• Leonard Smith Discount Error
    We are aware of the Leonard Smith Event discount not working properly for players. We will reactivate the event once we correct the issue blocking the 15% Discount.

Troop Card Glitch

sileepuppee

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
385
It was mentioned before on a post but I wanted to bring it back up because we've noticed it in the last few wars as well. Likely this post will get closed as well but we wondered why suddenly half the attackers started using elephant archers on the offense regardless of whether they were gunpowder or cold war. If they were for sale I'm sure they would have actually paid but the archers haven't been around in a while. Whatever the glitch is, it works only on offense and not for defensive purposes. I watch youtube videos for certain people which I won't implicate because I think they're good people and I've learned a ton from them. I watched a live attack with commentary and as usual this person crushed this base but I noticed right away when he clicked on attack from the troop screen it said 0/4 troop tactics and I thought wow that was a mistake but during the actual attack he had 2 elephant archers cards and 2 impis. When the battle was over it did list the archers and impis as troops lost. I made comment on the video about not knowing that it was probably "The glitch." Someone else made a comment that it was indeed the glitch. I was waiting for a public reply from that person but instead the video was taken down and replaced again but this time around showing the correct info so I'm not how that happened but I've seen replays of other attackers all over youtube and suddenly this last month or so you notice a ton of people using elephant archers.
 

Festivus

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
268
I snatch up as many ancient chests as I can afford whenever the deal comes along. Still got over a hundred elephants in inventory. I know others do the same...
 

True God

Approved user
LV
4
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
380
Awards
1
It was mentioned before on a post but I wanted to bring it back up because we've noticed it in the last few wars as well. Likely this post will get closed as well but we wondered why suddenly half the attackers started using elephant archers on the offense regardless of whether they were gunpowder or cold war. If they were for sale I'm sure they would have actually paid but the archers haven't been around in a while. Whatever the glitch is, it works only on offense and not for defensive purposes. I watch youtube videos for certain people which I won't implicate because I think they're good people and I've learned a ton from them. I watched a live attack with commentary and as usual this person crushed this base but I noticed right away when he clicked on attack from the troop screen it said 0/4 troop tactics and I thought wow that was a mistake but during the actual attack he had 2 elephant archers cards and 2 impis. When the battle was over it did list the archers and impis as troops lost. I made comment on the video about not knowing that it was probably "The glitch." Someone else made a comment that it was indeed the glitch. I was waiting for a public reply from that person but instead the video was taken down and replaced again but this time around showing the correct info so I'm not how that happened but I've seen replays of other attackers all over youtube and suddenly this last month or so you notice a ton of people using elephant archers.

Never mind. We run with it.
 

Dirac

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
Messages
9
Maybe you should close this thread. I didn't even know about the existence of this glitch before reading your post, and now I even know how to reproduce it. I guess this explains why I've been attacked with troop tactics in multiplayer lately.
 

True God

Approved user
LV
4
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
380
Awards
1
Wish i knew how it works! But if it actually benefits rather than hinders then just be quiet about it . There are too many loud mouths complaining and bitching . Grow up.
 

Quovatis

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
Was good while it lasted. Next time keep quiet about a bug that doesn't hurt any players, just the company's pockets. We should all embrace a bug that ends pay to win.
 

True God

Approved user
LV
4
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
380
Awards
1
Was good while it lasted. Next time keep quiet about a bug that doesn't hurt any players, just the company's pockets. We should all embrace a bug that ends pay to win.

Correct. It sounds like a good glitch. Unfortunately there are too many weak loud mouths who whine and complain. Utter morons.
 

Loonies

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
99
Yes the glitch is so great. It’s pay to win without the paying ... how does that benefit players again?
 

ReekyBullet

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
196
Loonies Agreed, especially given that it's all very secret so most people don't know how to do it therefore only benefitting a select group of people (oh sorry cheaters).
And it is cheating before anyone tries to cry otherwise. I've seen the replays of people using multiple troop cards to get oil or hit tough bases in MP they otherwise wouldn't touch. This is the night witch glitch all over again but with any other troop they want.
 

Mcnasty

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Messages
456
A glitch is a glitch. Wether it benefits us or not it should be reported. It may benefit attackers but it doesn’t benefit defenders. You people complaining that people reported it should maybe work on your attacks so you don’t get so upset when someone reports a glitch that only benefits attackers.
 

sileepuppee

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
385
Obviously it hurts their pockets which is why it's on the top of the list with the new update. Every game is p2w otherwise there would be no game. . No one doing this for free as a hobby. They aren't working on donations though that would be great. My point is that you can do so much in this game without the need to pay that's why I continue to play because it's still fun to me even without me dropping a penny on it. So when I notice some kind of glitch I'm going to say something. To just say keep quiet about it is ridiculous. Why would you want someone to have an unfair advantage over anyone else in the game. If they do it by spending money on in game items that's their choice. To call people weak loudmouths when they talk about it is also a weak loudmouth thing to do because you have no better comeback. Why not say oh "Make your base defense better or learn to play better?" That would still be a stupid response. You may as well say that if everyone around me is cheating than it's ok that I cheat.

