I guess we have no hope ever of rumbles not being pay to win. A simple 10 battle per player limit would solve everything. Benefits of new 1v1 format so far: faster start times, but sadly matching does not seem to bother with guild rank much better rewards when we lose, because why would we bother gemming to win I like seeing the snow again, so that is nice.
This should be the priority. I’m a strong believer in improvements in gameplay over new upgrades. Both are essential but if you want to enhance the gaming experience, the customer base must be heard.
I do agree limited numbers of battles would be a killer for me. If you want that go play coc. 24hrs fight as much as you can. That is pp to me. Yes those who spend more win more. So maybe we need leagues. Kinda sounds like midoki already groups us that way for rumble matching with their tier system. I am hoping player averages will eventually make it into the matching system. That was the original plan I think but seems like worry from some caused them to back down. Hope they reconsider as that will be the only true way to get fair matches.
This game is free to download, they need to make money somehow, and gems is it. Limiting battles would kill the game, kill the leaderboards...
I’d like to see a limited 10 battle rumble introduced 1 day a week, but make it the best 10 battles of each individuals battles. That way anyone spending gems to battle more would have a higher chance of maximising his/her score, while allowing it to be competitive with the non-gammers. Probably wouldn’t happen though as programing would probably be a nightmare.
One vote for just a smoother matching on same parameters: Guild Size and PH level. 1v1 still has mismatched guilds on size. Matching player averages would indeed put better head to head rumbles more consistently (with longer match wait times). I think that would get old quickly, slugging it out every day. Should be some rewards to just being a good guild and that is whipping on less active guild for some guaranteed rewards every now and then. Small guilds have been punished under new system with lesser rewards. Of course small guild members always have become second class pirates anytime a guild event comes around, the pariahs of the pirate world, the untouchables, regardless of PH level, years of loyalty. Max size guilds are the ones encouraged.
“Slugging it out every day would get old quickly!” GET REAL! Most want an even match, an even competition! We’ve already had the match-ups you describe and Midoki can’t get it even/right because everyone values the quick match-up so highly and the parameters widen so quick we get rubbish match-ups most of the time. Going by the rule “if it aint broke, don’t fix it” the change to 1v1 is about fixing a broken system. The new system is definitely better but not perfect. If the guild rumble average was used (I mean here the average of each individual at the time of hitting the rumble button) as the main parameter, I believe we’d get an even match-up more often. And yes, we’d be slugging it out. AWESOME! Isn’t that the point of a rumble! And if you don’t want to slug it out, it’s an incredibly easy solution: Don’t Rumble.
I am not so sure does the reward system has to do so much with guildsize. It is more about how strong a guild is. Members, their ph lvls and maybe also players PR... i have played in big guild(BV event guild and DMC) and we matched with strong rivals- higher rewards, matched with weaker rivals- lower rewards and sometimes the match with a weaker guild it didn‘t affect reward size at all(still a high reward). And later also as a 15 player guild we got 3-4M reward against a 2 player guild. I wrote about earlier here. Yes, for some guilds the new matchup made it better, they actually can win rumbles when putting up a bit effort. They have the chance now they didn‘t have before. For bigger rumble guilds like MMTX, Arancia,Russia, CB etc. the new system brought mostly very easy rumbles. Nothing challenging anymore. Because the parameters get widen that fast. I play with main atm in Aranciameccanica and yes... 2. rumble there very easy again... and so it has been for them since the 1:1 was published(Burian wrote about that many times here). I played there also before the 1:1 for about 3 months with my mini. It is a huge differense. We had sometimes hard rumbles 2-3 in a week and now... nothing. It also makes a huge differense for gems spending in those guilds when they match easy and the community suffers when players are not much online anymore and chat the most . And yes, Arancia tried different matching times, but it didn‘t do the trick to get some more challenging rumbles. Very competetive gets now easily and fast matched with not so competetive guilds... i‘d rather wait for an hour or longer to have a more challenging rumble. Please take also the rumble ave into the matching. Forget about fast matching times. What fun is it to match fast and be bored for next 24h??? A few days ago a active 13 players guild got matched up with a 38 players guild(+35), about 30min matching time. The fixed code for filtering inactive players worked in that case. The others had only 17 active players and reward was 3-4 M if i remember right. But it still wasn‘t a even match. The 13 players kicked ass, because the other guild wasn‘t competetive when rumble ave isn‘t involved in the matching. The +/-25 matching rule is outdated with the 1:1. Fix please the parameters. Forget about the complainings with to long matching times, make it more fair and again challenging and those guilds who wants easy matchups(what is the point?)... don‘t rumble if you don‘t want fight
