PvP Points Are BIASED! Unfair to Junior Team Members

The PvP Point system is Criminally Biased to favour the top players and leave low level players with Little or No incentive to play.

Team xx
Lvl 150 = 125 points
Lvl 80 = 100 points
Lvl 25 = 75 points.

Thus, a player attacking his equal in the game, can receive 50 points less than his teammate who, granted is attacking a tougher base, but I think it should be more about courage and will to succeed than level. That lvl 150 player has the choice to attack easier targets (lvl 80) and still get bigger points than the little guy trying his hardest.

I think points should be allocated on a PvP ratio … player v player. A Win should be 100 pts +/- (level difference)

ie:- lvl 150 v lvl 100 = 100-50=50 pts
Lvl 150 v lvl 150 = 100 pts
Lvl 150 v lvl 160 = 100+10=110pts

Lvl 70 v lvl 70 = 100 pts
Lvl 70 v lvl 100 = 100+30 = 130 pts
Lvl 25 v lvl 25 = 100 pts

All based on Primary attacker. If backup is used, their value would be added…
ie:- lvl 25 v lvl 125 = 100+100 = 200 pts
Lvl 25 + lvl 125 (total 150) v lvl 125 = 100 - 25 = 75 pts.
Etc. easy to calculate and FAIR to lower players who deserve to win points towards getting their Season Dragon just like the big players do!

And also an idea to do away with FLAMES in Wars and become a FAIRER system there.

We attack higher players, we get more rewards, and Not just because we have bigger friends.

OH MY! This DOES effect you big leagues after all!You would have to play on MERIT and not just on the overly simplistic notion of Five Flames.

Dekatuu (lvl 59) Leader AncientEmpire (Silver1) alt account
= Dekamin (lvl 109) Officer ShadowLords431 (Gold1) main account


You mean the game rewards you for doing more?!? No way???


“Sarcasm doesn’t survive the written word.”

It’s a quote from some wise dude but yep, it’s appropriate. Can’t tell if you’re with it or against it.

Lol if panda agreed he would say so risk pays out rewards hitting low doesn’t go hard or go home :joy:

The good thing about this would be, that it discourages higher players to drop down to lower leagues and farm easy points.

But what would you propose for players with the same dragons but different bases like a lvl550 vs. a lvl380?
Will the 550 be punished for having a bigger base?
How many targets are there that he can hit?
This applies to any team in lower leagues with higher level players that try to pull their team.


Nice point , make sense

That 150 you speak of was once a 50, and had the same issues with scoring. We all faced that same issue when we were starting out.


Ummm, punctuation? You know what you’re saying, but it is confusing to anyone else, especially those who don’t already know you. Please, I don’t mean to sound like your third grade teacher, but clear messages ARE important when your opinion is respected and depended upon.

And… In Your opinion, then, ALL new players should just give up and go home? Everyone starts out wanting an even playing field. Then they learn how to manipulate the crooked playing field. Then they profit from the crooked playing field and defend it from reformers. Like Politics!


1 Like

Damn man, that was deep :+1:

1 Like

That is a good point. Very valid, and I don’t know the answer. I’m lvl 109. I’ve never been more than Platinum 4 for a week or so. The higher level leagues might have to re-evaluate their scoring to compensate???

Well no offense but when you come up with a huge proposal like this, it needs to universially work for everyone in the game in theory.


In this current event, as long as the top player on the other team is a higher level than I am, that player is worth 131 points, and players tend to go down by one point from there. So, identical bases at identical levels on different teams are not worth the same number of points. I do not know if the points start at the bottom and go up or start at the top and go down. But a team with almost all players at a higher level (over 300) is, for me, not a good team to attack. I’m usually looking at 95 points or fewer for those around my level.

It was not always this way.

EDIT: I am not an amazing flyer, but I’m not awful either. Since the recent tower buff, If there is no defense and I do not have a backing, I can pretty consistently win against my level +20-35 … maybe +35 if the base is terrible. Point is, having 10 very high level players on a team throws off the individual points so that to reclaim the flag, if needed, I have to choose between what is good for me and what is good for the team.


