New Units.New Towers.New Spells.New Boosts

There has always been a lack of variety at the top in RR2.  Everyone knows the formula for strong bases because word travels fast in this game.

 

 

 

New Units, Towers, Spells, Boosts;Do we need them? Please cast your vote and post anything that the poll didn’t offer.

Some think we need the current weak towers to be improved, while others think that will ruin certain levels.

 

Although I don’t feel the game should be concentrated on the top, a lot of people feel that it is time to quit when you get to the top because there is little to accomplish. If Flare added new units, towers, spells,(maybe boosts) then everyone at every level would have new combinations to experiment with.

 

 

The obvious comment is ‘Flare will just ruin new content if they add it’ or ‘Flare needs to fix my complaints first’. Then this thread is not for you. This thread is for discussion of new content and if we need it/ want it.

What I really want are New Units for raiding. The current raiding at the top is as boring as the cookie-cutter bases.

I Agree

I voted for new troops because they are useable in both offence and defence.

 

however I still think the greatest suggestion of all is lightning damage cause it could add of that!

Well i basicly wanna choose all.

But i think the thing i would like to see now most. Is a new dam type.

Which offers the posibilty of new units new spells. And a rebalance of the game.

I agree… It would be pretty interesting to see Flare add a new type into the game.

 

And you can vote for as many of those as you like.

the game should have attack units only and defense units only. Where some attack units are good and weak vs some defense units. Diversity in one word will bring colors to this game.

Do you mean unit effectiveness like in rock-paper scissors, or units only usable on either attack or defense, or both?

 

 

So true… since the introduction of the first elite boosts 9 months ago or so, I don’t remember a single time where I really used several different combos for attack concurrently, because all the time there’s like exactly 1 very effective combo, with maybe 1 minor alternative for one single of the three troop slots, and everything else is just completely useless on (high lvl) attacks.

 

The by-far biggest changes to my raiding combo during the last half year or so have been substituting “knights” with “mummies that spawn knights”, after war boosts came out (dominant combo changed there), and switching from wolf to cannon when wolf was bugged, and then back to wolf (change to adjust to / minimize harm of severe gameplay bug)…

The remaining “diversity” between raids currently is mostly limited to “should I use more/less of mummies and knights or archers” at a certain point of time during the raid. And of course, even this minimal “diversity” is no real choice but rather a means of being able to survive and complete a raid because one of the two possibilities for balancing your troop spawns is more effective at a certain time/base. 

 

I mean, it’s a challenge to beat high lvl bases, so during a single raid you definitely don’t have time to feel bored, but overally it’s very boring to have to ignore like 98% of all possible combos for spells and troops, while always using the same single combo all over and over and over again… basically it’s just endless grinding smashing the same troops against not identical, but still very similar bases all the time, repetition of one best-option pattern. Sure, it takes some skill and time to practice that pattern, and on every raid (especially against unknown random match maker bases) you have a risk to misfire a spell or two, most probably failing the raid unless the oponent is comparably very easy, but all in all it’s just, with one word, repetitive.

The largest amount of variance currently is slightly different lvl of defender’s waves, and some bugs/glitches affecting movement speed and damage dealing, which sometimes makes you lose the same identical base you just before easily won. E.g. I did 3 subsequent regular raids on 1 player within 5 minutes (and he was offline, or I couldn’t have attacked him, so definitely the base didn’t change during that time), 1st raid (base unknown before) was easy 100% with 15s left despite I had slightly misfired 2 or 3 spells, 2nd raid was timeout at 67% despite better spell timing and some knowledge about the base, 3rd attempt was timeout at 40% with better knowledge about base and better spell timing than on 1st raid. And this example, while it may sound extreme, is 100% true, and is not the first of its kind either, but rather something I have come to generally take as a given - especially after months with bugged spells and units, which made raiding outcome mostly random anyway. 

 

 

Anyway, back to original question, more variety is necessary. And not just “let’s add a new unit or two”, but also (mainly) balancing existing content to give more viable, equally strong options for combinations of troops/spells/towers. 

 

Only thing I don’t want is “more boosts”, mainly because it only increases pressure (both on alliances as a whole, and on individual players) and pay2win, and also because looking back at the last year of RR2, boosts didn’t really make more viable options but rather less…

 

E.g. boosted paladin is still as useless as unboosted paladin, for high lvl gameplay, while (as only remaining unboosted troop type for higher level bases) the froster is more dominant than ever before lately, which in part is due to changed attack combos, and partially due to bugs/glitches/secret-unannounced-buff(?).

Mummy as boosted tank replaced both ogres and, for the most part, wolves. 

And buffed froster and arbs, together with mummies for offense, made cannons mostly obsolete for top bases. 

First season of boosts made formerly widely used arbs useless thanks to boosted archers, and even boosted arbs are now (on offense) rarely ever used.

Troops like pyromancer or mortar were getting useless with introduction of boosts as well, and still no boost for them made. 

 

And of course, all the boosts complicate balancing, because both boosted and unboosted versions / levels should be balanced.

And as generally only high lvl paying alliances can even afford boosts (making them mostly irrelevant for large parts of the community while at the same time they’re essentially necessary for bare survival on the higher tiers of the game, where most veterans and also most big spenders reside), this gets even more complicated: Whenever working on improving the situation, they ever ignore most overall players by balancing the boosts, or ignore most veterans as well as most big spenders by working on something else. 

