axek
@axek
What kind of cheating is this?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Donald Trump
@foobarbaz
2 bad weeks then a good one? Since when is not filling your huts cheating lmao
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
axek
@axek
I'm kidding mate. I see how it works, just wanted to clarify your using this method, and indeed you are. Now that i clarified i would say it's bad design and the score should be counted using the number of possible villagers, instead of the number of actuall villagers. Cuz otherwise i could just make my villagers die one week, and resurrect them the very next week to stay out of the competition
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Donald Trump
@foobarbaz
It doesn’t work like that. If you kill the villagers you start the following week negative, not at zero
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
axek
@axek
gotcha, anyways, keeping the new huts empty for couple weeks is an unfair competitive advantage. I agree that you kinda sacrifice two other weeks and lose two weekly battles in a row, but participating the next weekly battle would make zero sense for all your neighbours if they see you start with +200 the first day
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Donald Trump
@foobarbaz
Now that hit cost is related to villagers and not score, the idea you have an unfair advantage is not as clear as you are claiming. If you don’t fill huts for 2 weeks, your overall progress is slower than if you did fill them.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
axek
@axek
that is true, but again. if anyone starts a weekly battle with 200+ score advantage, whether it is fair or unfair, i have no chance to compete. With all the speedups and lucky raids i was only able to gain 185 villagers per weekly battle. So when i see that some of my neighbours went ahead this way, i simply don't take part in the weekly battle
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Donald Trump
@foobarbaz
But you do have the chance to compete, you can make the choice if you want to play the long game, or try and guarantee a weekly battle medal by slowing down for a number of weeks. I think the choice existing is another reason it’s not unfair, and also makes the game more interesting by varying how you can play.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
axek
@axek
Okay 'unfair' is incorrect term. Just that as a matter of fact for this particular week i couldn't compete in weekly battle, and it happens for the third week in a row
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction