Search results

Sounds good.

I like this idea.

Though I don't really think it's my role to educate outside of our alliance, first aid can be very effective in some circumstances. I'd suggest testing it before discarding it as an option. (Though I think the peashooter spam comment may be right on.)

Ha. Right. The internal investigations group. Are they the one's that make sure you fight the same cheater alliance you just beat? It's important to give them a second (and sometimes third) chance.

Yeah, we've focused on defensive artys for some time now as well. It's interesting, though, that while there seems to be a consensus that they're the strongest defensive troop, some are still arguing that the game is properly balanced. Can both statements be true? Is there any other troop...

Get a grip. The devs will decide how to address issues raised by forum posters. People should feel free to bring up topics that they are interested in. Some of those topics will include game balance, as they should. Attacking those who bring up game balance issues is not helpful. Save your...

Guys, Force quit ensures the following: 1. Our medals won't increase as a result of defensive battles. 2. Resource production by roads, caravans, farms, mines, etc. will be matched or outpaced by looters and failed attackers who force quit. (We lose resources, reset traps, renew blessings...

For the record, this is a bit of an exaggeration, as I've never had 1 kill 6, but my point is simply that offensive artys don't attack defensive artys, which creates an imbalance. I have seen 1 defensive arty kill 2-3 of my offensive artys before I noticed it, which is the inspiration for this...

Attacking bases with artillery on defense is doable, though it can be tough. Having said that, I'd like to see offensive artillery balanced with defensive artillery. Right now, 1 arty on defense will kill 6 on offense easily (the offensive artys won't attack the defensive arty, and will...

The reason Nexon/BHG won't fix the force quit exploit has nothing to do with protecting people with bad connections. It has everything to do with not wanting players to gain medals and resources passively. They want us actively playing all the time, not sitting back and raking in the profits...

Ha. Would be funny. Maybe just add gate functionality to the sabotage tactic effect.

We don't have this problem now, but we did when wars started. Why not just allow us to dump the troops easily and replace them? Even a slip of the finger can be an issue. Why stick people with non-defensive troops for an entire war?

Good idea, and watching the attack would be classic.

Agreed. Good post, umyo.

We're having a strong performance in war. If you're tired of getting smacked around by cheater and spender alliances, come join us, we've got a few spots open. We'll be happy to help you seek revenge...

Sorry, but I strongly disagree here. The purpose of posting on this forum is to make the developer aware of issues that make the game more or less fun. As to ai, they seem to have determined that troop rebuilding is a cash cow for them, and have therefore purposefully made ai less effective...

We need more people complaining about ai, not fewer. Good post. This is the number 1 issue with the game for me. Makes it less fun.

Oh, and my guess is that this guy isn't a cheater. Just new to the game, unskilled at the moment, and wealthy. Again, this is my guess, and I could be wrong. (It's nice to see another alliance with zero tolerance for cheating. Your leader/council could ask to see a receipt next time. We've...

People spend far more than that in this game and others. I don't, but many do.

Yeah. Pretty much. Seems obvious that the treaty shouldn't be broken until the attack actually happens.