Olympiodoros

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Olympiodoros

  • Rank
    Private

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Olympiodoros

    solved Server problems

    The same here ?
  2. Olympiodoros

    Restricting the beast viewing before the attack.

    I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. Do you mean the beast preview before the attack? If so, it's a terrible idea. If you want excitement just don't check the preview before fighting.
  3. Olympiodoros

    Chat and translation

    Especially now when we have conquest mode, a better chat is very important! We have a lot of multilingual alliances, so the current version of chat sucks! ?
  4. Olympiodoros

    Chat and translation

    Exactly, see the "Chat improvement" topic ? I wrote the same thing.
  5. Olympiodoros

    Need this in conqest mode

    Ah, ok. Yeah, it would be helpful.
  6. Olympiodoros

    Need this in conqest mode

    @cr1 What exactly do you mean? Make what for towers? What is hard to understand?
  7. Olympiodoros

    community manager answered Time warp too overpowered? Nerf

    Hmmm, pay-to-win? Every game in which you can buy an advantage with real money is a pay-to-win game. You didn’t start playing RR2 yesterday. Suddenly TW becomes the biggest problem and the symbol of pay-to-win??? Really??? C’mon! You’re a smart guy, you don’t believe it yourself! You’re just angry that a few guys beat your base and your ego is hurt. Ok, I accept that there are players who’ve been playing for a long time and are very strong without ever having bought gems. But how many of them are there? Anyone can say “I don’t buy” – but only Flare and that player know the truth. I understand that you never spent a cent on RR2 and now stand for all the poor of the world. Kudos to you. It’s hard to establish who actually pays more to win: those who use a few TWs during battle, or those who spend huge amounts of purchased gems on pearls for forging. If spent gems did not give pearls, if we couldn’t speed up forging with gems, etc., then maybe the discussion about not using scrolls during war would make sense. Let’s first retract all forges gained with purchased gems before returning to this discussion. The way things are now, the idea of prohibiting scroll use during wars sounds rather amusing. We have to remember that increasing the number of TWs used during battle is connected to overpowered defense and bad matchmaking during wars and conquest, as well as to bugs and lags. It would seem that solving these issues is urgent, not a nerfing of TW. Who knows, maybe resolving these problems would be better than nerfing TW even for all the poor of the world? I totally agree that the amount of diamonds for the defender should be higher. I really like your idea of 50%. Of course, Flare will never agree to that. But only 2 TW? Any further ideas of that kind? I suppose no reviving, 2 (ok, 2 and a half) Armageddons… What about Blessing? None? 1? C’mon… Exactly! ?
  8. Olympiodoros

    Thinking out loud...

    @aslan First of all, I cannot agree that the TOP alliance will always be a winner with negotiations. Exactly the opposite - they'll be always a winner without negotiation. And it's not only a theoretical statement. My alliance once won the conquest, beating a far stronger alliance because of negotiations and deals with another weaker alliance. Second, you probably have experienced (I experienced it many times) such a war season, when your alliance was cut off by the strongest alliance during the first day of the season. And even if you were the second strongest on the map, you won nothing, because until the very end you had to fight (without any chance of winning) only against the strongest team. I was also in a war season when we lost all our fiefs in the first day - where is the fun and fairness in these situations in your opinion? Sometimes it also happens that the strongest alliance has friends on the map and helps these friends by blocking other teams from attacking them, and even giving these friends a fief to secure them second or third place. Is it unfair in your opinion? Moreover, during the conquest you don't know the other teams at the start, but you know them all during the war season. So, you can start negotiation immediately after war season begins. And the practical problem of anonymity: could you imagine fighting against totally unknown alliances, totally unkown players? With unknown level, trophies amount etc? I couldn't see it as a strategy game, and conquest, as I understand it, is supposed to be a strategy game. Anonymity during the conquest brings to mind a situation like this: "I'm a f.... kamikaze crashing into everything" as Eminem raps ? P.S. For clarity, in my opinion every type of negotiation - during wars and conquest - is fair and acceptable. Even if my alliance loses and gets no rewards as a result of negotiations between other alliances.
  9. Olympiodoros

    community manager answered Chat improvement

    Thanks for an answer ?
  10. Olympiodoros

    Attacking in Wars

    Ah, ok. Thanks for the translation ?
  11. Olympiodoros

    Attacking in Wars

    English, please! ?
  12. Olympiodoros

    Thinking out loud...

    @aslan if you're against the negotiation during the conquest you should be, consequently, against negotiation during the war season as well. It is a similar situation. Why only during the conquest????? Keep alliances anonymous all the time ?
  13. Olympiodoros

    community manager answered Chat improvement

    Is it possible to get an answer from the staff??? @Sasch @Madlen
  14. Olympiodoros

    Thinking out loud...

    @aslan Negotiation is sometimes the only way for weaker alliances to win. Besides, negotiations are really amusing and enjoyable ? And, in my opinion, they're fair, too. Every alliance is suitable for negotiations. The only way you could guarantee a "non-negotiation" system of conquest is to keep all alliances anonymous the whole time. But it's a very bad idea, in my opinion. You wouldn't know the strength and level of other alliances on the map, so, in fact, all your movement and strategy would be totally random. How could you analyze your "mistakes" for the benefit of the future? I suppose that in the case of alliance anonymity the conquest would be terribly boring, with most alliances barely moving and concentrating only on building towers. The whole conquest would become a building tournament and not a war conquest.
  15. I have a suggestion concerning chat and messages in RR2. It would be very useful for players if it was possible to copy the text from chat and messages. It would help in the case of multilingual alliances and other multilingual communication. Right now, it is very difficult to translate messages in which special characters appear. What do you think, @Madlen?