PvP update has ruined the game.

[Hassleham]

Up to now I've purely done pvp to level up. I have 5000 wins and only 150 missions done, basically because I decided I was making more money from pvp and I didn't want to level too fast by doing PvE as well.
Since the update my casualties have doubled and I now lose >50k worth of units in 90% of my attacks. The xp rate has also doubled, if not tripled! This means that by continuing to do as much pvp as I did before the update, I will level up too fast and stop dominating most other players of my level.
I reached level 50 just before the update and now I'm 3/4 of the way to level 51 after only approximately 80 attacks, earning me only 5000 BP.

Therefore the only thing I can do now is camp; improve my buildings and hope that they sort out the mess they have made of this game.
I have sent a slip to support requesting information and help and am waiting for a response.
Until they make things better again I'll probably be checking the game twice a day to collect money and start upgrades, and meanwhile I'll be searching for a better, more reliable game to play on my iPhone.


Well done Funzio.

[JMC]

Casualty rates definitely went way up, i also can't even find a target to attack. I can literally go down my rivals list hitting the attack button on every player and it will show that they have been destroyed already. Every once in a while some heavy gold spender with 100K+ stats will be alive, but obviously i can't win that fight.

[Hassleham]

I'm not having that problem, you whales have less targets I guess..

[KCh]

I agree, after the update PvP casualties are way higher. It seems that only the issues that are fixed are the ones that are somewhat helpful for players.

I believe that the casualty rate is the biggest issue in the game, and so far in every update, the casualty rate seems to get much worse. A while ago, the last 4 maps had a few missions that had a slightly higher pay out than others and once they noticed that, the pay outs were drastically lowered so that they were a complete waste of energy.

Again in this recent update, the casualty rates increased tremendously and also the very low casualty rates of the Venal Fighters got "fixed". Before the update I used to lose a biowarfare troop for almost every single battle. After the update, I do not lose biowarfares too often anymore, but instead I lose all my venal fighters now. In my last 5 or 6 attacks, I've lost 5 Venal Fighters and 2 Super Hornets. Because of this I've decided to quit PvP for a while once again, until the casualty rates get better.

[procsyzarc]

My loss have skyrocketed too. Hardly ever lost a unit before since update lost about 50 super hornets and 10 stealth bombers

[MaverickMunkey]

I agree with the PvP losses - got attacked last night and lost 4 Military Ambulances and 6 (yes that's right 6) Super Hornets to just one attacker (admittedly i dont know how mant times he attcked - but even so these are supposed to be low loss units and these are all that i lost)- WTF?!?!?!?!?!?

[Aidan]

If i didnt know any better, i would have thought Funzio trying to chase away players from playing their games!!

[JMC]

I'm not having that problem, you whales have less targets I guess..

There are actually hundreds of people to choose from in the top level, top ally tier. And every one of them is dead.

[EnjoyLife]

I haven't had any casualties from defending against attacks, but I haven't attacked after this update because of all of the horror stories from the casualties from battles. I'll wait a little longer.

[Sugarymama]

If i didnt know any better, i would have thought Funzio trying to chase away players from playing their games!!

I would agree, but I think they are hoping it will have the reverse effect. People strive to "win" in these games, so who wouldn't want to be on top with these newly created ranks? Not to mention, the prizes at the higher ranks are pretty decent.. What's not so great is the 5 gold awards at the lower ranks. What the hell can you buy with 5 gold??? You can't even replenish your energy with that.

[Big John]

Lost a Super Hornet to a guy with less than 6000 def.

Got 1 valor though.

[Sugarymama]

Lost a Super Hornet to a guy with less than 6000 def.

Got 1 valor though.

That really sucks, especially since hornets cost 350.

The casualty rate is the same as it was before the rankings started, and probably slightly worse..

[Big John]

Losing loads of loot items which were free from the events but can't be replaced.

[JuSt.SiCk]

Loosing tons of Units after the Update. Allrdy lost over 50 Velan Fighter (50!!) I can´t buy that much Units as i loose, this suxx so hard. If Funzio wont fix this, i´ll quit MW and play CC only.

[Sugarymama]

Losing loads of loot items which were free from the events but can't be replaced.

Exactly. I'm losing Riot Busters. I'm losing good $&@ing units.

[Arizona]

I have to disagree with the tone of this thread.

If Funzio have adjusted casualty rates, then instead of looking for another game to play or complaining, why not adjust your strategy a little. I don't know what the stats of your opponents were, when losing so many units, but perhaps in future look for weaker targets. Increase the difference in your attack to their defence and see if that improves things for you.

