Skulls in chests opinion



I was late to see the other topic and unfortunately it’s locked now and after writing all this reply I realized that so I decided to post it in a topic alone 




The main issue now is skulls in chests. I know some players who spent last war around 2000-2500 gems.It’s impossible to open all chests and scrolling the bases with the 10 raids limit. Well, I think 10 scrolls limit is more fair but with skulls in chests it’s not pay to win even worse than before.





I am totally with random rewards to make the game more fun so winning more skulls may be by chance only not who pays to open the chests. Why not the random rewards are just pure RANDOM? like let’s say we remove the skulls from chests and we keep skulls in the chests that we earn in each milestone like the 1000 skulls, 3000 skulls, etc…


If the skulls rewards will be in those chests only so the player will get skulls as a free reward not as buying skulls by opening chests after each raid.


Randomness is nice and will bring more fun to the game but such random rewards are no longer random since anybody can open chests by gems.



To bring randomness to the game there are millions of ways like special guaranteed chest after each raid that MAY contain skulls or skulls in the milestones chests and we may choose to which battle we add them or a random reward when we complete the 10-20 raids or many other ways to add randomness but without letting rich players win by paying to open chests. 


Let’s just do a small calculation: a normal player in top alliances like top 10 has to open let’s say 2 chests on average in 10 raids so 300 gems each battle. average 5 battles per war so that’s 1500 gems eventhough some of my friends spent 2500 gems+ and let’s say 1000 per war. Any player can afford 1000 gems every week? that’s without scrolling too. so is the game now is only to earn gems and spend them in wars and keep playing day and night to be able to win leagues and get gems.



I don’t find any reason to have skulls in chests. if the reason is randomness so there are many ways to bring randomness and I mentioned just couple ways to do so. 



10 raids per war personally I find it more fair and easier but some other players may not due to scrolling and others may agree with me. But I am sure the main majority of the players WANT RANDOMNESS AND RANDOM REWARDS AND SKULLS but for  FREE  and not pay to win


I hope you reply to my post Jack and hear some opinions from the players




So you want a war decided on Random awards, pot luck??

I didn’t say I want the war winning to be based on rewards. I said there a bit of randomness is nice and if a player wins by chance 20 skulls as a random reward it may be nice but not winning skulls that will shift the tide of the war. And the system now is even worse like players are paying to open chests and earning maybe 1000 skulls in opening chests by gems and that is shifting the wars and making it unfair even more than winning 20 skulls by chance in a chest

And I just gave a suggestion to replace the current skulls in chests system and keep the randomness going

But in general I prefer playing and who deserves to win they should win without paying to win or random rewards

Hey Isa,

totally fair to open this topic - we discussed the skulls in chests the least so far.


Having some randomness in competitions is something totally legitimate.


Think about some of the games out there:

  • League of Legends, Dota, etc all have a chance for critical hits.
  • Dota has random power up spawns and random creep spawns.
  • Every strategy game has random starting positions and some even have or random creeps/items
  • Every 1v1 Shooter has random respawn positions
  • Every card game has randomness: Hearthstone, Poker, Magic The Gathering, Yugioh 


All these games are are being played at a high skill level, despite random factors influencing the match.


All of these games are highly competitive.


Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 are great examples

WC3 had random item drops that could decide the winner of the game. The pros hated it, but the game was a huge success among casual players.

SC2 removed this random factor and only skill decides the winner of the game. The pros loved it, but the game’s success was quite underwhelming.



I think the question is to what extent this randomness is implemented.

You can have too much randomness or too little. But having no randomness leaves you with a skill-only game that has much lower chances to be successful.


In the long run, skilled players/alliances will consistently show up at the top, even if randomness is involved. 