I get it that this is just my own personal opinion and I'm always up for reading responses. If someone willingly uses glitches to play the game that's cool and their choice, I'm not going to debate with them personally to stop nor would I be able to convince them to anyway. That being said, that won't stop me from posting about it.
 
Last edited:

Quovatis

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
Obviously it hurts their pockets which is why it's on the top of the list with the new update. Every game is p2w otherwise there would be no game. . No one doing this for free as a hobby. They aren't working on donations though that would be great. My point is that you can do so much in this game without the need to pay that's why I continue to play because it's still fun to me even without me dropping a penny on it. So when I notice some kind of glitch I'm going to say something. To just say keep quiet about it is ridiculous. Why would you want someone to have an unfair advantage over anyone else in the game. If they do it by spending money on in game items that's their choice. To call people weak loudmouths when they talk about it is also a weak loudmouth thing to do because you have no better comeback. Why not say oh "Make your base defense better or learn to play better?" That would still be a stupid response. You may as well say that if everyone around me is cheating than it's ok that I cheat.

I get it that this is just my own personal opinion and I'm always up for reading responses. If someone willingly uses glitches to play the game that's cool and their choice, I'm not going to debate with them personally to stop nor would I be able to convince them to anyway. That being said, that won't stop me from posting about it.

That's just not true. Clash of Clans is arguably the most profitable game of the genre ever, and has made billions in revenue, and they are not pay to win at all. Yes, you can pay to advance faster, but it doesn't have any absurd mechanic where you pay for greater offense, defense by buying troops/buildings directly. That's a big difference. There are players in Clash that are maxed without spending a penny, and they are at no disadvantage in war. In Dominations, it's pretty much impossible to max without spending money, and you are at a huge disadvantage if you only use free troops in the stronghold. Dominations is unique, as far as I'm aware, to being pay to win, despite Nexon saying they don't believe in pay to win on their own webpage.

We all understand they have to make money, but there are plenty of way to make absurd amounts of money (literally billions!) without having any pay to win elements. Supercell has proved this.
 

sileepuppee

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
385
That's just not true. Clash of Clans is arguably the most profitable game of the genre ever, and has made billions in revenue, and they are not pay to win at all. Yes, you can pay to advance faster, but it doesn't have any absurd mechanic where you pay for greater offense, defense by buying troops/buildings directly. That's a big difference. There are players in Clash that are maxed without spending a penny, and they are at no disadvantage in war. In Dominations, it's pretty much impossible to max without spending money, and you are at a huge disadvantage if you only use free troops in the stronghold. Dominations is unique, as far as I'm aware, to being pay to win, despite Nexon saying they don't believe in pay to win on their own webpage.

We all understand they have to make money, but there are plenty of way to make absurd amounts of money (literally billions!) without having any pay to win elements. Supercell has proved this.

But it has the option for people to pay money as you said. Even it's a much smaller percentage of people paying and you don't have the numbers but people are paying money. Like I said Dominations is still fun to me but at the same time my experience is obviously different from other players. I have run into a lot of players that have maxed cold war bases in war but they had no advantage over me because while they have the best def buildings or troops, they don't know how to play well and again that's their choice to drop cash. You're speaking of "Game of war" or those genres where you would spend thousands to get what absurd millions of power. In those games you're right in that it would be impossible to overcome such odds but in this game I'm 202 atomic and I'm beating 270 cold war bases. We have level 100-120 i.a players in our alliance who have been i.a for several months because all they want to do is push the limit of what bases they can destroy and so far they can get defeat lvl 200+ bases. If they have all the advantages and they get beat senseless than that just makes us feel better about not spending money. I only commented partly on the p2w aspect as I was making a point about the use the troop card glitch in the game which you didn't even address so you must be in favor of having an advantage? I'm just trying to and it isn't impossible to max and obviously it will take forever and probably never happen for me but players I'm content as long as I enjoy myself. I can see your hyper focused on the money being made and if you were really pissed about it than you would stop playing the game if you haven't already. That's the only way to show them. I'm not arguing about the money being made by them, probably dumb money but we are playing their game that they created.
 

Quovatis

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
Pay to win is different from pay to advance faster. Big difference.

I only support using the glitch in war, where at the level our alliance plays, you must use elephant archers on offense to even have a chance at beating other top alliances. Those not in the top alliances won't understand how bad the pay to win is. If we didn't use elephant archers and elephant stables, there is absolutely no way to compete. It doesn't matter how much skill we have. That's just a fact. I don't like that I'm basically required to buy streams of elephant archers to even COMPETE, much less win. There is absolutely no way to beat a top team with free units if they use paid-for units. Absolutely no way.
 
