Hi Caligula!

Thank you very much for the straight answer .The first 4 clear for me. I disagree with the last one!the administrator should not be allowed to intervene in this way! Nato respected everyone!!!

One player said it wasn't that good! and the Admin helped him! guys is this so good? many players lost everything! guys is this good !? Guys what are we doing ???? this is the way to the end of the game! who wants this? please tell me what do you think? NATO lost 4 fantastic players. Tyra lost 2 players! I'm not happy for this! admin gives us the opportunity!?Why is that?Alex, David, Loic, Lee, Jose, Phil, jendzer, Ostry,Chris, Doolen, Graf, Comte,why don't we respect each other?why the game ends?
Keep your head up!! All the best!!!Szabika my real name! Im not not hiding!! Game name Anfisza

Hi Dschibait!

Can i ask you one quesion? You want to push down Nato!!!But where is ---? Where is the Germany allince? Who is suppot for you?
And why we play together? Where are you? I respect for you,but looks like you not respetct for us! So?

Hi Halberd.

Thank you for your answer.

But I think you misunderstood me a little.

I'm talking about supporting smaller players!
I saw on the forum that there were those who said that the market was outdated already.
I agree with that!
And that's why I thought maybe we could farm again!?

For rapid growth, the supply of raw materials (Resources) is important!
(I may not be right, but I experience this in the real life.)

This is the fastest way to proactively help players looking to improve. Some players who have been playing for a long time remember this support. (i thint this was worked very well!)

And that’s why I tried to make a suggestion.

i am very sorry that you think of me as wanting to give bad ideas to other players!
I can assure you that was not my goal !!!!!!

Farming can activate players who want to develop fast much better!

Best Regards

Szabika

Hi!

i think if the admin would restore the farming loss to 0% then he would give a huge boost to the smaller players! I think this would result in a much more spectacular catching up than the various restrictions.
if with this help a smaller but very active players can raise the 71/71/71 military level very quickly.is there an opportunity for faster growth than the farming support?

The number of recruiting castles is limited, thus the resources accumulating in the other castles can be used by smaller players to raise the faster military level.

Regards

Hi Dschibait!

If you don't like someone's opinion, post, idea here on the forum then should it be banned from the game? If you limit the players in the forum I might understand.
But you kick out him because you are angry. Hummm
Please show a player on this forum who agrees with your decision.
You have blocked the leader of the Spanish alliance!!!!!!

Regards

Thank you for your answer!

And sorry I used English! I was careless!

And you’re right, I really don’t understand this game.

Have a nice day!

Regards

Hi Chemilla!

I understand the frustration, and I feel the same .
The goal of a medium player is to become a big player one day.
And that makes them active.
But if I see how the big players are restricted then I’m not sure I want to invest more energy into the game.

And that's how those players achieved what they wanted.
Less motivation, less activity, and that means less military production!

I think that was their goal for them! AND SUCCESSFUL!

("Every really active player got a giant slap.")

I may be naive but I think this is just a test version!

The administrator always says that it is very important for him or his team to Listening to opinions and feedback from the players.
In the past 24 hours, a lot of people disagree with this change and the consequences of that.
(One player is an exception.)
I think so and i believe the administrator will listening to a lot of frustrated players!
And I believe he will make a democratic decision after that!

Best Regards

just a little thought

Why do they think the top players are bad for this game and that they want to destroy the smaller or medium players?
I think the exact opposite.
They are the ones who keep the balance in this game. I know some of the top players who never said it would be worthwhile to destroy anyone who smaller than them! Never!
Moreover, there are top players in your alliance who have worked to ensure that there is no unnecessary war or destruction of anyone.
I believe the top players can make this game fairer.
I agree that players with 13 and 7 billion military strength, respectively, cannot be caught!
But you don't have to!
We need to strengthen the strong middle class and help smaller players catch up faster.
And there are so many opportunities for larger players to help,support and make the smaller players catch up.
And so the top players can even reduce their own military growth!!

As a result, the administrators have introduced an innovation that can increase military strength very quickly!
And does not require the purchase of gold.

If everyone had a relatively similar military strenght , there would probably be a lot more wars that would bring a little fire into the game.
But until when?

Can't war be boring after a while?

I believe that a balance of military strength cannot be a solution. I believe that the source of the problem is the dissolution or merging of smaller and medium-sized alliances."And unfortunately, there were fewer and fewer alliances left."

Although now that the two worlds merging may be have a chances new alliances.
Although everyone clings to someone, and so it’s hard to make a really big difference.

Regards

Hi!

Maybe you're right!
But please don't tell me I'm a player who wants bad things for this game!
And that I want to dominate this game. Because that's not true!
I never said or thought of that!
But you did it several times if I remember correctly! You are not afraid of anyone, you are able to destroy anyone, this suggests that maybe you will receive exceptional treatment and maybe enjoy benefits.

