Will this game suffer from the same economic disaster that Clash of clans is facing?

Gemming comes in different forms. I gem because I can only play during specific hours and I wanna raid the whole time. I gem troops so I can raid the whole time I'm on. Gemming anything else doesn't make sense to me especially gemming resources. But I certainly don't subscribe to the theory that F2P players are somehow a more ethical group. There are many ways to play and if its fun for you playing the way you do then your all set. Always get a kick out of the judgement that always seems to come from F2P players about "gemmers". Never understand why it bothers people.

 

Fair point. My comment is more directed to those that gem everything. Clash releases a new troop or defense and people have it maxed the first day. You look at top bases and everything is maxed. Personally, I just don't understand how it can be fun to plunk down thousands of dollars just to max base as soon as possible.

 

Seems loot handicap what some whined for my be the reason most stop playing and paying we will see.

 

I agree. Not sure how that's fun either but I'm glad they do it. Need heavy gemmers to make a game successful.

 

Where is that new loot penalty discussed? Is there a thread on this forum?

 

Havent seen one just for that . But on the not hype thread its brought up. Start one

 

Yeah I saw that where Chris says it's there and someone mentions its in the release notes. I was trying to find it and couldn't.

 

Do you like loot handicaps? 0r loot caps in games? I know some on here posted over and over getting bullied and to put a loot handicap because they couldn't defend well enough to keep the 20% that gets took. Clubbing baby seals isn't fun lol but pirates would raid a weak ship its the pirate way. Get strong or be took evrryday that's how most had to do it here.

 

http://forum.plunderpirates.com/index.php?threads/release-1-3-3.1777/

 

Hmmm. I made it through just fine without it, but I got drummed until I was a healthy PH 6. PH7 taking 500K from PH5 is pretty unfair. I saw a lot of frustrated people in my guild and on this forum. It was a hump you had to work hard to get over. If you only fought a couple of battles a day, you couldn't get ahead. So, in a round about way, I think a scaling was a fair addition as long as it isn't as severe as in Clash. Supercell wrecked the loot system in Clash. I'll have to play this one out and see how it goes.

 

Thanks!

 

It just makes me really nervous. These things are never enough for people who frankly arent any good at these games. Just watch, soon enough there will be some more whining about how hard it is to get ahead. We now know that midoki isn't apposed to appeasing the loud minority and may do it again and again. Its just stupid to cater to casual play whiners, most of whom will quit before the rest of us anyway. Not to mention the map has plenty of loot to get you over the hump while on shield. Loot nerf was completely unnecessary.

 

Hahaha, every freemium game is the same....there are always people who spend insane amounts of money, people who spend some, people who spend a minimum to get a builder (or similar base requirement) and people are spend none at all. In some games I spend a fair amount, in some games, very little and some, none at all.

It doesn't matter whether you spend a lot or a little, it's a game and if it's fun for you, play it however you want (well...if you cheat and get caught, oh well, sayonara). If you have the money to spare, and spend because the results give you more joy, rock on, do your thing. If you don't spend because that is how you enjoy the game, rock on, do your thing.

Separate from that small developer companies do not have the QA team that Microsoft does. If Microsoft, with well over 1000 QA testers still releases applications with more bugs and vulnerabilities than you can keep track of, a small group like Midoki should be applauded for the limited number of bugs that are produced. As long as Midoki and Rovio stay responsive to bugs and do what they can to fix bugs and continue to develop the game, you won't get a complaint from me.

 

Your opinion is an opinion just like anyone else's. I guess this is an unresolvable debate, except that I am right.

 

True true. Not arguing or disagreeing with how you want to play, just sayin I don't judge. Play however you want, it's all good.

 

I agree that there are different forms of gemming. I normally gem only to keep from upgrading my storages. I want less available loot for my attackers. But recently I haven't been able to get on much. Holidays and all. So I gem troops to speed up raiding so I can get enough for upgrading.

 

I think I'm way too stingy with gems. Case in point: Upgrading to PH7.

*Starts Build*
OK. When it gets below 4,000, I'm gonna finish it with gems.
*hits 4,000*
Well, that wasn't too bad. Maybe I should wait until 3,000?
*hits 3,000*
Hmm. I've come this far. Let's go for 2,000
*hits 2,000*
Bah, I'm not spending 2k on this thing. 1,000 it is.
*hits 1,000*
Aww, I don't have enough loot to upgrade anything. 500 it is.
*hits 500*
Man, that is still a lot of gems. I'll finish it at 300
*hits 300*
Nope. 300 is a gateway drug. Once I do that, I'll do it for everything. 100 it is.
*hits 100*
Only a wuss would give in now. 50 it is.
*hits 50*
Patience, Kel. Patience. 10 it is.
*hits 10*
Well, dammit. Now I want to see it finish, but that will be underwhelming. I'll stop it at 1.
*hits 1*
There we go! *Spends 1 Gem*

 

Can't spend gems if I don't have any

 

I prefer loot caps, not penalties. In my general experience, I prefer to have more bases with an acceptable amount of loot over being able to find that rare gem of a base worth a ton. To use clash's loot formula, psychologically, I hate nexting through a ton of bases worth less than 100k(due to the 50% loot penalty). It just makes me feel that there isn't any loot out there. I would rather see 100k+ (without the loot penalty) and hit next anyways cuz Im not going to raid that for that little amount anyways. I want to know that there is loot out there and I am just skipping it.

Which leads me to my next point, loot caps. If you want to cap the amount of loot a lower PH has to offer, at least make it a reasonable amount. Say 200k/300k etc for anyone above the PH being attacked. Make it so that the defensive player has the normal amount up for offer until they reach the cap. So that there aren't any loot reductions in place at all, once again, until the player reaches the cap.

edit: Also, just from experience, during all of my journey through PH6, I have been steamrolled at times from people at my same PH level, so those that are whining need to realize that a loot sliding scale isn't going to prevent their base from being destroyed. Its just going to hurt the general appearance of whether or not there is loot out there.

 

How about forgetting loot caps and solving the problem with a different approach? I assume the cap exists to give lower levels a break from being picked clean by multiple high levels while they're away. Instead of the huge loot penalty, just give the player a longer shield when attacked by a high level. or even better, make that shield proportional to the amount of loot actually stolen. High levels would still get their big score, low levels would still learn how not to build bases, and wouldn't have to wake up bankrupt due to a dozen overnight raids.