Last edited:

sileepuppee

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
385
Well the W and the A are different. Anyway that's all I was writing about whether you chose or not to use glitches. That's your stance on it and that I have my own stance on it, that's fine. I know my game routine is different than others in the top alliances. I already said I'm not trying to change anyones perspective but I am going to talk about it as it's not a secret. People have already talked about it before I posted my thoughts on it. Just like the night witch planes or the 10000 troops in war bases, they are all glitches and eventually get taken away. I'm not in any top alliances so my worries aren't the same as someone who is. But I have seen insane offensive skill by people who don't use any special cards. If I did have so much worry or stress about a game or found it that one sided I wouldn't play it anymore so ideally it won't get to that point. Good back and forth talk never knew how much money CoC made since I never played.
 

Manifesto

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
1,920
In Dominations, it's pretty much impossible to max without spending money, and you are at a huge disadvantage if you only use free troops in the stronghold.
Quo, there are two points of discussion with your statements.
One, it IS possible to max without spending money. Anyone can max out if they're willing to spend the TIME, not money. Spending money is for rich or impatient people, the ones with the ''I want it now'' mentality.
Two, your comments would suggest that being at a disadvantage in terms of troops is absolutely unacceptable. Why?
Does every person in every match have to be superior to the other person? And how can everyone have an advantage to everyone else, by definition that's impossible. If everyone had the exact same advantage then that would be a stalemate. Each person gets 5 stars and each match is over in 1min 30 and each war is decided on time? How boring would that be?
In every aspect of the game there will ALWAYS be someone with an advantage over someone else and therefore someone else will always have something to strive for. This is not a disadvantage, I call this real life.
The ones who get on with the job, instead of whining about what the other guy has, are the ones that end up with an 'advantage', in my opinion.
 

Quovatis

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
Quo, there are two points of discussion with your statements.
One, it IS possible to max without spending money. Anyone can max out if they're willing to spend the TIME, not money. Spending money is for rich or impatient people, the ones with the ''I want it now'' mentality.
Two, your comments would suggest that being at a disadvantage in terms of troops is absolutely unacceptable. Why?
Does every person in every match have to be superior to the other person? And how can everyone have an advantage to everyone else, by definition that's impossible. If everyone had the exact same advantage then that would be a stalemate. Each person gets 5 stars and each match is over in 1min 30 and each war is decided on time? How boring would that be?
In every aspect of the game there will ALWAYS be someone with an advantage over someone else and therefore someone else will always have something to strive for. This is not a disadvantage, I call this real life.
The ones who get on with the job, instead of whining about what the other guy has, are the ones that end up with an 'advantage', in my opinion.

No, it's currently impossible to max without spending money. That's a mathematical fact. I have had all my workers constantly working since release of the game, and I'm nowhere close to max, yet I've spent money. Yes, if Dominations is still around in 2 years, you could max Atomic Age without spending money, but by that time you'll be at least 2 ages behind. You will never be max without spending money, they rig it that way. I'm not saying that's unfair, just pointing out the difference of this game vs some others.

My second point is this. Assume 2 identical alliances in bases and skill. One alliance fills their SH with premium troops and has elephant stables and bazooka towers on defense. The other fills with free dock troops and some crappy event buildings. I can tell you that the second alliance has no chance in winning, at least at Atomic age and above. I'm not complaining about some players having more advanced bases than others (that's what matchmaking takes care of), it's the premium SH troops that makes all the difference. It's not skill, it's money that decides certain wars, and that's the very definition of pay to win. This game didn't used to be like that, but now it is.
 
Last edited:

Manifesto

Approved user
LV
0
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
1,920
No, it's currently impossible to max without spending money. That's a mathematical fact. I have had all my workers constantly working since release of the game, and I'm nowhere close to max, yet I've spent money. Yes, if Dominations is still around in 2 years, you could max Atomic Age without spending money, but by that time you'll be at least 2 ages behind. You will never be max without spending money, they rig it that way. I'm not saying that's unfair, just pointing out the difference of this game vs some others.

My second point is this. Assume 2 identical alliances in bases and skill. One alliance fills their SH with premium troops and has elephant stables and bazooka towers on defense. The other fills with free dock troops and some crappy event buildings. I can tell you that the second alliance has no chance in winning, at least at Atomic age and above. I'm not complaining about some players having more advanced bases than others (that's what matchmaking takes care of), it's the premium SH troops that makes all the difference. It's not skill, it's money that decides certain wars, and that's the very definition of pay to win. This game didn't used to be like that, but now it is.
Despite what you say, it IS possible to max without money, just not possible to max 'right now'. That's a fact of time, not mathematics. Make sure you understand the difference. :D
And you've clearly missed my point about 'advantages'. You just talk about winning, I'm talking about the lessons learnt in a difficult situation.
If all you get out of this game is that you have to win, then you've lost.
 
Last edited:
Top