Dropping Medals

[Aussie guy]

I've been a top 10 player with over 1600 medals. I've decided to drop medals as the incentives to maintain medals don't really exist in this game. In the top 10, I was often waiting an hour to find an opponent...the battle screen was usually telling me that no opponents could be found...and when I did get an opponent it was usually sourced from the same 20-30 players. I want to max up by base, and simply can't do this in the top 10. I noticed Timo has dropped more than 500 medals today. Maybe he has had the same experience? I am happy to keep my medals lower and max up all my buildings and resources, whilst battling easier opponents...and just wait for the next update that will hopefully improve things. Sad to say, many of the top players are using hacks, bugs, glitches, or exploits (some of us call it cheating)...and I have no interest in competing with them, as things stand at the moment. What do other players think?

 

[Whatwhat]

Well AG you already know what I think. But let me repeat. The rewards for medals are a joke. The highest I have is around 1000 and getting 6000food doesn't go far when my upgrades are costing 3 to 6 million. This will be changed I'm sure but I hope the devs realize how many players are being put off by this. Go to the Google play store and read the reviews. Almost a quarter are complaining that they are getting raided by players (like me) who are 30 to 40 lvl above them! And although I think this is accurate in a historical since (like English vs Zulu, English vs Indians, etc) it is giving this game a bad name. There needs to be some balance. Nexon increase the rewards! Secondly the cheats are still cheating and nothing has been done about it. 3 months now of allowing this is not good enough.

 

[Andy]

Agreed - with 1600 medals you really should be getting a hell of a lot more than 6000. That's a joke.

I medal drop to be able to be competative, build, and continue to get stronger.

Not sure you can do much about the cheating, but I agree that it's crap. It seems the game people are now flat out ignoring this forum? Little flurries of activity just don't cut it.

AG - what level are you at? I'm 59, and I try to stay around 500 medals which always rewards me with 100k battles. I'd be interested to see what level you are, and what target you'll aim for with medals and battle rewards?

 

[Problematic]

I'm level 68 and normally keep myself around 5-600 medals due to this exact issue. Lately I've been letting my medals go up (I gain a lot from defense) and am currently sitting at about 850. Attacking at 850 is nowhere near as profitable as it is around 500. I can't imagine being at 1500

 

[Whatwhat]

I'm lvl 77 and have recently got up to 900 medals. But there is not much point apart from getting my guild in the top 100.

 

[Problematic]

There really isn't. I just dropped down to 400 yesterday, and I am making a killing. Even just sending a couple troops at outlying farms is getting me 50k+ on average, and that's for 5-10 troops. 4-500 is where it's at until they address the low rewards at higher tiers.

 

[Aussie guy]

Well, my civilization level is over 100 and I had over 1600 medals. Now, I'm much lower in medals and have access to greater numbers of players to attack. In the top 10, I could try for an hour before even one opponent turned up on my screen. Raiding for resources was difficult when you have limited numbers of opponents. At the moment I am sitting lower, just going for coins to upgrade my walls. I could not do that when I was top 10. It's all about medals up there. A variety of exploits are used. I don't want to name players here, but some are online almost all the time, some produce abnormal amounts of defenders, some have traps that inflict huge damage, some have extra farms, walls, mortors, etc. I have no interest in playing against those players. In my opinion, to really dominate this game you need to look outside the legitimate game parameters.

 

[xilefdestroy]

I really hope they change the leagues reward, because otherwise super powerful players come to lower medals, and lvl 30 (like me) are asked to fight against lvl 100 and I can't find any other player to attack

 

[Aussie guy]

I came across a player at level 90 with 400 medals. That player must be harvesting resources big time. At the moment I'm still over 1000 medals, so most of my opponents are around that mark. I only use food pts for rebuilding my army as I have maxed up all the buildings and items that require food pts. I really go for coins, as I am trying to level up my walls at the moment. I'm am happy to lose medals, as they don't contribute towards the growth of my base, and in fact just give me fewer opponents with less potential to get those coins that I need for my walls. I know this sounds a but cynical, but after playing the game for 4 months, the strategy of dropping medals has worked well for me.

