Nexon/BHG Are you going to fix the no-opponent situation?

[GroteKoning]

The game became unplayable. Maybe one attack per 30 minutes, and then only for 1 medal. Yet defending you stand to lose 15 plus. Thus 8 hours plus to recover your loss = zero progress.

Nexon/BHG Are you going to fix the no-opponent situation?

If yes, by when?

 

[Gambrinus]

so it's apparent that BHG never had a plan for end game play. I'll have to assume they expected all of us to give up by now. why else would they constantly come out with updates that nerf units and make it take longer to build your base and cook your army.

if they cared, they would have been focusing on; ridding the game of cheaters, fixing the force close exploit, making the medals system equitable, and improve the match making system so we can always find an opponent.

 

[maggiepie]

I'm curious as to what the viable solution to this problem would be. Presumably there are no opponents found because the pool is so small at higher leagues, thus players in those leagues are more likely to either be online or on a PT.

Broken PT's are equally upsetting, so that's not ideal.

Keeping 'banned' cheaters in the pool also upsets people.

Increasing the pool of players is a great solution- but how can that possibly be achieved. There is no real incentive to climb medals. You can get some nice league bonuses if you go up high- but not when you can barely attack anyone, so that's not really a great incentive either.

So, how can nexon/bhg force lower league players into climbing in order to increase the pool? (I'm actually genuinely interested).

 

[Gambrinus]

they need to start matching players by level and disregard the medals.

there is no reason a lv120 player in kingdom league shouldn't be able to attack a lv150 player that is in silver league.

 

[Cannibals]

They need to present me with an opponent search result. When was the last time Google told you 'sorry no pages ... try again later.'

 

[Eddie F1]

I put a suggestion in the Medals Spotlight thing.

But even a very simple matching on troop space only would work 10x better than the current medal/league malarkey.

IA 135 troop space Vs IA 135 troop space then they can't go flattening early EA with only 95 troop spaces. Distribution of medals is the scoring afterwards. Might stop folk lurking down at 200 medals forever.

And it would still cripple hacked/buggy bases with 6 barracks or 2500 troop spaces because they would have to match 270 or 2500 troop spaces - i.e. other cheaters only. If you woke up to 6 barracks suddenly, you'd be straight on to CS to get them removed.

 

[maggiepie]

@Gambrinus: That's a good suggestion. However, then there is no need for a medal system whatsoever, and then the leaderboards will be dissolved.

The medal system is, I suppose theoretically, meant to represent different levels of dedication and skill in the game- which gives those in the leaderboard their 'elite' status.

If you rise on the leaderboard, you commit significant time to attacking all manner of bases, being victorious enough against most of them to maintain an elite ranking.

On the other hand, if you do not have the time or skill to rise in the rankings, you remain low in the leagues.

Forcing a player that does not want to compete in rankings, just because you as an elite player have decided to put yourself into a very small pool of other players, isn't particularly fair either. Level hasn't got much to do with the type of dedication and skill needed to get onto the leaderboard.

So in this scenario, if its level based competition you want, then the leaderboard becomes defunct and there are no medal rewards. That may upset people that have an extreme desire to be ranked on a leaderboard.

 

[maggiepie]

@cannibals: I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I'm understanding your proposed solution. I'm not sure what you mean by being provided with a search report- like instead of the 'no opponents' message you want a long list of all the players in your league and the reason you can't attack them at that moment? That seems like a really big request and I'm not sure how helpful, or feasible, it ultimately is- so I really think I've misunderstood you!

Google is also very different. Google has never returned a message that 'this page is currently being viewed so can't be viewed by you right now' or 'this page has been viewed so hard recently that you can't view it for the next few hours'.

 

[maggiepie]

@eddie: that's another really interesting point! But again, I think troop space isn't a good measure of dedication and skill, so I'm not sure how it can fit with a medal based ranking system.

There has to be other good incentives to want to make lower league players commit the time and effort to moving up- not necessarily solutions that allow higher league players to access lower league players, which isn't fair.

Also, I don't see any real inherent problem with someone wanting to linger at lower leagues, forever, even. If they don't want to be ranked in the leaderboard, then fine. It's only an issue insomuch as it keeps the higher leagues a smaller pool- but that's why the players there want to be there, because it's elite. Currently, if you want a larger pool of players, drop down in league. People can't possibly want to be in a small group of elite players while at the same time being in a large group- then it's no longer elite.

Maybe other solutions could be shorter PTs in higher leagues (and I think maybe adjusting the medal system somehow). So there are more opportunities to access players, perhaps for more equitable medal distribution, so the time commitment doesn't become impossible (but still remains significant).

 

[Gambrinus]

I'd argue that level has a lot to do with dedication to the game. you don't get to EA or IA if you're just causal gamer, cause most of them leave after GP when things get too long to upgrade.

also, thanks for thinking of me as an elite player, but is humbly disagree, I'm definitely a fan of the game. when someone like me (lv119 2557medals) has a constant issue with not finding an opponent, then i think the match making is broken. and thus the medal system is to, since there is no practical way to advance in the game and if you can't advance then why am i still playing? am i supposed to play only one a week to get resources for upgrades, then forget it about it until another upgrade is ready? doesn't Nexon want me to play (and spend crowns) every day? but if every time i log in and try to play, i get a no opponent message, then I'm not motivated to spend money on a TB or instantly training troops.

 

[maggiepie]

I'd argue that level has a lot to do with dedication to the game. you don't get to EA or IA if you're just causal gamer, cause most of them leave after GP when things get too long to upgrade.