I lose SH, SF, and cash units, but I look at the make up of my military and see where I can improve it. Add some expendable units. I've noticed that the more of one unit I have, the more the probability that it's going to become a casualty. That's to be expected. So add some cheaper expendable units to take the heat of the Hornets and S Frigates.
Works ok for me.
Just my op. Good luck whatever strategy you choose though:)

[JMC]

I have to disagree with the tone of this thread.

If Funzio have adjusted casualty rates, then instead of looking for another game to play or complaining, why not adjust your strategy a little. I don't know what the stats of your opponents were, when losing so many units, but perhaps in future look for weaker targets. Increase the difference in your attack to their defence and see if that improves things for you.

I lose SH, SF, and cash units, but I look at the make up of my military and see where I can improve it. Add some expendable units. I've noticed that the more of one unit I have, the more the probability that it's going to become a casualty. That's to be expected. So add some cheaper expendable units to take the heat of the Hornets and S Frigates.
Works ok for me.
Just my op. Good luck whatever strategy you choose though:)

What level are you and how many allies do you have? There is no strategy for me to reduce casualties at my level.

It's hard enough to find targets, and the only guys I attack have under 8000 Defence versus my 58000 attack.
I lose up to 3 or 4 units against people with 1500 defence. And i even lose units against someone on the rivals list with a total of 1 defence. I think that's as good as it can get, there's nothing wrong with my targets here. There's something wrong with the casualty rate.

[Captian Awesome]

Up to now I've purely done pvp to level up. I have 5000 wins and only 150 missions done, basically because I decided I was making more money from pvp and I didn't want to level too fast by doing PvE as well.
Since the update my casualties have doubled and I now lose >50k worth of units in 90% of my attacks. The xp rate has also doubled, if not tripled! This means that by continuing to do as much pvp as I did before the update, I will level up too fast and stop dominating most other players of my level.
I reached level 50 just before the update and now I'm 3/4 of the way to level 51 after only approximately 80 attacks, earning me only 5000 BP.

Therefore the only thing I can do now is camp; improve my buildings and hope that they sort out the mess they have made of this game.
I have sent a slip to support requesting information and help and am waiting for a response.
Until they make things better again I'll probably be checking the game twice a day to collect money and start upgrades, and meanwhile I'll be searching for a better, more reliable game to play on my iPhone.


Well done Funzio.


Seriously?
You're complaining?
I love the new change! It gives you a reason to keep playing. I'm sorry that leveling up to fast is beyond your intelligence.
Play smarter and complain less.
Crazy birds might be a less intelligent game for you to keep up with.

Giggidy ....

[Hassleham]

Wow you disagree with my thread so you insult my intelligence in front of a dozen or so people who agree with me?

[Hassleham]

I have to disagree with the tone of this thread.

If Funzio have adjusted casualty rates, then instead of looking for another game to play or complaining, why not adjust your strategy a little. I don't know what the stats of your opponents were, when losing so many units, but perhaps in future look for weaker targets. Increase the difference in your attack to their defence and see if that improves things for you.

I lose SH, SF, and cash units, but I look at the make up of my military and see where I can improve it. Add some expendable units. I've noticed that the more of one unit I have, the more the probability that it's going to become a casualty. That's to be expected. So add some cheaper expendable units to take the heat of the Hornets and S Frigates.
Works ok for me.
Just my op. Good luck whatever strategy you choose though:)

A little more info for you:

I had 90 allies and was approx. 7000 att/def when the update came out. I started attacking people of varying power compared to my stats to try and discover how the BP reward was calculated. It was then that I noticed the casualty rate had changed. My meatshields were only half as effective as before the update and no matter how weak the other player was, it didn't alter the average number of casualties.

THEN I went up to 190 allies to increase the number of meatshields I take to battle and experiment with BP rewards at a higher number of allies. (more allies = more power, so I presumed that would mean more BP too). No change in BP and no change in casualty rate. I tried all ranges of power with my extra meatshields and nothing made any difference.

I know for a fact my strategy works for me because I currently dominate 99% of my rivals list and since the update mutliple people have started suffering (even more than before).

[Thunder Child]

Seriously?
You're complaining?
I love the new change! It gives you a reason to keep playing. I'm sorry that leveling up to fast is beyond your intelligence.
Play smarter and complain less.
Crazy birds might be a less intelligent game for you to keep up with.

Giggidy ....

Somebody who can't spell his own game name properly - Captain - should not really be throwing the word intelligence about!