 

[Jacuer]

For the moment i couldn't care less about the medals. For me it's all about profit, and the medals doesn't give anything in that regard. Medals seems for me to be an endgame thing, but if they change the rewards, that could probably change my opinion about them.

 

[Whatwhat]

Jacuer, the problem is that there are too many high level players 'raping and pillaging' the lower levels because there is no motivation to go up the ladder. This will effect the game overall because if the lower level players give up then the player base will diminish.

 

[Andy]

...or they change it so it's your "Level" that determines the players you fight, but then you're in a bind if you're AG? - Though I think a lot of other players would pop up in the list to fight if that were the case (all the medal droppers?) Tough call for the design guys.

I drop medals, but not crazy low, but I see lots of other very high level players where I'm at. There is no other way to make money, but it does hurt the little guy.

 

[Whatwhat]

Andy there are alot of problems with only fighting players your level. Castle clash is like that and it sucks. I just think if the rewards are decent then it will even things up a bit. But I get the feeling that this matter is completely ignored by the devs.

 

[Rod]

Does this game have a loot penalty for attacking lower town hall levels? That is what they do in clash of clans and it makes it not worth it for the high level guys to attack the lower players.

 

[Andy]

This sounds like a good idea. I agree with WhatWhat that it's a bit ignored. I guess they were concentrating on bugs in the game, and trying to sort out people with heaps of extra buildings/walls.

 

[Mizzo]

This game is really pissing me off i cant even enjoy it anymore, im level 33 atm in classical age with 700 medals and worked really hard getting that amount of medals.
Now my question is how the hell is it possible that a level 60+ GUN freaking powder age is getting 18 medals for whiping my whole base? when i cant even get over 15 medals attacking level 50+ players? and if im not able to kill the town center i lose from 18-24 medals.
And i can barely whipe half of the bases im attacking, so i usually get around 4-6 medals per attack and keep losing double the amount i can even get of constantly getting attacked from gunpowder age players and medival age players. How is it that they can even get over 10 medals? some of the 40-50+ medival players i get to attack has a maximum of 10 medal prize IF i whipe the whole base.

And the other problem i have is attacking people with Acropolis wonders and colesseums, its literally impossible for me to whipe over 37% of the base the defenders rapes my ceasers legions, and their maximum upgraded for my age and so is all 3 of my barracks, my opinion is that they should lower the %.
I Chose hanging by the gardens (dumbest idea ever) that wonder is a complete joke, same with notredam the 10% doesnt help me at all and neither does the daily gold bonus.

 

[Aussie guy]

In the past two days of raiding I gained 150 unwanted medals. This pushed me into the mode of getting harder opponents with fewer resources to raid. So now I'm dropping those medals again so I can continue to get coins from easier opponents. Why would I attack another level 100plus player for 40k of coins, and sacrifice my entire army, when I can raid a level 60 player with 300k of coins and get most of my troops back? The League incentives are not strong enough and there are no rewards for being near the top of leaders board. In fact you are punished for being at the top, with fewer opponents and resources made available on the battle mode. Why would anyone wait up to an hour to find one opponent? That's not fun! My strategy is to keep a moderate amount of medals and enjoy a few battles of my choosing whilst slowly upgrading my walls.

 

[Jacuer]

I think the loot penalty like in Coc, is the right way to go. That would force players to go higher in medals, and thus give people up there more opponents.

 

[Whatwhat]

There is no loot penalty. But you can only attack players that are 2 levels below you. Eg. As an enlightenment age player I can only attack as low as medieval age. So I never see classical age players any more.

 

[Whatwhat]

Mizzo, I think your strategy is all wrong. Is this game only about medals? Not really. And if it is then wouldn't you reckon it would be easier to get them if you had de end troops and a decent base? Well at classical age that's just not possible. So I reccomend that you lower your medals to around 300 and just raid until you get up to enlightenment age (that's what I did). When you get there you will have no problem getting medals.