Yes, please no more boosts.  It is getting more and more difficult and expensive to upgrade alliances and remain competitive.  It is also very difficult for mid 4k- 5k players to compete in less than maxed alliances due to the affordability and strength of boosts.  Personally, I would prefer if boosts were limited to troops and monsters, even add a couple for mortar, pyro, etc.  While there may be preferred attack combos, players can still be successful or at least get by with different combos in both offense and defense.  Defensively, however, how can you be competitive without boosted barricades, traps or now range bombers?  So, what if tower/obstacles boosts were converted to upgrades.  This would allow players in all alliances the ability to better defend their base by upgrading towers without the necessity to leave an lower level alliance.  It may actually improve diversity among bases.  Alliances will still have tons to spend money on between troop/monster boosts, champion/shield feature, etc.  Granted these comments may be self-serving but doesn’t one normally upgrade weapons or structures and boost troops anyway?   :wink:

I hate to say it, but adding more stuff probably won’t increase top-level diversity all that much. The top levels being almost the same is a systemic problem; it’s prevalent in just about every game. There’s always going to be the top 2-3 strategies that are 1% better than everything else and people will always use those because they don’t want to be even 1% less than they can be.

i very agree , every game same like this also

 

and now new boost gargoyle thing , i think no good because need more money

I wish I made this thread sooner. Now there is at least 1 new boost that most people don’t want.

 

EDIT: I like the new boost. It looks interesting because both gargoyle and gargoyle tower really suck right now.

I just want new units. Flare can boost those. ;p

maybe you very rich to pay many many boost, for many alliance they only afford 1-2 boost and no level up many weeks

So Elite Gargoyle Tower will come in the next update and surely other 2-3 new elite boosts so now let’s wait together ^^

It this confirmed that Gargoyle towers are coming? Players are currently upgrading towers as we speak but just trying to work out if its worth doing the same in preparation?

It is :slight_smile:

Also I guess for alliance with less donation more boost is not sustainable but that’s not a bad thing. We need Tiered alliances who utilise various boosts. Just because arrow towers or Paladins have boosts for example doesn’t mean a Top alliance would boost them. They are intended for low/mid alliances.

Therefore having new boosts is a way to offer a new potential tower to mix up base design and make the game marginally different for a few months for a specific range alliances who may choose to use it

There is a good chance the gargoyle boost will come with new alliance levels.

The thing is, “intended for low/mid alliances” may be a nice idea, but in practice, most alliances struggle to keep active 1 boost at a time, many even can’t boost anything permanently. So now matter how many new boosts flaregames adds at this point, unless they generally decrease costs for boosts and alliance expansions, those lower alliances won’t be able to use them at all. 

I mean, they might then have a choice between “boosted arrow tower every friday” and “boosted gargoyle tower every friday”, but don’t expect new inferior boosts only being useful at lower levels to generally increase the use of boosts when they’re not affordable. :grinning:

Also, if I were a low lvl player, would I bother to spend millions of valuable gold on levelling up otherwise useless tower just because my alliance might boost them once a week? Probably not. Instead, I’d go for whatever is useful without any boosts until my alliance is able to afford permanently boosting something for sure.

And, just saying, even as a high lvl player this is what I did: Only when it was clear that Todesritter could and would start permanently activating the barricade boost in near future, I built a dozen of barricades from scratch, and only when the long range bomb tower boost was planned to be introduced in Todes, I started upgrading (or newly building) all of my previously useless old bomb towers. Before we had boosted traps, I never bothered to take a look at them, knowing that without boost they’d be way inferior to boosted barricades. 

So either boosts have to be easily affordable, to allow planning and then upgrading the boosted units/buildings, or the units need to be useful even unboosted (which isn’t the case for e.g. gargoyle towers). 

 

 

I honestly hope not!

The last pack of new alliance levels destroyed many mid tier and even upper tier alliances as all their good members got sucked up by higher / top alliances, and even those had troubles finding any decent candidates to recruit… before the pool of high lvl players increases, there’s no real room for even bigger alliances now. 

Also, additional levels would mean a cost of 500m gold and more - per level! That is INSANE!

Currently, not even top alliances can even afford their standard set of boosts without constant extra pay-donations, despite having all their members on max donations. In addition to that come costs for alliance war champions and shields, which require more pay donations. 

Now think about it, how would those have any chances of levelling up for 500m gold cost?!? Do some simple math and calculate how much real money is necessary for that. 

 

I don’t want to even mention “lower” alliances (99% of all players) here, as those can’t even get to the current max lvl anytime soon, so additional levels will be something that only harms them (member drain by top alliances, which make high lvl alliances drain members from mid level alliances, draining in turn from low level alliances, …), but which they will never ever gain access to themselves. 

 

For short: Chaos, countless destroyed alliance, extreme Pay2Win, and content unaccessible for 99% of all players!! 

 

 

Better decrease elite boost costs by some %, making it possible to level up a bit more easily (or use boosts more easily) for anyone. 

I see lots of players upgrading gargoyle towers already. I’m keen to see what the stats are of this boost. They need to be stronger than an alternative or at least in certain positions on a map to make them worth the additional cost of the boost. Heroesflorian makes a good point that even with all 60 players donating 500k per day its not possible to pay for all the boosts without donations

 

Just looking at the stats of a gargoyle unit, with damage being ~ 1.5k and range 3.5. If you add the 3.5 to the range of a gargoyle tower of 2.8 then you could potentially damage 6.3 distance which could mean across a lane?

 

However, a max skull does ~ 6k damage (assuming the bombs aren’t bounced back) If there are a lot of towers together this is quite difficult to do. The gargoyle tower must need to have quite a few gargoyles flying about to make it better than a max skull?

 

If you have one across the lane at the start of the map, and they can fly across a lane, if say the attacking unit is killed and a gargoyle was on its way to attack it will it then continue flying to the tent?