Suggestion;a little prize/bonus at certain time for top 3 players in contests each 24h.. it can be at 12PM PST,it does nt matter.By giving some rewards each 24h for top 3 or why not top 5 players, contests would be more exciting in my opinion.

Jezebel said:

constantincerna said:

Suggestion;a little prize/bonus at certain time for top 3 players in contests each 24h.. it can be at 12PM PST,it does nt matter.By giving some rewards each 24h for top 3 or why not top 5 players, contests would be more exciting in my opinion.

I would rather see the rewards extended to the top 20 in tiers rather than the top 10 why give a select few players even more rewards and leave out the rest?

contests/tournaments already have a large variety of tiers and ranking depth that are "random" or just determined by some hidden algorithm (duration of tournament seems to be a major factor).  but i agree, it is always disheartening to see the same players consume 90% of the rewards.  the tiers, tier exclusions, ranking depth needs some ongoing attention so that a wider population get some rewards (i'm looking at you weekly top 10!...soo outdated...it's just about an automatic 5k-20k sapps a week for some players).  as a new player 2 1/2 years ago it was uplifting to earn those rewards and kept me going till the next time.

this is my suggestion:  that the head of development personally read the forums and gather feedback personally.  so that when players say that the update that money, time and effort was spent on, is not to their liking and that they want you to fix the spacing problems created by the update resulting in scroll bar issues and that the information display is cluttered ugly and distracting and we want that display removed,  the man in charge can decide the best way to do his job, (that he gets money to do).  then players with feedback on the update won't be told to make suggestions that will be denied on the account that it does not fit the vision and direction of the company spending time, money and effort putting out the product.

maybe have a secondary development crew to put out fires created by the main development crew.

you could call them ninjas.

EDIT:  

so in the members list. we have a drop down arrow where we can send a letter or add to contacts. Can we have a "send reinforcements" added to this.

I know that some leagues cannot fill their ranks but some of the leagues could desparately use more people. Could we get the maximum number of league members raised to 200?

brunsonthomas said:

Eugenia Misura said:

brunsonthomas said:

I know we have asked several times to allow the Marshal to force troops out of a Beacon and the Fortress. Since you don't want to let the Marshal do it alone. Then make it so that the Marshal and two designated officers must agree as well. This will allow better control of the members when Fortress downgrades and Beacon exchanges could be accomplished more easily. The other possibility is to allow two co Marshals in a league so that a Marshal and both co Marshals must agree before action can be accomplished.

Edit: Thomas, as far as I understand you still want us to give Marshalls and/or Captains (in this case) to be able to move defensive troops from Beacons and Fortresses. I can see the reason why it might be helpful, but it's still too risky. Maybe we could discuss some details such as possible limitations?

P.S. Sorry for confusion with previous response.

How about a limit of say 10 per Beacon or Fortress per week. Limit the number of people that you can kick out of any building would be a reasonable compromise.

Lord Brunsonthomas, I can see many negative comments from players regarding this matter. There is a chance that adding this feature would harm more than help.

brunsonthomas said:

Eugenia Misura said:

brunsonthomas said:

I know we have asked several times to allow the Marshal to force troops out of a Beacon and the Fortress. Since you don't want to let the Marshal do it alone. Then make it so that the Marshal and two designated officers must agree as well. This will allow better control of the members when Fortress downgrades and Beacon exchanges could be accomplished more easily. The other possibility is to allow two co Marshals in a league so that a Marshal and both co Marshals must agree before action can be accomplished.

Edit: Thomas, as far as I understand you still want us to give Marshalls and/or Captains (in this case) to be able to move defensive troops from Beacons and Fortresses. I can see the reason why it might be helpful, but it's still too risky. Maybe we could discuss some details such as possible limitations?

P.S. Sorry for confusion with previous response.

How about a limit of say 10 per Beacon or Fortress per week. Limit the number of people that you can kick out of any building would be a reasonable compromise.

I don't like this suggestion, because it takes away the freedom of the players. If a player is inactive... they should get kicked anyway for a beacon transfer.. no need to have dead weight.

also.. it could be used maliciously by the marshal/captain... ie they take a lvl 1 beacon.. move a player they plan on kicking defence to that level 1 and then have another league hit it, wiping our all of the players defence.