[manbeast]

i would have to agree. i am very disappointed with the update.

funzio isn't listening to us

we have come up with soooo many suggestions for this game. a lot of them are very simple and very popular. and they release an update, and don't change a single thing we have asked. i had hoped they were reading this and maybe taking note of the good ideas, but they obviously have their head in the sand.

this update is pretty stupid. the new units arent very impressive. and the amount of fights you have to do to get them is a joke.

[LeBarticus]

i would have to agree. i am very disappointed with the update.

funzio isn't listening to us

we have come up with soooo many suggestions for this game. a lot of them are very simple and very popular. and they release an update, and don't change a single thing we have asked. i had hoped they were reading this and maybe taking note of the good ideas, but they obviously have their head in the sand.

this update is pretty stupid. the new units arent very impressive. and the amount of fights you have to do to get them is a joke.

Yeah, agreed. It's cool they're thinking long term but this is looonnnng long term.

[Hassleham]

Just had a reply to my support slip:

"Hello,

Thank you for the report. We're looking into it now.

Regards,

C"

Not entirely ire what it means but I'm hoping for changes soon!

[Arizona]

What level are you and how many allies do you have? There is no strategy for me to reduce casualties at my level.

It's hard enough to find targets, and the only guys I attack have under 8000 Defence versus my 58000 attack.
I lose up to 3 or 4 units against people with 1500 defence. And i even lose units against someone on the rivals list with a total of 1 defence. I think that's as good as it can get, there's nothing wrong with my targets here. There's something wrong with the casualty rate.

I see your point. My comments are directed at rivals below Whale territory or Shark zone; in general sub L100. I can't honestly comment on what goes on around your levels. It's something I'll need to experience for myself. It's a bit worrying though, when you can lose unit(s) to a rival with a defence of 1. Seriously, one? I'd like to hear Funzio's response to that.

I'm currently L64 with in the region of 50 allies. It hovers around that mark. I don't make too much in battle points, but I try and find targets a lot weaker than myself. Sometimes I get lucky and farm someone without a single loss, sometimes not.
Good luck

[Arizona]

A little more info for you:

I had 90 allies and was approx. 7000 att/def when the update came out. I started attacking people of varying power compared to my stats to try and discover how the BP reward was calculated. It was then that I noticed the casualty rate had changed. My meatshields were only half as effective as before the update and no matter how weak the other player was, it didn't alter the average number of casualties.

THEN I went up to 190 allies to increase the number of meatshields I take to battle and experiment with BP rewards at a higher number of allies. (more allies = more power, so I presumed that would mean more BP too). No change in BP and no change in casualty rate. I tried all ranges of power with my extra meatshields and nothing made any difference.

I know for a fact my strategy works for me because I currently dominate 99% of my rivals list and since the update mutliple people have started suffering (even more than before).

Thanks Hass,
I probably don't experience the losses others talk about as I try to find weak targets for myself. It's obviously a lot harder to find a good balance. As I said in my previous post, it's something I need to experience for myself.
I can't remember if we are allies, but I will add your numbers as we're in a similar level area. I'll PM you as well.

[HGF69]

New update sucks, in order to rank up I'm losing high value valour units and loot items.

So if I pvp or pve, I gain 2-10 valour but lose units 350 valour each time!!!

What's the point in ranking up unless you dimish your defence trying to get to special ops whereby you can buy all the valour units? In the meantime you've spent a fortune and could have doubled your stas by not ranking up.

I'll stick with just not ranking up for now til they sort the ridiculous casualty rates.

[Q Raider]

Since the update I have run close to 1000 Attacks or Raids. It was the style of play I planned when started playing this and will keep running it for as long as I can.

Losses are more consistent than previously and have amped up the shields as a result to keep the prime group somewhat protected. Still lose a few too many of them for my liking though.

Been checking when it happens, one oddity is a fairly high percentage of the opponents have a unit called an "Oil Shipping Truck" in their inventory but it doesn't actually show a picture....

Am also now generally avoiding people with high GIGN counts or who appear to have far too many Loot items actually in play as this is an indicator to me of someone who has the "low loss glitch" and from experience hitting those people seems to almost double the casualties at my end.

Main change for me is being more selective with the money building targets to cover for the higher expected losses. Basic maths is if a three raid run on a building won't generate at least 60k then it isn't worth it.

[Hassleham]

I don't raid anything for less than about 300k overall because eventually I lose several cruisers in a row or a hovercraft and I don't make profit.

[Errol]

Has anyone tried downgrading their MW to the previous version. Before I upgrade any software, I always save the old ipa file.

It may be a server update, so idk if this works.