(If you are interested: Watch this episode of Extra Credits about Randomness in Esports)




Jack, they won’t if those random rewards cost them important boosts, RR is trying to be a Jack of all trades, boosts you can only win by being in an alliance and winning them, then random rewards that could potentially remove those boosts. The boosts are the problem, a top alliance like VL who have some very good players are now struggling because of the lack of boosts, not having boosts makes it harder to win boosts in the next war and so on, its a vicious circle. Casual players are pretty much non existent  for any length of time in RR as they can’t develop without boosts, they can’t get boosts without being in an alliance, they can’t get in many alliances if they are casual players … the game is killing itself.

I am curios when was started first topic with skull chests… Is simple to remove that, but seems impossible for Flare to renounce to a incoming nice bank account…so guys, until Flare doesn’t find a new method to “extort” money… Skull chest will remain … AMIN!

Isa, old friend, when have chests from Flare ever been random (and believe me, I opened a lot at the end off successfull raids).

Ask yourself, have you ever found the 90 gems, or the 200 extra skulls, or the legendary gear, in the first chest you opened ?? Statistics would mean the odds are 1:5, but honestly, out of thousands of tries I think I never found the jackpot in the first chest!!

Finally, skulls in chests during war are simply … well, guess everything on that topic has been said already, and I don’t want to use nasty words here, lol.

Thanks for your reply Jack!


I am not against randomness and randomness brings more fun and excitement to the game but the issue is PAY to open the chests and get the randomness. 


I don’t really play any of the games you listed so I am not aware of their rewards system but if the system is pay to win it doesn’t mean they are good and it doesn’t mean RR2 should be like them.  I am not against the random rewards and I don’t think any player really is against it but we are all against paying 45 gems to open 3 chests every raid to have a chance of winning some extra skulls.



We LOVE randomness and we all asked for rewards in each raid and battle but the game is becoming almost pay to win only.



I know flare isn’t an NGO and for sure Flare like Zynga or any other gaming company it has an aim of making fun games and also make profit and that’s totally right and for sure Flare should make profit to keep going and pay for the programmers and servers etc… 


Having an option to buy gems is good but the game recently and after the last update especially became for top 10 alliances pay to win or keep losing the wars.



Again we want randomness and we want rewards and Flare has the right to make money and we know the game costs a lot to keep going but to be honest in a month I am sure top 100 players will quit because non will Keep on buying gems. So far 3 of my friends quieted the game and they are in top 200 players. What’s next? if each war we have to spend minimum of 1000 gems nobody can afford that. So only the medium and new alliances will keep on fighting without spending gems and the game will lose it’s hardcore and loyal and top players



That is the whole point about the chests. We aren’t 100% against them but against the idea of paying 45 gems each raid to earn more skulls




It seems to be about to what extent this randomness is implemented. If it’s too much, we don’t like it. If it’s too little, we don’t like it.


Overall, Randomness can be a very good thing!

So let’s not bash randomness by itself and try to find out why our community isn’t happy about some features.



  • Which features involing randomness in RR2 do you appreciate?
  • Which features involving randomness in RR2 don’t you appreciate?
  • Why?
  • How would you prefer it to be?


Jewel!!!  :slight_smile:


What you said is another reason to support the idea of removing skulls. Well, I remember maybe once or twice I earned 90 gems in first chest and mainly I was earning gems or legendary items in the last chest.


I know finding skulls in chests isn’t always guaranteed and that is another reason to remove them. We are spending gems to open all the chests because we have a hope and even if it’s 10% that we may find skulls in them and sometimes we spend 45 gems and earn some pears or food or some gold without any skulls. The idea is that we are spending to try to find skulls to win and we may spend 45 gems for waste too.



  • Which features involing randomness in RR2 do you appreciate?

we like randomness and for me the current randomness REWARDS are nice

  • Which features involving randomness in RR2 don’t you appreciate?

I don’t like opening chests in order to win skulls or anything. I don’t like gambling for skulls. it’s nice to win some skulls that won’t shift the tide of the war but help players who didn’t complete 100% raids to earn some extra skulls but just in a random form not in a paying form. 

  • Why?

