Jump to content
FlareGames

ReaperEOD

Members
  • Content Count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

ReaperEOD last won the day on November 10 2018

ReaperEOD had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About ReaperEOD

  • Rank
    Corporal

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It would be if they nerf Nemesis like they did Ceres, poor guy. Never used him again after trying to make him work after the nerf. Only very high level players can even use him and still he is inferior. But don't tell flare to drop bomb amounts to only lvl 130 players to get 5 and lvl 10, it was lame enough that Ceres 16 morale was locked out in such a way let alone all the other nerfs (like the fear). I like where Nemesis is at, it's a step in the right direction to be sure. Ability is at least doing something that isn't counter-productive to what the pal does now.
  2. Took a video recently myself of a 5.5k raid using Nemesis, might try PF instead of TC because honestly it's kinda fun if you've ever tried it! P.S. I did have to time warp, that's because I don't forge my gear much let alone my skull gear yet because I'm not level 130 yet.
  3. Please make the Conquest resource donations awesome by not losing those precious resources upon reaching 24 hours. Make it basically the same as the current donations. Have the standard 'donate when full' going, but behind it have another stack going that you can either choose to donate now or finish filling up. Essentially it would change conquest donations to a 2 day cycle, but you can only donate one day at a time (for free when full) and can donate partial of whatever next day you have early if you so choose. Does this make sense? This would make players who are busy likely to spend or even purchase the fill up because they are already partly towards higher resources too, so it's a good economic choice too, who wants to fill up or send early when they only just logged on and were busy for greater than the last 24 hours? Spending gems is probably the last thing on their mind, but if they already had some they wouldn't mind chipping in some to help out. Hopefully this sounds like a good idea/suggestion, because I think it would change the dynamic of donating resources to be more interesting and to waste less time/resources of players who get busy beyond 24 hrs and can feel helpful if they will remain busy and not have wasted their time or resources, and can gem the rest that wasn't wasted.
  4. To me, Nemesis is not meant to be crazy strong alone. I mean, all of his bombs, and his beast form, are designed around troops. You can copy enemy troops, your own troops, confuse enemy troops, infect them, or heal your own/your hero. The ability does play a part in damage, it adds up when all working together, I can literally solo my entire base with Nemesis using PF and Gaspar. Here even with Gaspar, Nemesis ability played a good part around 2:30 time stamp. If anyone wants to friend me I don't mind making test runs, this was Nemesis lvl 7, I went up to 9 recently for 5 bombs. He's been a blast to play with this new change, no boring ability. It actually does something and gives the option to use PF or not, I've already attacked 4.4k trophy bases with no PF build and have been switching to monks and even played around with forged TC, very fun pal now.
  5. I found it, here are my results: First pic is my second chest, no skull found and no gems spent. Second pic is showing I failed, found a skull after clicking for my 3rd chest and failing. Third pic is the new probability after spending the gems, before opening 3rd chest. (I got pearls btw)
  6. I was just looking into this myself, and what I learned was that the probability is the probability for the next chest to be opened. Be sure to check this probability on the 2nd successfully opened chest, haven't gotten around to it myself yet. Will pop some luck gear on and check back to confirm.
  7. I see gems quite frequently and never win them unless I spend gems. So hypothetically let's say for example if I played the game for 100 years how many gems would I win for absolutely free? I've played about 2 years myself, maybe more idk now, so all I have to do is ask about 50 players and that gives us 100 years of playing the game. So of those 50 people that might be here on the forums, how many have won gems for free? It's not me, that's 2+ years of experience worth showing a negative result. Maybe it is so rare it doesn't happen but once a century for any given player, but I just want to know if it's 0.001% or 0%.
  8. There is a 0% chance to get gems from the CoF unless you spend gems. You can be farming in full luck gear and get 3 chests almost every time, but if that 3rd chest is going to be gems, you have to spend gems to get gems. Is this just me with this experience, or is this a planned way to try to gem for that 3rd chest (whose chances actually go down as you spend gems consecutively to reduce your chances of getting said 3rd chest whether they're gems or not)? Just wondering if anybody else no matter what does not get gems, unless they spend gems. This is why I purposely do not spend gems for the 3rd chest, and notice that I have never won gems ever, unless I felt like spending gems in the moment to discover that pay wall. I feel like it's an unnoticed trend or a concern that would be dismissed for me pointing out. Other players feel this way and notice these trends of reduced chance of 3rd chest as gems are spent and no gem winnings unless gems are spent (which are exclusively 3rd chest, no other)? Thank you for any input, hope this perception of my intuition isn't wrong.
  9. I have more than enough crystals saved to buy Nemesis, almost two! But until I know how Nemesis works, I cannot in good conscience waste the crystals. The waters are too murky, we need more clarity on why such a payment is justified. 150k for a pal that becomes less efficient as you feed it treats and unknown stats/effects in display and benefits from gear?