[JMC]

I see your point. My comments are directed at rivals below Whale territory or Shark zone; in general sub L100. I can't honestly comment on what goes on around your levels. It's something I'll need to experience for myself. It's a bit worrying though, when you can lose unit(s) to a rival with a defence of 1. Seriously, one? I'd like to hear Funzio's response to that.

I'm currently L64 with in the region of 50 allies. It hovers around that mark. I don't make too much in battle points, but I try and find targets a lot weaker than myself. Sometimes I get lucky and farm someone without a single loss, sometimes not.
Good luck

Yeah the updates and casualty rates don't effect the low levels that severely. However, the high levels are effected greatly and at every update something is done to hinder our progress and sh*t on our chance of any success. I have yet to see more than 2 or 3 free players doing well legitimately in the top levels. Each and everyone one of them has already quit because they are getting destroyed, are continuing to play while getting destroyed, or fortunate enough to have the casualty glitch. Without the bunch that have the glitch, every single free player is getting dominated and the game really is not worth playing. Currently, it is impossible to earn valor, impossible to go up in stats. All you can do is sit back, try to make enough money to upgrade your buildings and that's it. All while your stats are plummeting.

Funzio obviously reads the forums, because they seem to nerf anything that has a positive effect on our progress. They read, and ignore all the problems we bring up though.

[Ramshutu]

I would suggest that the Devs need to do the following:

1.) work out what 'expected' loss rates should be, in terms of how much cash, valor, etc should be lost, on average per battle.
2.) create 100 test profiles with a typical, or untypical unit split.
3.) run those test profiles through the loss algorithm against a variety of other test profiles.
4.) compare the results against 1.)
5.) if the results deviate +\- a given small percentage, then the test has failed and the 'tweak' should be rejected.

This can run automatically over night.

I can appreciate that losses are expected, and that it may not be in the best interests of the game for people to be abe to maintain 2000 super hornets indefinitely, but it it needs to be possible to realistically maintain a vaguely competive army in the high levels. At the moment, this is just not possible.

[Ascent]

I think the problem is not in the tuning, but in the nature of the game itself. It is almost exactly like real life in the western world... you work hard, to strategize, you beat up the smaller kids to get up higher, but there is always someone higher than you who does the same thing to you. And there is no way out of the ratrace, you keep doing the same boring thing (building, collecting, upgrading) and nothing really changes but the numbers have more digits... the nature, the experience is the same at every level...

... until you get to the top that is...

and reading JMC's posts it seems to me that the most miserable place is right at the top

because there is nowehere else to climb and no one to fight against and you spent enormous amount of time and effort getting there all for what? what did you get out of it? What is the prize? Th fact that you can kill anyone with one click of a button? And who on earth enjoys sitting all day clicking on a red attack button and have no more challenges, nothing to do, just pressing the button which lost all meaning.

I think this game is a good lesson if you realize that your real life might be no different

except, that most of us die sooner than get to the top of the pyramid to realize

the futility of it all :D

[Warfiend]

Seriously?
You're complaining?
I love the new change! It gives you a reason to keep playing. I'm sorry that leveling up to fast is beyond your intelligence.
Play smarter and complain less.
Crazy birds might be a less intelligent game for you to keep up with.

Giggidy ....

I like the new change too, but no need to attack people's intelligence. I think the problem is, more than a few people here, even some of the senior people, don't seem to grasp what type of game this is meant to be. Not because of intelligence issues, but because of personal preferences and prior experience with other war games that had a more fast paced less long term focus. Also, the way the earlier versions of the game functioned at higher levels, created a perception among the senior users here about how the game should be, but I suspect the way it was was not how the devs intended it to be.

This game, going by build, upgrade, expansion, and now pvp rank times, is clearly meant to be played long term and incorporate resource management, investment, and patience. This game is not in any perceivable way, designed to be an instant gratification non-stop fight game.

Other than the zero casualty rate bug people have mentioned, I think the casualty rates aren't a bug. They are reflective of the need to have a substantial economy in place to sustain a modern war machine. The higher casualty rates emphasize the need to take the time to build large economy before you are able to dominate in moden warfare.

In real modern war, it doesn't matter how much stronger you are than an opponent, you will take losses launching a full scale assault on another nation. I think Afganistan is a great example of that. They are a relatively primitive people who have fought defensive wars against two super powers and made each one experience losses, despite being vastly militarily weaker.

If you look at other games in this genre on mobile devices(can't name them due to forum rules), you will find they also require long term commitments and time and patience to build up economy in order to sustain powerful forces. MW seems very much intended to be the next generation of those games(think the S8 titles). If you can see it that way, much of what people complain about makes sense.