Top 10 alliances are spending thousands of gems to open chests and in last war I can guarantee that minimum of 10,000 gems was spent by each alliance in top 10.

  • How would you prefer it to be?

We want to play and win by skills and have some random rewards but we don’t to pay for winning. Flare has the right to make money but the game became pay to win


I never play the other games you’ve mentioned above, so i’m going to ask you, do they also limited the attacks for the match?

FG introduced loser bonus several seasons ago, we complained but FG didn’t listen, and players still managed to kinda get over it by grinding, even though none of us really like it.

After that, as if the loser bonus wasn’t bad enough, FG introduced new messed up system by making ‘luck’ a deciding factor in the war too, again, we players (that care for war) didn’t like it at all, but like the warriors we all are, we push through by doing more grinding (to be able to open many chest contain luck, we still have to grind)…

And as if FG think we players haven’t suffer enough, now they limit our attacks yet still letting loser bonus and skulls in CoF exist, we literally can’t do anything to cover any gap. We are forced to watch out team lose in silence… 


Now tell me, are all of those things i mentioned above (or similar to it) also happened to the games you’ve mentioned above? if yes, then i really really wonder how those game can achieve a huge success and at the same time thankful that i didn’t play it.

If not, then one or more of those games probably gonna be a better option for us here that are on the verge of leaving RR2 for good…



Agree with you. Loser bonus with  10 raids limit doesn’t work.If the bonus will be doubled let’s say and both alliances can do only 10 raids so for sure who loses in a war will win the next war easily.


That’s should be taken into consideration or at least we want to hear Flare’s point of view of how can an alliance face another alliance with 2% loser bonus more than you?

Well, randomness in poker can’t be altered. ie Players can’t get good cards by paying some extra money to the house. If it’s the case then no one plays it in the long term.

Similarly, if there are gems involved in  randomness then it would be creepy. If you introduce randomness please keep it same for all people(Paying/without paying).


So Jack find a good way to introduce the randomness.

Ideas to replace skulls in chests:

  • +1-5 to your attack limit
  • adds time to a random War Boost, 5-20 mins? so if you don’t have it active, you might be able to get a few raids out it.
  • You get bounty contract for a random enemy King (any kings already attacked 3 times are excluded).  If you get 100% you get extra skulls = what is currently given for free.

It looks like they’ve changed it so that only the first successful chest has skulls. I’m happy with that as it will save on gems. I totally support capping attacks and the loser bonus. But then again I lead a low to mid level alliance which is very much at the whim of the matchmaking engine and is often overmatched by absurd opponents in a war season.

Skulls in chests is a horrible idea.


They should just make higher ranked players offer more skulls. End of story.

It seems to be about to what extent this randomness is implemented. If it’s too much, we don’t like it. If it’s too little, we don’t like it.

Overall, Randomness can be a very good thing!

So let’s not bash randomness by itself and try to find out why our community isn’t happy about some features.


Which features involing randomness in RR2 do you appreciate?i like random matchmaking and i wouldnt mind that being encouraged more.

Which features involving randomness in RR2 don’t you appreciate?

Why?all those who determine a outcome without a chance to adjust to it

How would you prefer it to be?

I wouldnt mind the idea i read here with random matchmaking during war.

As that way i might end up a stronger opponent then im used or capable of fighting

But that would be a factor i can consider taking

I would agree with Jack that a bit of randomness is a good thing for any sports and game. And also irl you also have random FActors influencing the outcome of matches.

But what i would like to give to you Jack and the moderators. In any good game the influence of the randomness is always limited. For example a critical hit in dota is a percentage often influence by skull choose of a player. And was often a tactic (maxing a high attack speed with a high critical hit)

As another example at cardgames like magic, the way the player balanced his deck how many lands/creatueres/draw card determineren greatly how often randomness determines the outcome.

And there the Gust of wind during a sport match. All who have played a soccod game know you wont shoot that far against the wind. Or further with the wind in your back. So we take this ods in consideration and alter our choose based upon them.