Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Iceman7

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I understand what function/role the general plays in conquest as i to was a general in an alliance at one time (now i am sergeant in top 20 alliance). Ya gotta face the fact that the way conquest is intended to be played is "participation" and yes that means each player needs to log on and move their own piece. Conquest is intended to be different from a regular war season. IMO conquest is far more enjoyable than a regular war season. In fact i would say most in our alliance enjoy conquest. What you are advocating for is a bunch of mini war seasons except your own teammate may not even know they are being moved into a battle. Like i said with my suggestions, it may not be a bad idea for some teams but there has to be a trade off for having that ability.
  2. I dont take screenshots of chamber of fortune because I don't obsess over the smallest details of the game. I know I have got gems twice, I know I don't use gems in cof (except in conquest/war). Maybe that was thr 2 times during war/conquest maybe not believe what ya want. Has someone added up the probabilities icon on 3rd try to see if it equals 100%?
  3. I've played for just under 2 years have received gems twice and did not use gems for a failed attempt. Guess im lucky
  4. We can go round and round on this, the format you are talking about is a one player or few player game. Conquest is not that nor is it intended to be played that way. The whole idea of conquest is participation and communication and strategy. You must have all 3 to be successful it sounds like most of those that dislike the conquest format are lacking in one of these areas (typically participation). I have no idea what alliance you are in or have been a part of but obviously participation (related to time available) is an issue. I don't think having the ability to move the pieces around by a few people is beneficial to the game as a whole and completely undermines the idea of group participation and strategy for a common goal which is what the conquest mode is all about.
  5. Yeah I get that so you want to spend less time while simultaneously offering a solution that increases to time for leaders and generals 10 fold. I don't know about everyone else but that doesn't sound like it's solving the problem of 24/7 play at all. Per all of your other points I laid out a few different examples of why it is not a very good option just to say here ya go leaders and generals you play chess and make all the moves while the rest of us sit back and watch.
  6. I always read that people want the ability to move someone else's piece in the game and that is a MUST have suggestion based on insubordination, inactivity, ability etc. Well what about the person that got moved that now has no energy when they wake up/login, or got joined into a war that is too easy/difficult or even worse got SV'd and now they are back in SH? With that said I don't think it's an entirely bad idea however there has to be some kind of give and take with that ability so here are some suggestions for that. 1. No more than 10% (rounded up to next whole # ie. Max 7 players) of members can be moved. 2. Only leader or general can move players. 3. The 10% of players forfeit their ability to play their own piece during entire conquest. (Designate players at beginning of conquest) 4. The 10% can only be used for WT building (no ability to initiate, join, be assigned troops or join any battle but can be attacked) 5. Cost to move these players is double normal movement cost. These are just a few suggestions that would limit this power and the capability of having a major impact on the game mode as it was intended.
  7. I understand your frustration this is also the same topic that you and others have brought up many times on different threads in the forum. The theme is typically always the same so I'm not sure why there is still surprise. The formula is easy win more than you lose in raids and continue working on defense (although it doesn't matter even at highest levels because everyone can still beat you). No use complaining just do what you can do with what you can control ie. Raid more trophies than you lose daily.
  8. I believe the answer is the same as it always has been. The attacker is probably quite a bit lower in trophy count or hero level and more than likely both since I see none of their troops are boosted it's probably a low level alliance/player that has foundthey get trophies out of your base. On a separate note why complain when they gave you 18 gems. 5 trophies is easy to make up with 1 easy raid.
  9. Speaking of gems if they wanted us to use gems you would think every player would have at least been offered a 30% off gems package for part of the event and maybe at least 1 special one time offer package but no, I sat back and was offered nothing at all for the entire event so I didn't spend any real money. Guess they didn't want it bad enough. 🤷‍♂️
  10. Great event overall I really wish the wave and upgrade event would have taken place with more than 24 hours left. Also if only 24 hours for the finale why not make max time to 1 day for all items in the grand finale event?
  11. Would be interesting to see how many alliances actually have phoebe above level 3 and then correspond their votes to that fact. I voted no because why would I want something nerfed that effects my alliance. Now if you're in a top alliance or an alliance with phoebe 4+ why wouldn't you vote yes? The nerf wouldn't apply to you but would apply to the vast majority of players using it in their defense. That's a win win situation for high level alliances/players.
  12. SV happens all the time the alliance I'm in is in 2nd tier, probably 90% or more of conquest battles end in SV. You may be talking about the very top 1% players that don't always achieve SV and that is because of activity and nothing else. Pinning/getting pinned is also because of activity no way around that.
  13. The goal to get the highest rewards is not very hard to reach if your alliance is balanced correctly. If your alliance is a mid to upper level with many players under or around 1k trophies you should encourage those players to upgrade as their ninja score will not be very helpful in reaching your goal for a level 60+ alliance.
  14. I have not upgraded anything that doesn't use pal food specifically because of the list above. The guardians are great bit definitely not worth that price tag compared to using pearls to strengthen towers, gear, spells, troops etc. With how many items use pearls for upgrades the cost should be reduced by 1/3 to 1/4 of the price otherwise you have the same problem you have with nemesis being super weak for the price.
  15. Topic on fiefdom dumping while admitting to fiefdom dumping 🤔🤔😂😂
  • Create New...