[Mad]

I like the new change too, but no need to attack people's intelligence. I think the problem is, more than a few people here, even some of the senior people, don't seem to grasp what type of game this is meant to be. Not because of intelligence issues, but because of personal preferences and prior experience with other war games that had a more fast paced less long term focus. Also, the way the earlier versions of the game functioned at higher levels, created a perception among the senior users here about how the game should be, but I suspect the way it was was not how the devs intended it to be.

This game, going by build, upgrade, expansion, and now pvp rank times, is clearly meant to be played long term and incorporate resource management, investment, and patience. This game is not in any perceivable way, designed to be an instant gratification non-stop fight game.

Other than the zero casualty rate bug people have mentioned, I think the casualty rates aren't a bug. They are reflective of the need to have a substantial economy in place to sustain a modern war machine. The higher casualty rates emphasize the need to take the time to build large economy before you are able to dominate in moden warfare.

In real modern war, it doesn't matter how much stronger you are than an opponent, you will take losses launching a full scale assault on another nation. I think Afganistan is a great example of that. They are a relatively primitive people who have fought defensive wars against two super powers and made each one experience losses, despite being vastly militarily weaker.

If you look at other games in this genre on mobile devices(can't name them due to forum rules), you will find they also require long term commitments and time and patience to build up economy in order to sustain powerful forces. MW seems very much intended to be the next generation of those games(think the S8 titles). If you can see it that way, much of what people complain about makes sense.

Good post. I think you hit the nail on the head. Nobody goes through a battle unscathed in real life..

I just came off pvp, lost a bit of equipment - one nice one. But in the process I accomplished my long term goal of raising enough cash to build an oil rig.

The money I make off that rig will more than pay for the bit of equipment I lost. Anyway the equipment will soon be replaced by my other cash flow. But I also got some gold and valor. You just can't look at your losses in the short term.

[JMC]

I like the new change too, but no need to attack people's intelligence. I think the problem is, more than a few people here, even some of the senior people, don't seem to grasp what type of game this is meant to be. Not because of intelligence issues, but because of personal preferences and prior experience with other war games that had a more fast paced less long term focus. Also, the way the earlier versions of the game functioned at higher levels, created a perception among the senior users here about how the game should be, but I suspect the way it was was not how the devs intended it to be.

This game, going by build, upgrade, expansion, and now pvp rank times, is clearly meant to be played long term and incorporate resource management, investment, and patience. This game is not in any perceivable way, designed to be an instant gratification non-stop fight game.

Other than the zero casualty rate bug people have mentioned, I think the casualty rates aren't a bug. They are reflective of the need to have a substantial economy in place to sustain a modern war machine. The higher casualty rates emphasize the need to take the time to build large economy before you are able to dominate in moden warfare.

In real modern war, it doesn't matter how much stronger you are than an opponent, you will take losses launching a full scale assault on another nation. I think Afganistan is a great example of that. They are a relatively primitive people who have fought defensive wars against two super powers and made each one experience losses, despite being vastly militarily weaker.

If you look at other games in this genre on mobile devices(can't name them due to forum rules), you will find they also require long term commitments and time and patience to build up economy in order to sustain powerful forces. MW seems very much intended to be the next generation of those games(think the S8 titles). If you can see it that way, much of what people complain about makes sense.

A free players power primarily comes from valor points. Economy has nothing to do with earning valor, which is literally impossible at this point. All the way up until the update, i dealt with the losses and i gained a few valor units a day while completing probably 5-8 missions per day. Probably eearning around 15000-20000 valor per day, i came out with 5-10 new units. Now since the change i have lost over 60 valor units, and i haven't even been attacking. If i were trying to complete missions i can gaurantee that number would be closer to 300 valor units.

As for cash, the only way for free players to be successful with a entirely cash army is by buying the very expensive items. Items which are costing in the multi millions per unit. With an economy of 1 million per hour, i still doubt i could maintain a powerful cash army. And the problem before that is even getting to 1 million per hour. Right now the only way to build up a powerful cash army is to have camped for a very long time, doing expensive upgrades with no fear of cash being stolen. These players will eventually reach whatever income they feel is neccessary and level up. All to find out that with the casualty rates they will be losing 10million dollars of their army per attack and still getting pummelled by gold players, losing 20-25million dollars worth of units per set of failed defends. Currently there is no sustainable way to play as a free player in the upper levels.

Some people have a glitch which nets them near zero casualties and there's also a possible glitch that hides someone from the rivals list. Without either of these two benefits, a free player cannot survive the upper levels after this update.

