arbitrary limit on war follows. Though I will admit to having some thoughts along that line when I saw very low level players (or alts) getting backed by bigs for great glory in Atlas.


#240

I’d rather consider another option: all attacks count up to 5 points (100% destroyed) but the number of dragons needed to clear a base counts toward defense points.

So, if you use one dragon to clear a base, you get 5 points and the defender gets 0 points even if present in your attack. But if you needed 2 dragons (or 5 dragons), the defender, if present, gets 2 (or 5) def points.


#241

That’s a nice twist. I never liked the idea of defense points for just showing up.