Players with name Leader

[FCF50]

There are players with the name Leader who, if visited or patrolled, the name does not appear in the upper right corner.

If these players are attacked, the game returns a communication error message due to any inconsistencies found; in this case the absence of the name!

Our alliance already met such a player in the last war, and in the one we are about to start, we have 2 to attack! Of course there will be 10 stars impossible to do which will certainly give you the victory, despite being balanced alliances.

I would very much appreciate that this problem, bug, hackers be reviewed and solved forever.

 

[FCF50]

No Title

 

[FCF50]

Despite alerting Nexon to this situation, nothing was done and the attacks on the bases with the name Leqder returned a communication error invalidating the gain of stars in the world war! Where does Nexon want to go, allowing these situations to continue to exist in the Dominations gaming community? How can we justify to the allies of the alliance that the purchase of troops, of army in the offer tab, must be made in order to be stronger for the war? I have no words...

 

[Xabar]

well, as homero's says, nananana leader, leader...
I Suspect, that they are trying to clean the game of cheaters, and bugs are generated by it

 

[SomeRandomPlayer]

This workaround works in most cases.

Since you're only able to drop one troop, drop donated troops that can take out the base if left alone; usually HT (1 or 2) with zook fill, depending. Or drop one HT of your own if it can do the job. Then, wait. There will be a network connection error (as you referenced) but the battle will continue on in the background. That troop you dropped will take out the base like a normal attack would do if left alone. Ideally it'll get to 5 stars, albeit slow, but 5 stars. After, and only after this moment, click stuff and the end result (battle log) will show the 5 star result.

 

[rêvasserie]

I thought anyone named Leader had been rolled back.

 

[Uhuru]

Well, that's good advice.

 

[Freightshaker]

This workaround works in most cases.

Since you're only able to drop one troop, drop donated troops that can take out the base if left alone; usually HT (1 or 2) with zook fill, depending. Or drop one HT of your own if it can do the job. Then, wait. There will be a network connection error (as you referenced) but the battle will continue on in the background. That troop you dropped will take out the base like a normal attack would do if left alone. Ideally it'll get to 5 stars, albeit slow, but 5 stars. After, and only after this moment, click stuff and the end result (battle log) will show the 5 star result.

We are currently fighting France Est 67 and will suggest this.

EDIT- It's disappointing that alliances are allowed to continue fighting like this.

 

[KnattyNate]

This does work. We just had this happen in one of our recent wars. I used this method and was able to get the five stars.

 

[Mohawk Mom]

Our last war war with Armenian Army. They too had a “ leader”. We has 7 members try that base with all getting the error. Reported it to CS. Of course that generated the standard reply. They may get tired of me, I’m not dropping the issue.

 

[Uhuru]

Go ahead! If the developer wanted to, he could easily solve this problem, for example, by banning accounts in the war without updating to the current version of the game, or by banning war accounts with the name leader or more than a month offline, etc. The only question is - what will make them do it?!

 

[SomeRandomPlayer]

FWIW, a user may create this sort of base by accident. I've seen it done (by accident). Something related to how the tutorial may stall and never complete, and the user is never asked for a name so they are assigned "Leader" and a blank war name. Likely the system gets confused and is incapable of handing this situation of them not having a real name. It's a coding issue that could likely be fixed, to essentially require a real name to be in war and attacked in multiplayer; and ideally prevented in the future.

So while some users may do this intentionally, I'm speculating that not all do; some create sandbags as filler if their alliance can't meet the correct numbers. And since crashing happens sometimes anyways, maybe it takes awhile before they realize it crashes _every_time.

The workaround is simple (and described above and elsewhere) but not widely known; and not perfect as it can fail too and/or provide a slow attack.

I consider this a top priority bug.

 

[Rogue Squirrel]

This problem isn't new. We had someone join our alliance four years ago with the name Leader. We noticed after a couple of wars that something wasn't right because no one attacked her base in war. She contacted customer services and they sorted the problem out for her and she got her old name back and was able to participate in wars again normally. Problem is that since then customer services have gotten progressively worse so I don't think anyone now would get it resolved so quickly.

After that we didn't have any more problems then suddenly this Christmas three more people with the name Leader joined our alliance. I told them I couldn't include them in wars until they sorted out their accounts with customer services but they didn't bother replying. Since then one has left and I booted another for being inactive. We still have one left but unless they sort it out soon I'm going to kick them too.

A few weeks ago we were at war with the alliance 13NRV and the same base that has been posted by FCF50 above was still there. No one could attack it. We reported them and got a reply from BHG saying that they would investigate but we didn't get our lost glory back.

The weird thing is that after the preparation day this account moved form 13NRV to another French alliance called Feeling French. I don't know if they were finally kicked out or if this is just another glitch in their repertoire

 

[No Angel]

This happens when a player doesn't finish tutorial up to naming the account, then he clears game data (or uninstall then reinstall) the game on Androids then starts playing normally afterwards in the same device. Lower bases are manageable, but what if they proceeded to higher ages, obviously donated alliance troops wouldn't clear the whole bases
Also most of the time it's unintentional, though people could abuse this workaround.