Here are a few questions for you to think about:

  • what would happen when a backer doesn’t actually attack with a dragon?
  • what it the backer only has 1% of the base to defeat?
  • when if you got two completely random backers to help you contribute inner fires to your run, which is really punishing you?
  • do you think this would encourage or discourage teammates helping each other?
  • do you think players should actually get LESS points overall depending entirely on their backer and their ability to perform?
  • what happens to those players who have over leveled their bases compared to their dragons? Are you now proposing to all of a sudden punish them and be biased away from them in this event?

It would be nice for lower levels like myself if there was a points-incentive for attacking up, instead of just doing it for personal pride and about 5 extra points. But at the same you don’t always have a choice, if a level 300 wants to help take a flag (back) from a team with only one or two equal-level opponents it wouldn’t be fair to give them much less points.

Perhaps there could be a 20 point bonus for attacking above your level, or for attacking the highest level target a team has left if none are above your level. That way high level players can still get the max points, while others have a little extra reason to hit up rather than down.

1 Like

Actually @SavageAFforPG has a good point there.
There is already a system in place that makes it fair as long as you’re in the appropriate league or fight teams similar in strength.
If you’re a lvl50 in Diamond, you will have a hard time. Anyone else should find good targets in their league.
My main is 220+ and usually gets 115-130 points from targets in Diamond 1.
My alt is 80+ and usually gets 110-120 points from targets somewhere in Gold.
That is attacking the highest possible for the dragons I have on both accounts.
Doesn’t seem very biased or unfair IMO.


I wrote out a proposal for another thread, and I believe it addresses all of @mechengg’s issues with the original proposal, so, let me know what you think. :wink:

I’d suggest that instead of using a naive level ratio, it’d be nice to add in a relative level multiplier to the existing multipliers, say a linearly scaling multiplier in range 1.1-1.25 for targets from <150%-200% of your level; use the highest level in the attack, to prevent backers from giving rewards without risk. (I.e., if you’re a 100 hitting a 30, you don’t get penalized, but if you’re a 30 hitting a 60, you get 1.25x more points. 30 hitting a 45 gets 1.1x, 30 hitting an 80 with a 200 backer gets 1.0x.)

This way, it’d reward ambitious low-levels and wouldn’t hurt anyone else. It starts at 150% to only reward hitting substantially above your level. The multiplier’s small enough that higher levels still have an edge, it’s just not a crushing one.

As for what happens if an unwanted higher-level backer joins your attack, the answer is that then you don’t get a bonus for facing long odds, because you aren’t. If you want rewards for being a David defeating a Goliath and can’t coordinate that, consider not pressing the invite button.

May want to keep this out of diamond and sapphire, since the number of strategic level manipulators there is actually significant.

1 Like

I do agree with @MareZ . . . but, the points used to be easier to get when attacking up. You did need a backer, but you could make far more points. Maybe it was changed to help equalize the value of the mega coin? I do not know.

I know I miss the days when I could (not in this event, but in a couple other that once had the bonus meter) with 2 backers and 4-5 IF, get 2400-2600 points on a single super attack.


I find it ironic that the heading states pvp points are biased when your proposal, to me, seems not only overcomplicated and biased to the bigger players that already put up with a bs team prize but also the fact that nobody can help them very much with xp or res, etc. Id say find your way, not everyone find it for you.

…This really aint an event to complain about if you are willing to put in the effort. Think of free energy and then with each round just spend 1 energy pack twice for 16/16 energy each time, thats an extra 15 basic hits (40 total) difference from the standard 25 hits with buying 100/e for 10/ep.

…then again its possible i was being rash with my expression of my opinion and just wanted to argue with someone. I dont even know anymore.

1 Like

The main reason that proposals like this exist is that below a certain point, the concept of an “appropriate league” doesn’t exist. There are teams of 100s and 200s squatting at the bottom of gold. You could try silver, but (a) it’s a ghost town and (b) you get reformed teams on their way back up.


How many reformed teams are there in a lower league?
There should be enough other teams you can hit or not?