I tried to say my opinion on this forum, for this you say in front of everyone that I am a bad person who wants bad!

Please read my suggestion again and try to answer as a top player who wants to play for the game.
It wasn’t irony, I just thought it would be much better for you to fight players with similar military strength.

But you thought these players would rather reduce their military power to attack the smaller ones! I wouldn't think so, because such players can be monitored.
(But it’s interesting that you assume this about Damoria players!)

But I think it's up to you to decide what they're going to do. And it makes no sense to make suggestions.
There is no point in quarreling if you do not even listen to the opinions. or treats all opinions in an offensive manner.

I don't like to quarrel!

My mom said Two intelligent people can talk about anything without being quarreled!
But you consider me a bad person!!!

So maybe it's better to stifle this conversation! I wish you a lot of success in realizing your plans! And i wish a good game in the future.

Hi!

You never talk about how there can be such a difference in growth between the biggest and middle players. How could this happen? Maybe because they've been playing for a long time, they've been able to collect more loot, they've had time to build castles. Or have they bought a lot of gold?
Maybe that's all true. It invests a lot of work, time, and money. And now you want to limit that.
I feel like that's how you betrayed us!

(If you really want to help, please limit the purchase of gold and the benefits they have created.
I know a lot of fantastic small to medium players who are very active but can’t buy gold. If you only limit the number of castles or recruit, but do not limit the purchase of gold, the difference will be the same.)

That would make the game fairer, but it wouldn’t improve it either.

The growth of players should not be restricted!!!!
Now, maybe that’s good for you, but it will definitely do a lot of damage in the long run.

My suggestion: Top players should have a top league.
Players with more than 4 billion military strength can only attack each other.
They can't support smaller players militarily!
(Or vice versa!)

the middle league is pushed up from 50 to 80.
If someone is eliminated from the top league they can still fight in the middle league.
This would not limit the growth of the players.

Regards

Hi Caligula.

Yes you right,cuttung off the big players will definitely help you in a stratagy game!
I think in the strategy game,the exact opposite should be done and more support should be given to players.
For me the strategy game is about growth and teamwork,not about austerity.
(This is not a Candy crush)

If you want all players to have a same or simmilar talent,you also need to regulate the purchase of gold. Becausethe two are directly proportional in the strategy game. (You will surely agree with that)
the result will also be because less castles - less gold.
Otherwise it would not be fair.After 8-10 years or more of playing, if
someone cut, what the players have built up with hard work they will think about whethere it is worth continuing.
Can i ask you whay you want to keep the top position if in the meantime you are working to cut off what the other players are having a hard and long time to getting?
This kind of change can easily result in a final war,and maybe even theis game is will over after that. But im sure you know that very well!!!!
And im sure will be a lot of disappointed players if that happens and they may leave the game after the last attack.

And no one wants that!!!!!!!!!

Im sure there is another solution is possible.

But i may not be right,but thats what i think.

Thank you

Regards

Hi!

If you or your alliance want to reduce the power of the top players,the administrátor will probably do so.
All active small and medium players work to be top players.
If this is limitedthen i need to think about whether it is worth sending money to buy gold.I think the solution more in support!

Example: Farming! The bigest support for the small and medium players! (I used a lot more gold when it was 100%)

Market trading: (Good idea) But if i have 930 construction sites recruitment 100/100/100, resources production same, where do i put the market? it does not have a place. Build the new castle wherethe market and the production is 100? 1-2 years and not give me any protection!And he who has such a castle or castles prefers to support himself!

And if you make a mistake in war (everyone who is not afraid makes a mistake) and i lose 1 billion troops,how long will it take to produce again? 1 years minimum.
Capitulátion mode:Good idea! But those who go there afterwards are no longer as active as before.
If you or yours alliance want to cut down the big players,do so.

But this will not be a solution! I think the solution could be to speed up production,or create a common enemy.

Regards

Szabika

it doesn't really matter, I just don't understand why they want to suppress the big players! But good luck!

Ich will, dass das Spiel mehr Spaß macht. Nicht nur mir und meinen Freunden, sondern auch allen anderen! Und nicht nur 5 Spielern, die hier Weltpolizei spielen.

Ich will kämpfen. Fair kämpfen. Ich habe kein Spaß, wenn ich sehe, dass meine Gegner mit dem Spiel aufhören, weil sie keine Chance sehen, mich jemals besiegen zu können!

Wer hält das Gleichgewicht?

Your players may be right!!!

Caligula! maybe i wrong! You sure 2600? (2013) And do you agree with the restriction of big players?

Caligula! Can i ask you something? You working for this game? or no?

Caligula!

You are a very experienced player! what do you want?

Hi Juflo!

I understand you!
I fought with the Germans to win the battle against the Russians!(Ge2)Where were you then?I understand you want to be close to the boss!But you want to suppress the boss of your Alliance!
But him does a lot for the game!