[Arizona]

Yeah the updates and casualty rates don't effect the low levels that severely. However, the high levels are effected greatly and at every update something is done to hinder our progress and sh*t on our chance of any success. I have yet to see more than 2 or 3 free players doing well legitimately in the top levels. Each and everyone one of them has already quit because they are getting destroyed, are continuing to play while getting destroyed, or fortunate enough to have the casualty glitch. Without the bunch that have the glitch, every single free player is getting dominated and the game really is not worth playing. Currently, it is impossible to earn valor, impossible to go up in stats. All you can do is sit back, try to make enough money to upgrade your buildings and that's it. All while your stats are plummeting.

Funzio obviously reads the forums, because they seem to nerf anything that has a positive effect on our progress. They read, and ignore all the problems we bring up though.

Funzio it seems have a good thing going for them then. As free players quit, new ones such as myself eventually level up and replace those that have long departed. Each of us down here sub 100 all thinking we can find a different way to survive. And its no use being told we can't, we have to experience our military (that's taken months to hone to a perfect force) being taken apart with ease by Gold bugs. When that happens, I'll be posting as you are, telling some low level player, "it really sucks up here". This cycle will just go on repeating itself unless Funzio make it worthwhile for non gold spenders to compete, maybe not on an even playing field, but with the opportunity through skilful game playing strategy, to survive and even get the better of gold players. Not likely though; they can't upset their cash flow.

[Thunder Child]

What a thoroughly depressing thread this has become!

[Mad]

Funzio it seems have a good thing going for them then. As free players quit, new ones such as myself eventually level up and replace those that have long departed. Each of us down here sub 100 all thinking we can find a different way to survive. And its no use being told we can't, we have to experience our military (that's taken months to hone to a perfect force) being taken apart with ease by Gold bugs. When that happens, I'll be posting as you are, telling some low level player, "it really sucks up here". This cycle will just go on repeating itself unless Funzio make it worthwhile for non gold spenders to compete, maybe not on an even playing field, but with the opportunity through skilful game playing strategy, to survive and even get the better of gold players. Not likely though; they can't upset their cash flow.

I am a free player as well and am dreading the move into whale territory. But I think Funzio is missing out on middle players like me. I realized very quickly I was unwilling to spend the money like the big players and because of that the little I was willing to spend woulid be a complete waste, so I decided to spend nothing.

Funzio should develop a version for players like myself who are willing to spend a bit each year, but keep it an even playing field no gold players allowed.

[Arizona]

What a thoroughly depressing thread this has become!
In that case, I love Korean movies. Any recommendations for 2012?

[Ascent]

Well, a few months ago I started another player which I am grooming to become my additional cash cow

I hope that sooner or later it will catch up with my primary character so i can raid it and loot it on schedule (which will be quite easy for me to guess when ;)

That LLP has no barracks, no defense, only money buildings and a few thousand desert leaders, minisubs and amphibious troopers from PVE piled up.

It will be nice to be able to raid a reliable source for a few millions every day day by day. It will also be a nice way to store money safely to be "collected" just before starting a huge upgrade :D

[Captian Awesome]

Somebody who can't spell his own game name properly - Captain - should not really be throwing the word intelligence about!

The spelling of my name is done on purpose, but thanx for asking about the reason behind it.

[Sugarymama]

I have to disagree with the tone of this thread.

If Funzio have adjusted casualty rates, then instead of looking for another game to play or complaining, why not adjust your strategy a little. I don't know what the stats of your opponents were, when losing so many units, but perhaps in future look for weaker targets. Increase the difference in your attack to their defence and see if that improves things for you.

I lose SH, SF, and cash units, but I look at the make up of my military and see where I can improve it. Add some expendable units. I've noticed that the more of one unit I have, the more the probability that it's going to become a casualty. That's to be expected. So add some cheaper expendable units to take the heat of the Hornets and S Frigates.
Works ok for me.
Just my op. Good luck whatever strategy you choose though:)

I know I'm late replying to this pity party, but the losses have nothing to do with strategy, in my opinion. I have attacked weak and strong rivals alike, and the losses are sometimes worse after attacking weaker rivals. That should not be the case. I've loaded up on meat shields, bought more of the units that I lose more off, and the result is the same. There is no rhyme or reason to it. I don't mind losing units against a player close to my strength, but with an A/D of 36k/40k, I shouldn't lose ANY units when I attack a rival with an A/D of 15k/20k. Just my opinion.

[Warfiend]

A free players power primarily comes from valor points.

I totally respect you JMC and I'm hoping I can offer my viewpoints without coming across as disrespectful or thinking I *know* better than you. I do see things different than you, and not just because I haven't reached your level. I've also played other games in this genre for years. so with that, here's my reply..

