Jump to content
FlareGames

Josslynfire

Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Josslynfire

  • Rank
    Private

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That is my point, you do not know who is available or left for guard assignment, until a builder is available to start building a tower. Planning ahead on strategy, it would be helpful. Not necessary, but would be very helpful.
  2. Sorry Madlen, you are right, and I thought of my reply being off topic after I posted it. Thank you for moving it.
  3. True, but as a Leader, deciding tower placements with strength of hero to guard, it would be very helpful to not have to click on every tower to see who is left for guard assignment.
  4. Hi Madlen, Our kitty was a rescue who was already named Wendy, so we kept her name the same. She will be 9 years old this year. She has a bit of anxiety and clings to us, but as an animal advocate, I tend to be attracted to the needy furbabies.
  5. I started playing around March 2016, and then my husband joined not long after i did. We later started an alliance. We like the ninja, zombie, yeti events, and some real awesome people we have met from all over the world. Besides being a gamer family. We love dogs and cats. But right now, we only have our 1 kitty. Besides sleep, we like camping, anything on the water, sightseeing, and the casinos.
  6. A few Beasts have upgraded a level, and we have a great group of heroes in our ally! Apply to join!
  7. Is there a post or something that details how the matchmaking is calculated, as of this date? My teammates and I have been trying to figure out how our level 31 alliance got matched with a level 75 and level 80 alliance, this last conquest. I am thinking more tiers need to be added, and that is why midlevel alliances are getting matched with very high level alliances. Like there is no room for high levels to move upward. I could be wrong. Just trying to understand how they calculate the matchmaking.
  8. Happy this is being addressed. But, could you also add, who is already assigned to be a guard tower, in the list? Right now, we do not know who is left for guard tower, until we go to build another tower. I guess we could write it down on paper who is guard and on which tile, but having this info added would be very helpful.
  9. I can not tell you how many times I wished that I could move some of my players, because they just don't have the time to be online, at a particular time. Communicating orders is a real struggle with some members, especially with language barrier. Some do not see (or maybe ignore) a flagged order.
  10. So, if we don't play conquest, we lose out on the prizes and boosts that give all other alliances the advantages in raids and war season. Not playing conquest saves on frustrations, but weakens your alliances in all other aspects of the game. Not practical, it seems, of a choice. And, when a Leader has spent oodles of time and money building an alliance for a couple years, it is not an easy or simple decision to just "go join an alliance that plays conquest." An option, Yes, but easy, No. Especially, when you have a few members who want to play conquest, are active, and do their best, in it. I see the matching of alliances as the biggest problem for conquest. A good portion of my ally are active and listen, but it has always been hard to build a larger ally of active players (unless you joined when game first came out). Lots of multiple account allys too. A problem I am not sure can be fixed. Now, if money is no problem for some allys, then yes conquest is awesome. Pay to win. We do not mind spending, but their is a limit. Funny, seems we are paying to be beta testers for this game.
  11. This Conquest (Ups and Downs. And Downs): Tier Seasoned Explorers (3rd highest). Us: Rank 935, level 31, 26 members, lvl 5 HQ Enemies: Rank 93, level 80, 64 members, lvl 6 HQ; Rank 420, level 44, 37 members, lvl 7 HQ; Rank 770, level 75, 16 members, lvl 7 HQ Fine with losing in 4th place, as we are trying to move down in tiers, because this is an insane match. Overpowered to hold onto any resource tiles, so we had to pay for it all, to get 150 prizes. Last two conquests, we only had 3 alliances, and we were in the 2nd highest tier, Veteran Explorers. We had no business fighting in that tier. Think I am losing more members after this conquest. They are fed up.
  12. I have lost some good players, because of Conquest mismatching, and many other problems. Currently, we are a level 31 alliance in Seasoned Explorers tier of Conquest. Since, no tiers or ranks have been added to Adventurers (like seasoned and veteran) ranks or higher...., we are matched some freaking how with level 80 and level 75 alliances. Yeah. not fun. We had to pay for all our resources, and we just can not afford to play like this anymore. I have more members who are fed up with conquest. I am very fed up, myself, as Leader. So much needs to change, like chat communication, having more control on moving our members where we need them (especially those who just stand somewhere for 5 days or in stronghold). If I keep kicking players, I will have no team. I do not know how much longer (been 3 years) I can do this game. Cost too much for all the frustrations. I do like the time change on Conquest. Please do not change that.
  13. I like improvements. Hope devs add a prompt to triangle map, in Conquest, when matchmaking has only 3 alliances on a map, in the near future. This has happened to us twice now, and it is not fun to do conquest when you are in the middle of the other two alliances.
  14. Please have the devs fix this issue. Last conquest we were again on a four corner map with only 3 alliances, and AGAIN we were the ones in the middle. We took 1st place, but it was a 24/7 battle every day on multiple fronts. We do not have fun with this type of situation. I guess we are just unlucky, but a prompt to a triangle map when matchmaking has only 3 alliances, would be VERY appreciated. Of course the other 2 alliances would not complain, since they had no opposing alliance on one side of their's!
×
×
  • Create New...