This topic is closed

wow, i really do not know this game!

32 Replies
nobody
1 August, 2016, 3:24 PM UTC
Blasphemy said:

johanrayne said:


why are we penalized for having overwhelming defence is the topic

ive seen it now, thank you,

 Im sided struck not understanding her at the moment, and there is a pretty big discussion over it already

now im confused why the same topic was put here that will only take on what is already talking about in another thread, 

now we will be talking about the same thing in two different threads about the same topic 





( *Side note* Aloyna  is a community manager of plarium she is not a MOD, Mods are volunteer players ) 


UTC +0:00
nobody
1 August, 2016, 3:26 PM UTC

blasphemy found the post by alyona

i brought it back to the top of the page by quoting the falsified post. if you check the last post on the last page you will see it.

it should at this time be the first topic in line.








cheers
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
2 August, 2016, 1:56 PM UTC

I've edited my comment to make it less confusing and more accurate. There's no penalty for being a defender. Actually you do get points for your lost Units. it's a kind of compensation for your losses. But also you get points for your rival's losses.


Yeah, my bad 
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
nobody
2 August, 2016, 3:12 PM UTC

johanrayne said:


thank you alyona for responding, here are 2 hypothesis that i came up with based on what i have read in the forums. can you state which is most accurate? this is taken from my previous post speaking with djmoody.

"now in the actual factual manifestation of what happened the defender got 21 points without killing any troops.  are you stating that the points were redistributed from the offense's points. as part of the shared points you talked about. that on one end of the rainbow defense shares offense points for getting wiped out.  and that on the other end of the rainbow a defense gets no points for wiping out an attacker.  and that the mystical esoteric formula evens out at the 1/1 kdr point?

if not, then the points would have to come from the defense's losses.  i know most people don't believe that to be the case.

but a hypothetical based on assumption from the various things i have read and experienced, this is just a hypothetical for hypothetical's sake: could the mystical magical formula be that defense gets points for losing troops and offense gets points for destroying troops.  then as a second calculation the troops destroyed by the defense have a value and the troops lost by the attacker have a value. {yes they are the same troops, however, possibly separate values added together and then split between the 2 sides.

these are just ideas based on assumption."


and will the falsification accusation be expunged from my record?


UTC +0:00
Aaron KT3
2 August, 2016, 3:20 PM UTC
johanrayne said:

johanrayne said:


thank you alyona for responding, here are 2 hypothesis that i came up with based on what i have read in the forums. can you state which is most accurate? this is taken from my previous post speaking with djmoody.

"now in the actual factual manifestation of what happened the defender got 21 points without killing any troops.  are you stating that the points were redistributed from the offense's points. as part of the shared points you talked about. that on one end of the rainbow defense shares offense points for getting wiped out.  and that on the other end of the rainbow a defense gets no points for wiping out an attacker.  and that the mystical esoteric formula evens out at the 1/1 kdr point?

if not, then the points would have to come from the defense's losses.  i know most people don't believe that to be the case.

but a hypothetical based on assumption from the various things i have read and experienced, this is just a hypothetical for hypothetical's sake: could the mystical magical formula be that defense gets points for losing troops and offense gets points for destroying troops.  then as a second calculation the troops destroyed by the defense have a value and the troops lost by the attacker have a value. {yes they are the same troops, however, possibly separate values added together and then split between the 2 sides.

these are just ideas based on assumption."


and will the falsification accusation be expunged from my record?


I hear "airplane noises" in your near future.  Open wide.  ;-)
Aaron
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
3 August, 2016, 11:55 AM UTC
johanrayne said:



thank you alyona for responding, here are 2 hypothesis that i came up with based on what i have read in the forums. can you state which is most accurate? this is taken from my previous post speaking with djmoody.