While its annoying at times to have people move D, its their choice to move the defence.

example

http://prntscr.com/ex73xb

as shown..... I can tell right now with a trigger troop what this person has as far as power and what their main focus is on troops. those ranks I see on the guy on the right should only be able to be seen by the person who owns those troops, which is him. sure I can use this to my advantage, but it is more of a liability than a gain. and if yall are not going to change it....

then I just gave those that follow the forums a advantage :) I will accept small payments of tribute to a follow up email address... lol with unmarked 1 and 5 $ bills. Euros and AUD accepted.

I agree!

This game looks like an ATM ...

There is no Player respect !

If u are loaded VISA...in few weeks u do evrithing . In my opinion it is an abuse of the human greed for money.

The old players should get a bonus...and a heavy coiner should have limits.

Make at Black Market a way to exchange the Hero's Equipment !

Delete this from my screen! I dont play your lottery!

brunsonthomas said:

Eugenia Misura said:

brunsonthomas said:

I know we have asked several times to allow the Marshal to force troops out of a Beacon and the Fortress. Since you don't want to let the Marshal do it alone. Then make it so that the Marshal and two designated officers must agree as well. This will allow better control of the members when Fortress downgrades and Beacon exchanges could be accomplished more easily. The other possibility is to allow two co Marshals in a league so that a Marshal and both co Marshals must agree before action can be accomplished.

Edit: Thomas, as far as I understand you still want us to give Marshalls and/or Captains (in this case) to be able to move defensive troops from Beacons and Fortresses. I can see the reason why it might be helpful, but it's still too risky. Maybe we could discuss some details such as possible limitations?

P.S. Sorry for confusion with previous response.

How about a limit of say 10 per Beacon or Fortress per week. Limit the number of people that you can kick out of any building would be a reasonable compromise.

Maybe there should be some limits for the number of Units? 

I have a simple suggestion for the U.I.   .    whenever I hover my cursor over an area and a info/pop up comes up , it only stays up for 1 or 2 seconds , which in many cases isn't enough time to read the whole body of text. Maybe you could make it so when we hover  over an area , pop ups could just stay up for the time that we hover over them  instead  of disappearing after too short a time .   Very frustrating and a big waste of time to keep having to move the cursor back and forth to keep bringing the window up  again and again in order to see what it says  .  Maybe  long time experienced players  don't need to read so much anymore but new players need this info  provided by these  windows . Just makes sense  to be able to read what's given by the game .

Eugenia Misura said:

Snowgoon said:

Add Curses to the game

Sometimes a revenge raid or fireball just isn't enough, we need something more .....

Add limited duration Curses

10% off everything for 24 hours, or 20% off for 12 hours

This would slow all production, reduce offense/defense and troop production etc for 1 day
Additional Curses would add to the duration but not the effect
Mini curses should be bought using Soulstones etc

Click LIKE if you love this idea

I agree with commens below your idea, I don't think that players will like the idea of decreasing all of the game parameters. 

How typical and hypocritical of the forum moguls to dismiss this idea

yet they are perfectly happy to apply debuffs from flag tournaments

Debuffs affect an entire league for 7 days - Curses would only affect one player for a few hours

Curses and mini curses could be designed to target selected parameters - I only suggested all parameters for the biggest curses, but did not expect those to be approved

There are none so blind as those who will not see

Suggestion:  New Castle Skins

Perhaps a Lego one?  or Hello Kitty :D

Suggestion:  Could we perhaps have a plus and minus or a way to prioritise the troop building list?

Suggestion;a little prize/bonus at certain time for top 3 players in contests each 24h.. it can be at 12PM PST,it does nt matter.By giving some rewards each 24h for top 3 or why not top 5 players, contests would be more exciting in my opinion.

johanrayne said:

this is my suggestion:  that the head of development personally read the forums and gather feedback personally.  so that when players say that the update that money, time and effort was spent on, is not to their liking and that they want you to fix the spacing problems created by the update resulting in scroll bar issues and that the information display is cluttered ugly and distracting and we want that display removed,  the man in charge can decide the best way to do his job, (that he gets money to do).  then players with feedback on the update won't be told to make suggestions that will be denied on the account that it does not fit the vision and direction of the company spending time, money and effort putting out the product.

maybe have a secondary development crew to put out fires created by the main development crew.

you could call them ninjas.

