UncleTH

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About UncleTH

  • Rank
    Private

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. UncleTH

    How is cost of stone/wisdom determined?

    Understood. I am in a level 19 alliance and we are trying to save. If we stop spending we could have it.
  2. UncleTH

    Energy Slow To Restore

    There can be a limit to how much food used and how much energy can be bought in conquest per time frame.
  3. UncleTH

    Energy Slow To Restore

    How about being able to use some food from other parts of the game as well. Silo is full over there.
  4. UncleTH

    community manager answered Wisdom costs for Research

    I agree - while different alliances will have different capacities - the cost does seem high unless you are lucky enough to find a library or 12.
  5. UncleTH

    How is cost of stone/wisdom determined?

    Are you saying that a level 31 or lower alliance is capped on how much gold they can save? Meaning they can not save enough gold to upgrade their alliance HQ in the example shown?
  6. Do you have plans to integrate more of the regular game into Conquest? Right now it seems to gems and alliance gold only! There are multiple ways to do it. 1) where all players can use 5 attacks against the other team(s) - make it team on a team instead of solely on tile matches based on the current war system. This then could result in taking some resources as a raid type event. Have some sort of aggression factor that triggers the raid/war. 2) Have some use for the food in the conquest - Buy some extra energy not just that from resting over time. 3) expand the skill set of assigned troops - we have skill sets for troops. Nothing that elaborate but have major skills and minor skills that can be forged... Archers, knights, paladins with a basic medieval matchup to increase the strategy when assigning troops depending on a purpose. Scouts are faster / can escape but have little attack or defense... Those kinds of things.
  7. I am not opposed to the conquest but do want to see improvements - hopefully, the recent matchmaking and the promise keep improving it helps. So far the conquest seems to be treated as a completely separate game with the exception of using gems of course. There should be more integration. Allow players to use food for energy as well as recover some from rest as an example. Food is used in many other aspects.... why not here?
  8. I am sure were attacking. The opponent was headed to our tower and I attacked to block.
  9. Thank you for that. It helps very much! In the sample where we were outgunned and the troops doubled. I was attacking that tile not defending it.
  10. UncleTH

    Conquest Matchmaking Calculation

    We are level ranked 1024 and pitted against 506, 666 and 667 with alliance levels 18, 32, 39 and 32 respectively. We are outmanned and outgunned. The top rank team has shown brute force but few real tactics. We are in the last place with 86 tiles and 18 more in the oven. Just need to hang on and try to get a few more for the Tent. I know math is hard for lazy programmers but something can be done to tighten up the matches.
  11. UncleTH

    Can't build a level 4 tower

    I know there is very little economy to increasing tower range. It is like a cost per tile regardless of the tower level. Right now there is too much risk and too little reward to larger towers. Players will attack the bigger tower for the gain of taking it down but the cost of 3 little towers is about the same.
  12. If anything Towers vision should be extended not shortening the player vision for reasons stated by others. I know it makes it hard to ambush someone but how would you know to ambush them if your vision was shortened?
  13. hat the Math? I have few observations on math in Conquest. It seems if the attack vs defense calculation is actually Us vs Them without regard to who is attacking or defending a given tile. If that is the way the tiles modifiers are used then it does not match real-world behaviors for a given terrain. Attack and defense are typically based on the roles in a competition. Defense is holding a position whereas Attack or offense is trying to gain a position from an opponent. It appears the game is inconsistent in providing data as well. Highlighting an active war tile then clicking the emoji produces different data. On one tile it shows my team only however on another tile where the other team has a tower, the others teams players show up. Both include the number of troops. Seems it would show all players on the tile with the appropriate data. Data such as level, troops and even perhaps estimated energy would be nice for all players on a given tile. Having said that, I am left trying to interpret the math observations First is on the supreme victory. Simple match ups seem straightforward. I can see how many troops are assigned to competitors if they are out on the map but not while in war. So we have to assume that is correct when looking at the Supreme Victory screen. Not sure how the program came up with 800 troops for the defense is derived. See photo. In this case, one of the players is 110. I have observed and recorded 9 players engaged in war. They are levels, 67, 83, 84, 85, 93, 98, 103, 109 and 110. All seem to be given a hero rating of 75 except the 110 player. I believe that players rating adds 20 or is 95. The math should be more granular. As 109 and 110 is a much closer match than 67 and 109. If I am correct here that is a serious flaw in the program. Generally speaking players within 5 levels are fairly matched without regard to how a player has developed their defense or offense. It appears the math is such (Total Hero + Total Troops) X Tile Modifier. So am I to assume that on the attacking side that one player has all the troops since the participating troops and total troops is the same. However, I do know for a fact on our team there are two players with 200 troops. This equals 400 participating but how does this become 800? In our second sample, the defense is actually defending a tower and the calculation seems to be (Total Hero + Total Troops) X Tile Modifier X Tower Modifier. There is only 1 player on the attacking side so hard to tell regarding the Total Troops. Did the troops assigned double in the first example because there is a 110 level player? Does it apply only to the attacking side because I do not see that happening on the defense side in any case observed? The last point to mention is of the 4 teams their Alliance levels are 506, 666, 667 and 1024. Clearly, 1024 (us) is being pitted against teams with roughly 150% of the players. Most have players many more players at least 5 levels and in some cases 8 or 9 levels higher than our highest players. While we have done well in the last two events, I do not believe we have dominated other teams enough to be cast into this mismatch. Some more clarity on this math would be good as well. I know it can be difficult to evenly match all events. There are modifiers used in the game but not sure they are working as intended and perhaps more should be applied to level out the playing field some. Perhaps the use of defense and offense build would be even better as players are known to trophy drop and such too. There are plenty of threads on that match up concerns alone.
  14. How is it we can pick opponents that do not have 30% more players and 20% higher ranks. I seem to be not seeing those full controls.
  15. UncleTH

    BAD MATCH

    We are also outmatched to the point we can not be competitive at all. Not just in the number of players in other alliances but the levels as well. There are no diplomatic channels to open as I can see either. The strongest team seems intent on wiping out our towers ASAP. So I guess we will just keep fighting them and perhaps throw the game to another alliance. We can not win but we can tie up their players