"now in the actual factual manifestation of what happened the defender got 21 points without killing any troops.  are you stating that the points were redistributed from the offense's points. as part of the shared points you talked about. that on one end of the rainbow defense shares offense points for getting wiped out.  and that on the other end of the rainbow a defense gets no points for wiping out an attacker.  and that the mystical esoteric formula evens out at the 1/1 kdr point?

if not, then the points would have to come from the defense's losses.  i know most people don't believe that to be the case.

but a hypothetical based on assumption from the various things i have read and experienced, this is just a hypothetical for hypothetical's sake: could the mystical magical formula be that defense gets points for losing troops and offense gets points for destroying troops.  then as a second calculation the troops destroyed by the defense have a value and the troops lost by the attacker have a value. {yes they are the same troops, however, possibly separate values added together and then split between the 2 sides.

these are just ideas based on assumption."


and will the falsification accusation be expunged from my record?


Unfortunately, I am unable to share battle mechanics or calculations, but I can share my guesses. If the defender didn't kill any Offense, but had some losses in the battle, he will get points for his lost troops. Less than he would get for the killed Offense though.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
djmoody
3 August, 2016, 12:55 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Unfortunately, I am unable to share battle mechanics or calculations, but I can share my guesses. If the defender didn't kill any Offense, but had some losses in the battle, he will get points for his lost troops. Less than he would get for the killed Offense though.

To be honest you shouldn't have to. Two people can work this out for themselves with a 2000 archers and 1000 pallies by just setting up different test battles (or god forbid, just analysing their battle reports).

Having said that, for people with official plarium status by their name to be spouting completely incorrect info is extremely worrying at a minimum extremely confusing for newer players.

I am glad I pointed out how wrong the info was, even though the groundswell of opinion on the threads was telling me I must be wrong because "Plarium said so".
Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
nobody
3 August, 2016, 3:48 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


johanrayne said:







Unfortunately, I am unable to share battle mechanics or calculations, but I can share my guesses. If the defender didn't kill any Offense, but had some losses in the battle, he will get points for his lost troops. Less than he would get for the killed Offense though.
now see, that is part of the point of my first point:
play our game.
ok, how do i play?
don't worry about it.
but i want to play the best way i can.
don't worry about it, just play!
ok, sounds good to me.
i know that game companies state that they we be giving out their super secret esoteric advantage by answering simple questions. but you yourself have shown a page from oberon supposedly showing a secret esoteric formula.  and yet i can't get a simple answer as to which of the two methods is closer to being accurate.
seems odd to me that that simple answer has to be protected more than the esoteric formulas.
i suppose you are not authorized to answer my other 2 questions i had for djmoody either.
thanks for responding anyhow, as i stated in my first post, i am simply done

UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
4 August, 2016, 7:58 AM UTC
djmoody said:


I am glad I pointed out how wrong the info was, even though the groundswell of opinion on the threads was telling me I must be wrong because "Plarium said so".
I'm also glad you did it. 
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
nobody
4 August, 2016, 5:53 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


djmoody said:



I am glad I pointed out how wrong the info was, even though the groundswell of opinion on the threads was telling me I must be wrong because "Plarium said so".
I'm also glad you did it. 
lol, ok this is my last post.  you just agreed with djmoody, when to the best of my deciphering the two of you disagree on the mechanic. and i still do not know which one of you is more correct.  or if both of you are.  which of my two scenarios is closer to agreeing with both of you. 
i spent my 5 days in the forums. now my experience is complete.
done

UTC +0:00
Sifr
5 August, 2016, 1:01 PM UTC
IMO that's a good thing for alyona admitting her mistake. And unless I misunderstood something alyona is basically saying djmoody is correct.
Fighter Sifr of Fellowship
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
8 August, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC
Sifr said:

IMO that's a good thing for alyona admitting her mistake. And unless I misunderstood something alyona is basically saying djmoody is correct.
Yes, he is correct 
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
brunsonthomas
8 August, 2016, 10:53 PM UTC
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Sifr said:

IMO that's a good thing for alyona admitting her mistake. And unless I misunderstood something alyona is basically saying djmoody is correct.
Yes, he is correct 
I am closing this topic answered and reanswered.
UTC +5:00
1724166 users registered; 43139 topics; 270988 posts; our newest member:kevin_e_kline