Conquer Club

Ah I see that makes it much more difficult so 26 in a row is very impressive for mage plunka. I think the goal of 10, 15, and 20 sounds more reasonable though I doubt very many people would even earn a bronze. 10 wins in a row with 3+ players is pretty damn difficult IMO

Jippd wrote:Ah I see that makes it much more difficult so 26 in a row is very impressive for mage plunka. I think the goal of 10, 15, and 20 sounds more reasonable though I doubt very many people would even earn a bronze. 10 wins in a row with 3+ players is pretty damn difficult IMO

these its not final decision,its open for any suggestion who are accepted from community .

qwert wrote:

Jippd wrote:Ah I see that makes it much more difficult so 26 in a row is very impressive for mage plunka. I think the goal of 10, 15, and 20 sounds more reasonable though I doubt very many people would even earn a bronze. 10 wins in a row with 3+ players is pretty damn difficult IMO

these its not final decision,its open for any suggestion who are accepted from community .

bullshit, if you felt that way you wouldn't have foed me

greenoaks wrote:

qwert wrote:

Jippd wrote:Ah I see that makes it much more difficult so 26 in a row is very impressive for mage plunka. I think the goal of 10, 15, and 20 sounds more reasonable though I doubt very many people would even earn a bronze. 10 wins in a row with 3+ players is pretty damn difficult IMO

these its not final decision,its open for any suggestion who are accepted from community .

bullshit, if you felt that way you wouldn't have foed me

You've made your concerns well known, and you're right that gold being set to 100 medals is not going to win community support. That doesn't discount the possible value of this suggestion for more reasonable medal values; from now on, let's discuss those. I suggested my set because 20 wins is clearly very difficult, but also possible. Yes, it won't be like other medals, and yes, as with any feature on the site, abuse is possible. But 20 wins is much different from 100 wins; the risk of people being held hostage for long periods of time is not so large. As for the potential for farming, I think we just need to decide how much of an increased risk of that we're willing to accept. I think that the so-called farmers are a very small part of the community, and often get caught when they do it; to throw out something enjoyable because of a vast minority sets a bad precedent.

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

qwert wrote:

Jippd wrote:Ah I see that makes it much more difficult so 26 in a row is very impressive for mage plunka. I think the goal of 10, 15, and 20 sounds more reasonable though I doubt very many people would even earn a bronze. 10 wins in a row with 3+ players is pretty damn difficult IMO

these its not final decision,its open for any suggestion who are accepted from community .

bullshit, if you felt that way you wouldn't have foed me

You've made your concerns well known, and you're right that gold being set to 100 medals is not going to win community support. That doesn't discount the possible value of this suggestion for more reasonable medal values; from now on, let's discuss those. I suggested my set because 20 wins is clearly very difficult, but also possible. Yes, it won't be like other medals, and yes, as with any feature on the site, abuse is possible. But 20 wins is much different from 100 wins; the risk of people being held hostage for long periods of time is not so large. As for the potential for farming, I think we just need to decide how much of an increased risk of that we're willing to accept. I think that the so-called farmers are a very small part of the community, and often get caught when they do it; to throw out something enjoyable because of a vast minority sets a bad precedent.

unfortunate with some people you can not discuss, they hold for hes statement and only demand that hes words are most valuable.