EDIT:  

In our company each employee has his own tasks. We all work as a big team and rely on each other's help and experience. Most of the working processes in our company require cooperation of several departments.

When it comes to gathering player feedback or suggestions CMs do their part of job (interacting with players and passing the info through the right channels). Game analytics, project managers, developers, game designers - they also have their parts of the job. They rely on CMs help in getting the direct info from players, and on other departments that get the numbers, graphs, and other kinds of information.

They don't interact with players, they don't visit our Communities. But not because they aren't interested, but because they rely on CMs. They know we'll give them the whole info right in time, so they can concentrate on their part.

The teams I've mentioned work directly on the new games, big features and small improvements. It takes a lot of time and effort to calculate the feature balance, create huge documents with specification and balance, tasks that will be assigned to devs, and to code all that, fix bugs found by QA, etc.

It's totally understandable that you want to be closer to the game development process. And from our side, we started making some steps to give you some info directly from development teams. Like our live streams about the new features. And there will be even more of them. That's what we can do. However, we can't ask any of the teams engaged in game development to communicate with players on Forums.

I hope this information was helpful :) 

so in the members list. we have a drop down arrow where we can send a letter or add to contacts. Can we have a "send reinforcements" added to this.

Most leagues like for everyone to send 1 archer to everyone in the league, and this would help to speed up the process and make this smooth.

Lord Mark said:

Lord Mark said:

I agree!

This game looks like an ATM ...

There is no Player respect !

If u are loaded VISA...in few weeks u do evrithing . In my opinion it is an abuse of the human greed for money.

The old players should get a bonus...and a heavy coiner should have limits.

Make at Black Market a way to exchange the Hero's Equipment !

Delete this from my screen! I dont play your lottery!

Can i get a reply from CM ? Dont stand there and watch...u know me !

BTW: Did u see that Ocult and Bestiary can be order now ? :)

Nice job !

Edited by Community Manager. 

I've asnwered you a bit earlier, Lord Mark. 

brunsonthomas said:

I know that some leagues cannot fill their ranks but some of the leagues could desparately use more people. Could we get the maximum number of league members raised to 200?

I can see your point, however, I have a question. If we do that, do you think after a while this number won't need to be increased further? To 250 and so one? Maybe there is another suggestion, which could help in this case? 

Eugenia Misura said:

brunsonthomas said:

Eugenia Misura said:

brunsonthomas said:

I know we have asked several times to allow the Marshal to force troops out of a Beacon and the Fortress. Since you don't want to let the Marshal do it alone. Then make it so that the Marshal and two designated officers must agree as well. This will allow better control of the members when Fortress downgrades and Beacon exchanges could be accomplished more easily. The other possibility is to allow two co Marshals in a league so that a Marshal and both co Marshals must agree before action can be accomplished.

Edit: Thomas, as far as I understand you still want us to give Marshalls and/or Captains (in this case) to be able to move defensive troops from Beacons and Fortresses. I can see the reason why it might be helpful, but it's still too risky. Maybe we could discuss some details such as possible limitations?

P.S. Sorry for confusion with previous response.

How about a limit of say 10 per Beacon or Fortress per week. Limit the number of people that you can kick out of any building would be a reasonable compromise.

Lord Brunsonthomas, I can see many negative comments from players regarding this matter. There is a chance that adding this feature would harm more than help.

There are negative comments but if you evaluate them they thought I was Suggesting moving troops to another Beacon. 

No,  I am simply requesting what has been suggested several times. This would be to give the Marshal or designated Captains the ability to send members troops from the Beacon or Fortress to their catacombs in time of need. Our only option now is to expel them from the league which makes them an instant PVP and raid target. They not only are out of the league but lose at least 1 week of league benefits from league membership including all Beacon and Fortress benefits. This is totally unfair to people who have real life limitations that the game does not allow a workaround.

Not too long ago a similar Suggestion was denied because it gave a Marshal too much power. No it is back and most Beacon leagues would be all for it if voting were allowed. Please reconsider this suggestion.