Should the force quit exploit be removed?

[zaphod]

Far more people seem to suffer from it than there are people who are protected by it. Removing the exploit would bring new life to the game and would show BHG does care about the community and the game. So should the force quit exploit/feature be removed?

 

[Parmenion]

No. 1 problem: The game can't tell the difference between a crash and a forced close!

I'm not willing to lose 39 medals every time the game crashes, so no, until they can tell if the game crashed or the player has forced closed I don't want it messing with.

For now, loot taken needs to be returned and traps reset. This limits the hurt even if winning on defence is virtually impossible.

 

[zaphod]

The game has become much more stable. I've experienced one crash in the last three weeks; on the other hand I have to re-arm my traps at least three times a day costing me on average 100k gold per time. Not to mention that you lose part of your defence if you're not able to re-arm them in time. Also those three unsuccesful attacks would have netted me 50+ medals easily.

 

[maggiepie]

The game has not become more stable- I'm still experiencing multiple daily crashes, as I have been since downloading the game in April 2015.

 

[S_How]

Even though I crash some....I would LOVE for this loophole to be closed. Even though I would lose some medals in attacks, I would get them back from a reasonable defense strategy. I would say this is a wash....

However the biggest reason to close it, is that defense, at least in higher medal tiers, literally has absolutely no meaning for your home base. That is just crazy. There is absolutely no reason with this exploit to actually protect your town center and play defense for medals.

 

[Woodstock82]

What zaphod said.

 

[sponge]

Instead of focusing on fixing force quit, fix the reason why players are using it. 1/-39 medals system is ridiculous. At 2000+ medals there's really no other outcome. Players with maxed out defences and walls give you 1 medal for a win, and 39 for a loss. No wonder people are force quitting.

And what about situation where you run into a cheater? With multiple TCs or indestructible walls? Are you going to lose 39 medals or are you going to force quit the game?

 

[Quovatis]

Of course fix it. It would bring *gasp* defense into the game!

 

[zaphod]

If you run into a cheater base you just press next. That is unless you are participating in The Big Bulldoze.

 

[Aurelius...]

Fix it. I like designing strong defensive bases, rather than tc/fc outside walls. Almost every defensive video I watch shows sprung traps, and not near resources, so it's likely that I'd produce medals from defense, rather than lose them. Wouldn't that be nice.

I've posted extensively about the medal and matching system being broken (months ago... I've lost my sense of motivation). I'd love to see it improved. Perhaps eliminating the force quit exploit would allow the devs to move away from +1/-39.

Alliance wars has tested whether eliminating force quit can work. And the answer is a resounding yes. (I feel bad for those who have connection problems. There are some ways to improve this. In the end, the defensive aspects of the game can't be completely destroyed to eliminate medal loss from disconnection).

 

[JuDomines]

Instead of focusing on fixing force quit, fix the reason why players are using it. 1/-39 medals system is ridiculous. At 2000+ medals there's really no other outcome. Players with maxed out defences and walls give you 1 medal for a win, and 39 for a loss. No wonder people are force quitting.

And what about situation where you run into a cheater? With multiple TCs or indestructible walls? Are you going to lose 39 medals or are you going to force quit the game?

No I'm sorry but even in a +39/-1 or more realistic +1/-1 configuration players will still use it. If they can't tell the difference between a crash and force quit, the solution is give the defensive medal anyway and don't attribute loot. It's not perfect but a good solution given the contraint

 

[Aurelius...]

Why not allow us to retain partial videos? It would be pretty obvious that if the attacker's army is completely destroyed before the disconnection, it was intentional. Or if 45 raiders just swarmed around picking up food and gold before disappearing that the attacker was intending to raid and force quit from the beginning.

 

[Mr Suplex]

No. 1 problem: The game can't tell the difference between a crash and a forced close!

I'm not willing to lose 39 medals every time the game crashes, so no, until they can tell if the game crashed or the player has forced closed I don't want it messing with.

Too bad. In World War a crash counts as a loss, and the same methodology should be applied to "normal" attacks for medals. Don't attack while on a spotty internet connection or troubleshoot your device if it becomes a constant problem.

Also, keep in mind that once the force close exploit is resolved, there will be more opportunity to gain medals through defense, since right now it never happens.

 

[sponge]

You can't tell if walls are indestructible or not.

 

[maggiepie]

I'm not on 'spotty internet', and the crashes become more or less frequent through absolutely no difference to my device or behaviour- which at least suggests the issue is not all with the user.

In WW a crash or force close counts as a null event, an unused attack which albeit cannot be used. No medals are lost, but also no medals are gained. Treating multiplayer and WW the same would not result in more defensive wins; at the most it may prevent trap re-sets- which should really just be re-set at no cost anyway (the same as regular defensive troops).

 

[Parmenion]

Too bad. In World War a crash counts as a loss, and the same methodology should be applied to "normal" attacks for medals. Don't attack while on a spotty internet connection or troubleshoot your device if it becomes a constant problem.

Also, keep in mind that once the force close exploit is resolved, there will be more opportunity to gain medals through defense, since right now it never happens.

In war you just get two attacks. I can live with a crash in war. I do far more attacks in multiplayer each day, so that's not a fair comparison. I also do on the rare occasion win on defence but most players aren't honest enough to lose the medals.

Troubleshoot the device??? The crashing is due to the game's coding, not the device. I get crashes using Bluestacks to access my 2nd account.

I've said my opinion and everyone is welcome to their own. I'll say no more on the matter in this thread.

 

[Quovatis]

BHG didn't do anything different regarding WW attacks and force close, so stop acting like it's some great progress on their part, because there is none.

 

[Martine]

I am so far from knowing anything about computer programming its like from here to Pluto and back but ...
how the heck do you even think its possible for them to do this ?

 

[zaphod]

Same here. I got rid of the forbidden castle because it was doing me more damage than good. As it is now my base is not designed to fight off an attacker but to allow them to win without losing too many resources. It's a bit like being back in medieval or gunpowder age.

 

[Quovatis]

Because every other similar game out there takes care of it