Jump to content


Photo

Unfair grouping at round 50+.

Unfair inequality level level 50 gem loss stagnation

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 WertySqwerty

WertySqwerty

    Pickpocket

  • Thief
  • 1 posts

Posted 09 March 2019 - 10:19 PM

This topic was raised by the user AyaJones in mid-2017, but I've decided to raise it again because it is still prevalent to me in early/mid-2019. Once you reach level 50, instead of getting put into a group with people of a similar level to attack and defend against, you get put into a group with everyone over level 50. This causes people who just enter into this group to be overwhelmed by high-level players.

 

Try as I might, I can't for the life of me find someone to attack who has a lower XP or trap level than me. I was lucky enough to get the Foreseer level 5 before the update a while back, but It really doesn't help that much when everyone you verse has level 40+ traps. This really slows down progress and makes me disinterested in playing.

 

For defending, it doesn't matter how good your dungeon is, if you have a good gem in a ritual it will get stolen. I'm level 51 and have had my gem stolen by a level 712 once. They died 4 times and still got 3 stars. This causes me to not do any rituals, but over time I've stolen heaps of gems and filled my gem storage with high-level gems. My lowest is 28,000. This seems like a good thing, but because I don't have enough emeralds to vault them, I have to either sell them or lose them in rituals. I need emeralds to vault my good gems and make space for smaller ones for rituals, but I get emeralds FROM THE RITUALS. This causes insane stagnation and would make many new level 50 players quit.

 

Now, I'm not trying to hate on this game - it is one of my favourite games of all time, and the only mobile game I've ever played that I've spent money on in-game - I bought a pack of orbs to get the Foreseer level 5 before the update. It's the only game that I've played that has made me so willing to watch ads and spend money, but if I just can't get past this point, there's no point in playing and that money spent was a rip-off. There are problems in the game that are serious enough to get many people to quit. These problems with gem stagnation and unfairness would be REALLY easy to fix, too.

 

To fix the gem stagnation, we just need more ways to get the green emeralds. I got about 50 from the most recent event, but that still isn't enough for one gem to vault, and I need to vault many. And, to fix the main problem of unfairness, just make more level groups beyond 50. Someone level 50 shouldn't be attacked by people more than 10 times their level.

 

Please comment if you are having the same problem, or if you have any suggestions. And please, Zeptolab, this fix has been long overdue ever since the problem was raised in 2017.

 



#2 DragonFiire

DragonFiire

    Pickpocket

  • Hardened Thief
  • 6 posts

Posted 24 May 2019 - 06:54 PM

I think the groupings should go like this (beyond level 50). 50-75, 75-100, 100-150, 150-250, 250-350, 350-500, 500-750, 750-1000, 1000+. This, I think, should fix the problem of unfairness.


Edited by DragonFiire, 24 May 2019 - 06:54 PM.


#3 Ashman

Ashman

    The One and Only

  • Elder Watcher
  • 2390 posts
  • LocationIn your dungeon stealing your gems!

Posted 31 May 2019 - 08:25 AM

Nice idea in scheme of things, but reason is there are not enough players in the higher level brackets for it to work effectively.



#4 Linkblade

Linkblade

    Pickpocket

  • Hardened Thief
  • 10 posts

Posted 11 July 2019 - 01:36 PM

Nice idea in scheme of things, but reason is there are not enough players in the higher level brackets for it to work effectively.

 

If so, then I repost (and expand) what I posted here https://forum.kingof...50/#entry196514

 

Make player pools of e.g. ~100 (number to be set by the devs in regard to experience with matchmaking). No matter your level, you can only be attacked by players with a max level which lies within the next 100 same or higher level players. That would mean if you are level 51 and there are 10 other level 51, 80 level 52-59 and 12 level 60 you can only be attacked by these 102 guys, but not by players of level 61+. If there is a known number of minimum players for a player pool where matchmaking is working well, then I guess this would be a good solution! The level cap of 50 could be eliminated as this method also adapts to lower levels. If there are 1234 level 1 players, then only these 1234 players can attack each other, because the minimum amount of 100 players is within this level. A high amount of players is not problematic for matchmaking but only a low amount of players. Therefore: method of minimum players level cap.

 

There are inactive players with a specific level which would also be counted to the pool although they don't play. Then it would be possible that no active player could attack you, if there are 100 inactive same/higher level players above your level. To avoid this problem the method should distinguish between active and inactive players and only count active players to the pool.

The criteria what an active player is could be:

  • is currently online
  • was online within the last day/week/month (number of X days off is already tracked by the game)
  • ...

What criteria to use depends on the needed network tech to monitor. I'd like to leave that decision to the devs.

 

I would like to hear what you think about this!


Edited by Linkblade, 11 July 2019 - 01:39 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Unfair, inequality, level, level 50, gem loss, stagnation

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users