hi all,
i’m just wondering if it is really usefull to atack against players who defend with a strong team…
i don’t know about you but when i invade another player, i do it for the gold!.. what else anyway???
Invading players with a strong teams (4 dragons, 3X + globe, all goblins, 3x spinweavers, ) seems wortless to me… i enjoy the option to get another player!!
personnaly a wrote a list of players that are not worth my time to attack…
i also downgrade my defense team… no more powerful bonus to screw the attaking player… this way i got mor players who attak me and i can defend against them…ho yeah, i just got the bonus for defense…
Actually I have been thinking about this whole invade/revenge system. Since it’s worthwhile to get attacked and take revenge for only 50 gold many players, including myself, have a weak defense team. Personally I would put up a much stronger defense team if the rewards for being attacked would be along the same lines of an invade/revenge. Especially when my XP would advance at a similar rate as when invading/avenging.
Honestly this change alone would probably make defending worth it. Don’t allow PvP star gain (so you can’t rank afk), but trophy gains make sense. I am not sure if the developers really want defense to be clearly worht it though. It might just encourage more “unbeatable” defense decks which is already a current complaint theme.
The way I view the game is no matter how many kingdoms yoou level, how many troops you get, how many troops you obtain, at the end of the day you are playing a matching game and I want those matches to be as interesting as possible.
Therefore I play with teams that require some thought and I don’t mind playing against tougher defenses at all. To me playing hours of mindless games to get more troops/glory/gold etc doesn’t make any sense. If your goal is to get gold/gems etc then its probably faster (haven’t done them math) to just work a job and buy it.
Also, a successful defence means gained stuff for free (souls, gold? I know souls for sure…). Unless you have unlimited time, then having a strong defence makes sense in my opinion. It also makes sense to make the game as fun as possible so I try to make creative defences… currently my lineup is Tyri, Deep Borer, Dwarf Lord, Rock Wyrm.
Here is an interesting idea, though I doubt it would happen. When you defend, you play the same difficulty as whoever attacked you. So if you have 1 weak troop to defend, and are defeated by someone on warlord IV. You have to defend using warlord IV level.
I’ve never satisfactorily resolved this debate for myself either. I see the clear valid economic point that @MarvelKit makes - revenge battles get you the same (or better) rewards as invading and cost less to initiate. On another hand @Serale has made the point that a better defence team makes it harder for other guilds to get trophies - fair, but as we all have a zillion trophies it seems of less import. I applaud @Machiknight’s idea to make the match interesting for the opponent…
So currently I’ve set out a defence of just the four cutest girl Epics (please let’s not have another misogyny debate here) as I just like the cards. Avina/Atalanta/Sapphira/Scarlett. It’s a rubbish formation with no real strategy planned, tho the colour spread is okay. And oddly, it seems to win about 1/3 of the time, which rather surprised me… Maybe it’s all those level 10 kingdom buffs…
Yeah, I liked seeing everyones opinions on this as well. I changed my strategy and made my defense easier to beat so I get attacked more often. As a newer player trying to grow my kingdom, this just makes more sense to me for right now.
I just look the team that is defending if my enemy has high level. I’ve created several specific teams to face boring teams. In this way, I do not have to look for a player with a friendly defense. I choose one of my teams prepared for that particular enemy’s team.
But at lower levels, it is not good facing teams like 4 dragons, 3X + globe, all goblins, 3x spinweavers and others.
It all depends on your level and the time you have available to play
I personally like defending the way it is. (Except maybe up the rewards earned for both losses and wins, eh?)
It discourages everyone’s defenses from running full gobos or dragons all the time, effectively offering variety and boarding off stale losing battles from taking over. If wins gave as much as losses, you’d be cutting possible battle options in half or possibly more.
You really want to fight nothing but 3 Venox + Celest, Full Goblins, or Full Dragons every battle, every day, every week? The enjoyment would die so fast I wouldn’t even be surprised when everyone eventually quit.
Rewarding people for lazily doing nothing to protect their kingdom? No thanks.
I rather be a Brave Hero than a Lonely King.
Yes I want people to defend with the best they can field, and being successful in PvP should require you to play well and/or finding troops that counter whatever is currently being played. It is already easy because the AI is weak, and you even get to scout so you can counter pick if needed.
My defense team is Brian, Brian, Valkyrie, Winter Imp.
It loses almost all the games, but I’m sure it is a welcome change for people that challenge. And occasionally the +Magic from Brian can let the Imp go nuts with true damage, so it isn’t a “pay no attention” fight.
It definitely is. (I’d rather call it braindead but can settle for bad).
And we pointed it out and asked for changes from the beginning of the game, but it’s stuck that way.
OTOH if we had good benefits for defensive wins it could still result us no gain till the attacker can just flee making the game just annuled.
Also the ‘revenge’ feature seems to be just an attack on the attackers’ def team instead of fighting back his attackers that would have better potential for more diverse and interesting games.