  10. Please do not buff poison in defense. It is offense that it is nobody noticing their effect, because poison is not very noticeable to most damage types in offensive raids. It is very noticeable that high level defensive poison ninjas alone can kill the hero if not dealt with right away or specific poison resistance gear is not worn. I beat a 5k trophy base and the biggest threat to me was the poison ninjas.
  11. She's a meme AK, look up "overly attached girlfriend". Not only does she have picture memes, but has some great and hilarious videos on YouTube! You'll get a laugh.
  12. I would highly suggest fixing the bug where the SV timer stops and keep checking your SV/skull formulas to address the blocking/invulnerability/timing issues, rather than this change that creates safezones on the frontlines and within enemy territory for extended hours in a game mode where the last 12 hours is the most critical part of the entire event. Simply have a 1vX (any amount) war have a short reprieve where they can't be immediately shut out of the fight (and thereby tripping the invulnerability of the spot) to give time for others to either join the fight, or to leave that player to their fate of choosing a fight they shouldn't have or let the punishment of losing happen faster. Make the SV timer tick faster when a player is massively outnumbered by 1) enemy players or 2) enemy troops. There are so many ways within the current system that can totally fix and address the issue of blocking without having to have programmed in an entirely new system to address the issue. That is my opinion, that is my proposed solution. Just how some of my suggestions was implemented, I truly hope Flare considers using something like this as a solution and fix the systems currently/previously in place and uses the idea of a Supreme Victory appropriately rather than creating a whole new mechanic that we can now abuse due to having pros and cons. Thank you for your time and I hope you sincerely consider fixing the game.
  13. Sadly most players don't want solutions. As many players here have specified, they literally don't care about anyone else except how the changes impact them specifically. Great way to balance a game, no scaling or regulation to speak of, just a 'free market'. I really don't want to be another one to leave RR2 but if Flare doesn't take more steps for positive direction, the player base will continue to fall. All there will be left are top bases and people using Phoebe and Howl, while Janus, Ceres, Eris, and Nemesis defense beasts will be totally, absolutely, useless. Just like their opinions. Fracking flipping useless. No balance in this ***** game and no point in working on anything except those two ***** beasts. So irritated that we're still having this entire ***** discussion all because NO ACTION is being taken to fix such obvious problems while the 'top players' complaaaaiiinnnn and mooooaaaaan without offering solutions. Ohhhhh, but just buff the thing we already have. I don't wanna unlock another beast. We worked sooooooo hard. Just ignore the point that most of a beast's power tends to come from beast boost and not from their level, and that buffing that would in turn buff all beasts. Or maybe we'll just ignore all solutions, because it's more fun to complain on a forum than it is to play the game that they claim to enjoy playing. I'm kinda done with all of this discussion, the state of the game should be FAR more important than any of this discussion surrounding Phoebe. If Phoebe matters more to anyone here than the state of RR2 as a whole, then you should quit because you don't give a hydro electric generator about improving it. I want the game to be better. Not Phoebe. Not my raids. Nothing except the game so that more players will join and more will stick with it and that communities can keep growing. The big pictures matters far more than 'buffs' and 'nerfs'. Balance needs to be maintained to maintain a community, just look at League of Legends. This started as a response and ended as a rant, my apologies. Hopefully I won't return here because we've all gone in circles so many times without getting to solutions all because of bad attitudes and a selfish nature. Humans suck.
  14. Yes and if you have 4 of them as gate towers, they will all spawn in the middle at nearly the same time. Way more deadly and annoying than having basilisk towers at the end. Nearly impossible to approach and survive to tell about.
  15. Realistically, wars in conquest by design are meant to last 24 hrs. So by design of 5 days of conquest, we only have time for 5 major deciding battles while the rest should be considered 'skirmishes' that can end by SV. Do you feel that's how conquest is supposed to work as is designed currently? The SV system does not demand a skull count per se, but a combination of certain troop advantages, terrain advantages, and skulls. With the winner losing an amount of troops based on how many skulls the loser has accumulated. You can technically attack for 0 skulls and win by the SV timer in skirmishes, and as long as the defender also has 0 skulls, the winner will lose no troops. Regardless it's better to have more skulls, but you don't need skulls to win by SV because troops have the greater impact there. When the timer proper runs out as long as SV isn't achieved, whoever has more skulls wins, much like what we know with standard wars. With these two colliding systems, in one scenario SV does not matter. In the other, skulls do not matter (to a degree). My question is, where do these systems fit in to the 'blocking' strategy? The purposes behind SV and 24 hrs war were designed for a specific use, and we have created strategies to work around the tools, not with them. To request us to not implement changes to use the tools as are intended are to ask us to stop abusing a system we have found a way to game around. Maybe if we still took away 50% troops when you declare a war and they get 0 skulls, then maybe people would SV just a little less because those skirmishes actually cost you troops. The reason I suggest that is not to punish those who have an advantage, but to encourage 5 big wars, as the game is designed. Depends on the intention of the player I suppose.
×
×
  • Create New...