Your power has come primarily from valor points as that is how you've played and built your forces. I do not think the devs, in their overall view of the game, meant for valor units to be the primary source of strength for a free player. I think they meant for valor units to enhance a solid cash force. I think the way they've implemented PVP ranking and set the casualty rates on valor units indicate that. I think if they wanted valor units to be the primary source of strength for free players, they would have at the very least given them a very low casualty rate.


As for cash, the only way for free players to be successful with a entirely cash army is by buying the very expensive items.

I don't think an entirely cash army is what the devs envision. I think a cash army as a solid base enhanced by valor units seems to be what they're trying to get people towards. And of course, gold units. They obviously want people buying gold units, which is their bread and butter and wine and back massages and nice sports cars, etc...


Items which are costing in the multi millions per unit. With an economy of 1 million per hour, i still doubt i could maintain a powerful cash army. And the problem before that is even getting to 1 million per hour. Right now the only way to build up a powerful cash army is to have camped for a very long time, doing expensive upgrades with no fear of cash being stolen. These players will eventually reach whatever income they feel is neccessary and level up. All to find out that with the casualty rates they will be losing 10million dollars of their army per attack and still getting pummelled by gold players, losing 20-25million dollars worth of units per set of failed defends. Currently there is no sustainable way to play as a free player in the upper levels.

What are the casualty rates of the air craft carrier and stealth bombers, would you happen to know? I don't know, but from my vantage point down here... I lose very very few of my very low casualty units as compared to my stealth frigates. I'm not sure of the exact ratio, but I can say that after losing as many stealth frigates as I have, and as few cruisers, hovercrafts, and mine launchers(which I have several times more of than any other single unit in my forces), it is very clear to me that I can rely on those units a helluva lot more than I can on the SFs.


Some people have a glitch which nets them near zero casualties and there's also a possible glitch that hides someone from the rivals list. Without either of these two benefits, a free player cannot survive the upper levels after this update.

I know for a fact that I don't have either of those glitches. I also know that one of the reasons I'm taking my time in leveling is because of what solid forum members like you have said about the upper levels. I don't doubt you guys at all and I have no delusions about competing with golden armies. I'm in this to have fun and it's very clear to me that to have fun, I should slow down and enjoy being powerful at the levels I can be. And it's only clear to me because people like you have shared your experience, and I appreciate that very much. Who knows how many mistakes you senior guys have helped me avoid by sharing your info. Thank you for that.

I just have to wonder if you would have an easier time with a powerful cash force enhanced by valor units. I'm not wondering if you could dominate with them, just maybe you'd be having a better experience with them? I don't see anyone complaining about their stealth bombers and aircraft carriers dropping like valor units, but that could be just because no one has them in any significant number yet. Or no one who posts here anyway. I don't know.

[JMC]

I totally respect you JMC and I'm hoping I can offer my viewpoints without coming across as disrespectful or thinking I *know* better than you. I do see things different than you, and not just because I haven't reached your level. I've also played other games in this genre for years. so with that, here's my reply..

Your power has come primarily from valor points as that is how you've played and built your forces. I do not think the devs, in their overall view of the game, meant for valor units to be the primary source of strength for a free player. I think they meant for valor units to enhance a solid cash force. I think the way they've implemented PVP ranking and set the casualty rates on valor units indicate that. I think if they wanted valor units to be the primary source of strength for free players, they would have at the very least given them a very low casualty rate.



I don't think an entirely cash army is what the devs envision. I think a cash army as a solid base enhanced by valor units seems to be what they're trying to get people towards. And of course, gold units. They obviously want people buying gold units, which is their bread and butter and wine and back massages and nice sports cars, etc...



What are the casualty rates of the air craft carrier and stealth bombers, would you happen to know? I don't know, but from my vantage point down here... I lose very very few of my very low casualty units as compared to my stealth frigates. I'm not sure of the exact ratio, but I can say that after losing as many stealth frigates as I have, and as few cruisers, hovercrafts, and mine launchers(which I have several times more of than any other single unit in my forces), it is very clear to me that I can rely on those units a helluva lot more than I can on the SFs.



I know for a fact that I don't have either of those glitches. I also know that one of the reasons I'm taking my time in leveling is because of what solid forum members like you have said about the upper levels. I don't doubt you guys at all and I have no delusions about competing with golden armies. I'm in this to have fun and it's very clear to me that to have fun, I should slow down and enjoy being powerful at the levels I can be. And it's only clear to me because people like you have shared your experience, and I appreciate that very much. Who knows how many mistakes you senior guys have helped me avoid by sharing your info. Thank you for that.

