Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


RoyaleDing2 last won the day on December 1 2018

RoyaleDing2 had the most liked content!

About RoyaleDing2

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2,148 profile views
  1. It's nice features. Glad you, again listen to community. Thank you.
  2. We already discussed it before, and there's Madlen as CM but it seems she (and dev probably) can't grasp the situation. Then-again make another absurd decision like before (like about frequency of conquest event -glad they finally changed it like what we wanted recently). Here the topic if you want to read.
  3. @Madlen @Pete @PaSte @Sasch I think you guys should re-read this topic, because it really happening now. A weak alliance really don't have stand for strong alliance slaughter way. Your updates about conquest killing all the fair strategy the war should have. It's funny because currently our alliance is the strong one but here I am still complaining about it πŸ˜‚. We only need like 10 main players to do the job and we have like 4 hours and 40 minutes break time. It's an easy conquest for us atm, dunno what's next, will it be a super hard one? (we hope you always match us with weaker alliance all the time, not just this time. LOL)
  4. Congrats you've been answered πŸ˜„. I ask the same thing on the Q&A Dev section but got ignored. πŸ˜‚
  5. I like the changes that you brought in point 1 and 2, especially point 1. Thank you for listening to us. 😊 However, I think you should re-think your plan about point 3, flare. A lot of players (including me) use that to win leagues. With your medals rewards from matchmaking that so little (except for high rank-high trophies of course), dungeon is the only way to get a lot of medals. Don't worry, we still attack from matchmaking when look for gold. When there's exploit with dungeon system, you should fix that and when you know the perpetrator, you should ban him. There's a lot of things in the game that need gems and there's a lot of players that haven't completed that task. There's even pro league tickets for those who already completed all the task. It means gems still very valuable currency in the game. When you disable that way to win league I think a lot of player will, again, feel frustrated. Please re-think your plan.
  6. Will this become a disadvantages for weak alliance when facing more strong alliance caused by fail matchmaking in conquest? or not. Let's see that...
  7. That's a homework for flare to give fairness in matchmaking (I don't know their current category for matchmaking so I can't give a detail feedback on what is lacking). Like a seasoning, the more complicated the more delicious the food is (e.g Curry dish) 😊.
  8. This is actually proved in my last conquest event. Both level 6 HQ that I said before fight to the death(?) and the winner go up to the Novice Explorer tier meanwhile the loser go down to Seasoned Scouts tier (we are gladly still on Veteran Scouts). I'm sure, the one who got match up with those level 50+ alliance that have level 6 HQ at Seasoned Scouts will feel more miserable and more frustrated when play the next Conquest event. Flare need to think another way about how to go up, go down, and stay on the certain tier. The rule that forced 20% to go up and 20% to go down aren't really good one imo. The system that can detect strength of alliance with consideration of number of members, level alliance, trophies, and headquarters well and can determine on what tier they supposed to be well should be made. The go up or go down mechanism shouldn't be easy to be achieved by certain alliance so that they can't go up or go down as they please. Make it so that they should fight for several season of conquest before judged by system that they will go up or go down.
  9. [OOT] In our alliance, we have like 30 players. We divide them into 4 group that have group leader for each. We post the names on the Notes chat and so the instruction to each group by group leader. By doing this all members will just read that notes and move according it. They don't ask that, just when special urgent case, a group leader give a certain player instruction when both online at the same time (this is when that similar style chat case happen). It's so glad that flare add another chat function to announce a message to all members by generals 😊. It would better if flare add another feature that give a generals the right to know the position of their members without search it manually.
  10. I will never fight with top alliance or top players by the way, because we fight in Veteran Scouts tier πŸ˜…. If top player CAN online 24/7 then there's no problem so far with conquest by them but not me. I dislike conquest because those 24/7 things, if flare can rework conquest so we can play casual like war or ninja, I will be happy with conquest. As I said, 24/7 problem WILL STILL THERE even though flare decide to remove pinning strategy, so it's not a solution to prevent 24/7 problem. When I support pinning strategy, means I too will gladly accept if I get pinned because that's a FAIR strategy. So it's not just because I pinning a lot of player that I support it, my view is looking for both side, weak and strong, not only one side. If strong one CAN do that then there's actually no problem with pinning strategy. The end. 😁
  11. Don't forget the one who do pinning strategy also require time too just like the one that do counter-pinning strategy. It just about timing. How to estimate timing, how to foresee the possibility movement by enemy, and how to decide action to deal with it. 24/7 hours problem isn't caused by pinning strategy alone, it's globally conquest problem. It's still there even if flare decide to remove or to restrain pinning strategy. Conquest need a whole rework to make it enjoyable, more timeless, more stressless(?), more good thing(?). If flare agreed with this idea (about cooldown thing) it will only harm weak alliance that faced strong alliance which is NOT FAIR imo. Weak alliance should be given a chance to fight just like how flare give a chance to free player to compete with pay player that we all already know.
  12. If flare still consider weak alliance, don't implement this. This features only support those who strong. If flare applied this, I'm sure much more many players will feel frustrated and in the end will leave the game. Pinning is one of those strategy in conquest. When my alliance faced strong alliance, they still can manage to loose from our pinning strategy. It's just those who have good strategy that be able to counter pinning problem. IMO, those who still have problem with pinning strategy should rework their alliance strategy to counter it because I have seen so many alliance that can do it. Cheer up! πŸ’ͺπŸ½πŸ˜€
  13. I suspect them (again) from tier above us because there's new rule that forced 20% of that tier to drop down. So even though in some tier there's balance strength alliances that compete, 20% of them must go down and that makes tier below them feel suffering when they match up with them.
  14. This is one of some my complaint regarding pro league. Glad you finally do the right things, flare. πŸ‘πŸΌπŸ˜Š
  • Create New...