I'd respectfully disagree I consider myself to be pretty casual and I've made it to EA. I could also easily make it to IA right now, if my philosophy were to rush. That's all about patience and a little sticktoitiveness. It's not necessary to crazy grind it out to get most upgrades done.

also, thanks for thinking of me as an elite player, but is humbly disagree, I'm definitely a fan of the game. when someone like me (lv119 2557medals) has a constant issue with not finding an opponent, then i think the match making is broken. and thus the medal system is to, since there is no practical way to advance in the game and if you can't advance then why am i still playing? am i supposed to play only one a week to get resources for upgrades, then forget it about it until another upgrade is ready? doesn't Nexon want me to play (and spend crowns) every day? but if every time i log in and try to play, i get a no opponent message, then I'm not motivated to spend money on a TB or instantly training troops.

I was speaking a bit more generally, and more to the highest leagues, but you are still in a decent ranking, which is likely still a relatively smaller pool of players. Advancing in the game and advancing in leagues are not necessarily the same thing. You can currently still play the game without going higher in medals.

You're supposed to be motivated to spend money on all aspects of the game, not just getting TBs or instant troops, but instant everything (or as much as possible). That's just the reality of mobile gaming. Games that don't try to profit like that will die.

I think more critical here is the question of why gain medals in the first place? If it's to get on the leaderboard, then it should be for those people willing to make and maintain the struggle. But the fact is the higher people go the fewer the players and thus the more difficult it becomes. The more opponents you find, the more players available, the less exclusive the league. The higher the league the more time you need to put in to maintain that, the less available you are for attack. Then when you are attacked you get an 8hr PT and are again less available for attack. I think at a certain point things just get worse and worse in terms of climbing leagues. If it were easy, we'd all be on the leaderboard.

 

[Europeos]

This is the most important issue in the game at the moment and needs to be addressed. Is anyone at Nexon reading this? A little feedback would be appreciated.

 

[Funks]

WHy are we having to come up with suggestions, where the f**k are the BHG reps!???

 

[Eddie F1]

Because we are the beta testers - on internships of course.

 

[Cannibals]

Instead of telling me there is no opponent, present me with a list of potential opponents in order by who might give me the best challenge. Then I'll pick which one I want to attack and go for it. While I am finding no opponents with my higher-medal account, my lower-medal account is getting matches so know there are not No Opponents.

 

[Magnifico]

They are probably home with their families. It's the weekend, after all.

 

[Hunter Killer]

This is getting into a vicious cycle. People get fed up with the no opponents situation and quit playing, hence there are less and less opponents to be found at higher medal range. Everyone has been chipping in ideas, I hope they use some of them to fix the situation.

I think we all kid ourselves about the real number of active players in this game. I personally think there's about 500-1000 players worldwide who actually really play the game (i.e. move to EA/IA, climb medals). The rest are casual players who either quit in GA or are playing it like farmville at low medal range and can't be reached by the active players because of the matchmaking limitations.

 

[Magnifico]

The rest are casual players who either quit in GA or are playing it like farmville at low medal range and can't be reached by the active players because of the matchmaking limitations.

I have read posts from top players about how the most efficient way to farm resources is to get into the upper medal range, so that all you have to do is pop a TC to reap a large league bonus. But those same players are constantly posting about how the top medal game is "unplayable" and full of cheats and hackers, interminable waits to find an opponent, broken peace treaties, etc. Maybe it's more efficient, but it sounds like a joyless grind. So, no thanks. I will sacrifice optimal resource gathering in the interest of fun.

 

[maggiepie]

@cannibals: a list of potential opponents like that, maybe let's say 3, is really interesting; but I don't think it solves a 'no opponents' issue. I think it would add another layer of interest, though; and perhaps could cost a few more coins to offset the decrease in nexting.

In terms of your main and secondary accounts- they are an entire league apart. While I think your secondary account is still in a more limited pool of players, and that you probably do see some 'no opponent' messages there, your main account is in a pool of about 75 players only (they are all on the leaderboard, so pretty easy to count them). Thus, out of all those 75 people, it is not inconceivable that at times many of you are online attacking each other, or have done so within the past 8hrs (and thus, are on a pt).

So the issue still remains increasing the players in that pool, while still keeping it limited. Or, increasing the rate at which you can attack each other.

 

[Hunter Killer]

I have read posts from top players about how the most efficient way to farm resources is to get into the upper medal range, so that all you have to do is pop a TC to reap a large league bonus. But those same players are constantly posting about how the top medal game is "unplayable" and full of cheats and hackers, interminable waits to find an opponent, broken peace treaties, etc. Maybe it's more efficient, but it sounds like a joyless grind. So, no thanks. I will sacrifice optimal resource gathering in the interest of fun.

Just like everything else in life, there is never a perfect situation. I'm not necessarily saying the top medal range is unplayable, just that the leaderboard is useless and not reflecting the correct ranking and skills because of cheaters and broken peace treaties. But I'm fine staying in dynasty league and can have enough opponents to kick off my upgrades when I need to. I get about 15 battles per hour.

If I play at lower medal range, I'll need to get 30+ battles to steal enough resources for a big upgrade. In dynasty, it'll take me 10 battles, I'll get 2m gold or food just from winning 10 battles and the rest will be from looting more juicy bases. The trade off is whether you'll get more resources per hour being able to do back to back attacks with low league rewards or wait for opponents and have bigger league rewards.

The idea of fun is very subjective. I used to have a heavy cavalry army that could wipe out any base back in the glory days of heavy cavalry. It was pretty much drop, go get a coffee and come back to collect victory. I actually find sniping TC more challenging, you actually get to think about a strategy to get there. It's also more fun for me because you get to attack more often, seeing different base setups than just dropping an army and wait 3 mins without doing anything until the map is clean.