I just have to wonder if you would have an easier time with a powerful cash force enhanced by valor units. I'm not wondering if you could dominate with them, just maybe you'd be having a better experience with them? I don't see anyone complaining about their stealth bombers and aircraft carriers dropping like valor units, but that could be just because no one has them in any significant number yet. Or no one who posts here anyway. I don't know.

Either way, you would be losing valor units as well as your expensive cash units left and right. I believe the stealth bombers casualty rate is medium and the air craft carrier likely is low or very low. Everything was dying more than my meatshields were which is not reasonable. Regardless of the army make up, if you were not running all indestructible units, you would not be able to sustain yourself.

On a side note, i just did my daily testing of the casualty rate and it seems to have been reverted to the rate of before the event. I'll have to find another target later and see if this holds true.

[manbeast]

On a side note, i just did my daily testing of the casualty rate and it seems to have been reverted to the rate of before the event. I'll have to find another target later and see if this holds true.

please post your findings. i havent even looked at my rivals list since updating. cant afford the type of losses yall were talking about

[JMC]

please post your findings. i havent even looked at my rivals list since updating. cant afford the type of losses yall were talking about

Did another set of attacks and the casualty rate is back to how it was last week.

[manbeast]

Well, a few months ago I started another player which I am grooming to become my additional cash cow

I hope that sooner or later it will catch up with my primary character so i can raid it and loot it on schedule (which will be quite easy for me to guess when ;)

That LLP has no barracks, no defense, only money buildings and a few thousand desert leaders, minisubs and amphibious troopers from PVE piled up.

It will be nice to be able to raid a reliable source for a few millions every day day by day. It will also be a nice way to store money safely to be "collected" just before starting a huge upgrade :D

very cool strategy. I would do it myself, but i'm too lazy haha.


Did another set of attacks and the casualty rate is back to how it was last week.

good to know. thanks jmc

time to start hunting.

btw i noticed your stats going up. what units you buying now?

[JMC]

Well i've decided not to restore my stealth frigates and m270s to my previous amount. So far i have re-bought 10 of my super hornets and i may consider starting to buy more of the new Elite Ops Helicopters since i switched to russia a few days ago.

None of these new units seem too lopsided, which i don't like. But i'm gonna have to start getting some stronger units and starting off with a few of them will keep casualties down a bit and make meatshields more effective.

[manbeast]

what country were you before?

[stricker]

Did another set of attacks and the casualty rate is back to how it was last week.
haven't attacked anyone in at least 24 hrs. because of loss rate on valors/loot... even after you've stated this i'm still skeptical about it really being the case... so, i'll wait until you've done several more series of attacks and report the same again...

[manbeast]

haven't attacked anyone in at least 24 hrs. because of loss rate on valors/loot... even after you've stated this i'm still skeptical about it really being the case... so, i'll wait until you've done several more series of attacks and report the same again...

JMC is legit.

just spent 20 stamina against someone with 4k defense. only lost 2 units total. 1 sniper, 1 inflatable. that might be my all time lowest loss

[stricker]

JMC is legit.

just spent 20 stamina against someone with 4k defense. only lost 2 units total. 1 sniper, 1 inflatable. that might be my all time lowest loss
...never questioned jmc on legit. lol ...always known jmc to give good advice and good info! ...and your report brings me more confidence, so thanks.

...just questioning dev gods!!! haha.

[JMC]

what country were you before?

I used to be UK. Switched to it early game when stealth frigates were 175 each and transports/frigates were the main source of my defence. Now i find it is better to give the boost to super hornets and i use stealth surveillance drones for the main source of my cash unit defence. Switching to russia brought down my attack by only about 75-100 while it brought my defence up by 1200.


haven't attacked anyone in at least 24 hrs. because of loss rate on valors/loot... even after you've stated this i'm still skeptical about it really being the case... so, i'll wait until you've done several more series of attacks and report the same again...

Did a third set of attacks. Same thing.

[manbeast]

I used to be UK. Switched to it early game when stealth frigates were 175 each and transports/frigates were the main source of my defence. Now i find it is better to give the boost to super hornets and i use stealth surveillance drones for the main source of my cash unit defence. Switching to russia brought down my attack by only about 75-100 while it brought my defence up by 1200.


stealth frigates were 175?! with the same stats?? if so, thats too good to be true

i'm uk. switched (from usa) about a month ago. i respect your decision to switch, but i still believe UK is the best. i like the low casualty and units. for instance, i prefer the mine launcher to stealth surv. bc it has a strong against. the new sea valor unit does suck though.

[Hassleham]

did another set of attacks and the casualty rate is back to how it was last week.

hurray!!!!!