#Gold Rush Issues

113 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

spring anchor
halcyon zealot
#

Thank you very much for the detailed description of the problem and your suggestions on how to solve it.
I’ll pass it on to the design team for further review.00_howdy

hallow night
halcyon zealot
undone panther
hybrid quartz
#

But true... if they don't compete in fever, then production should stop.

hallow night
random zinc
hallow night
hallow night
#

Sorry my english, I speack portuguese anda to use a tradutor.

hybrid quartz
hallow night
random zinc
# hallow night The fact that there is a station occupied for gold production will cause the pha...

I understand the idea behind not receiving attacks on empty bases, but stopping gold production is a completely different issue. It penalizes not just solo players but also lower-level clans with members who can’t afford strong defenders and rely on passive production for the time being.

Instead of proposing penalties, a better approach could be something like this: maps we buy for raids only match with clans that have active defenders, and initiating an attack requires a minimum number of defenders depending on your HQ level or similar criteria. This would help balance the game while allowing players who rely on passive gold collection to continue without being punished. Plus, this will still give you that 100 extra points for killing an defender in the Gold Rush leaderboard.

hybrid quartz
hallow night
hybrid quartz
#

I think you're then fostering empty alliances with large gold producers to passively gain that gold

hallow night
#

The problem is that most of the attacks we receive don't even give us a chance to retaliate, as they miss the target. This results in a low score. And even more so, attacking an empty alliance gives fewer points than a full alliance. In other words, it's just a disadvantage in the competition.

hybrid quartz
#

Leagues no longer influence pairings, nor does the authority.

random zinc
# hybrid quartz This latest matchmaking system was a mistake. Don't you agree?

I do agree the current matchmaking system has issues, especially when looking at it from the perspective of higher-level and lower-level clans. For lower-level clans, the main problem is revenge attacks from higher-level clans and higher level clans atracking lower level/empty clans😂.

While the idea behind matchmaking using a power-based system was meant to create balance and fairness, in practice it doesn’t work as intended. In my opinion, instead of coming up with entirely new ideas, they should focus on fixing the power system. Once that’s properly fixed, I think it would be balanced, everything would be fair and much better.

hybrid quartz
#

Some people go weeks without getting paid in small alliances. They receive daily attacks that they can't respond to. Their attackers are much larger than they are.

hallow night
#

Imagine the 3 daily attacks. The first is within the competition's members, the second within the league (gold, silver, bronze), and the third is an attack from anyone. Then we would also have a competition between the participants in the ranking who enters.

hybrid quartz
hallow night
#

Because, of course, attacking and being attacked solely by a gold alliance would cause an enormous expenditure of equipment, both for attack and defense. đŸ€Ł

#

Today, competition is purely based on luck and doesn't showcase the best.

glacial pagoda
#

Sempre achei que o sistema das alianças deixa a desejar quando alianças ouro atacam bronze ou alianças bronze abre um mapa e encontra ouro 1 impossível enfrentar então desistem ; perdendo as moedas gastas, e alianças fortes e bem organizadas quando abrem o mapa e encontra uma aliança fraca e sem defesa, qual a graça?
A emoção das competiçÔes Ă© justamente competir com jogadores no mesmo nĂ­vel Ă© emocionante enfrentar uma aliança forte ! TambĂ©m deviam deixar mais claro o sistema de ataques e pontuação na corrida do ouro Ă© triste depender de revanche para pontuar bem e acaba nĂŁo recebendo nenhuma , o esforço se perde e ficamos realmente decepcionados de depender de revanche que Ă© aleatĂłria para pontuar bem, seria bom por algum outro modo de pontuar para o jogador poder se esforçar mais e ter mais foco no game.đŸ€ 

hybrid quartz
glacial pagoda
#

NĂŁo falo inglĂȘs sĂł portuguĂȘs e espanhol 😁

#

Use o tradutor eu sempre uso 😅

hybrid quartz
lilac crow
#

I propose to improve the matchmaking system, There is a big problem on it, for example our alliance didn't receive any attack since 2 weeks, knowing that other alliances receive a daily attacks

stiff parrot
#

I suggest to let solo alliance live in peace

nimble ravine
#

If solo alliances are in peace then everyone will go solo again. Who decides to go solo must accept possibility of being attacked by stronger group, it's wild west. They should remove -100 pts penalty for raiding empty base, this stupid lottery rule ruins the competition.

hybrid quartz
earnest echo
#

i think buying the map should open you to the retaliation raid from the other alliance, not whether you go or not

no going "oh too hard, don't want them visiting" and ruining the other alliance's chance at getting some extra points.

stiff parrot
#

Having defender increase gold production can be one thing, then ppl will add player and have defender filled + there will be more gold in safe as player tend to forget collecting it

spring anchor
#

New considerations that came to my attention from other leaders: there was a request for the creation of a new league, Diamond, to receive the most fearsome gangs of the Old West.

There were also considerations regarding the past change that occurred in the gold rush; the defender's equipment lasted very little time in that system. There were many complaints, and changes were made. They suggested multiplying the repairers received as a prize in the gold rush, or increasing the durability of the defender's equipment, which ran out in 4 or 5 days, making the defense practically unsustainable.

random zinc
# spring anchor New considerations that came to my attention from other leaders: there was a req...

There were also considerations regarding the past change that occurred in the gold rush; the defender's equipment lasted very little time in that system. There were many complaints, and changes were made. They suggested multiplying the repairers received as a prize in the gold rush, or increasing the durability of the defender's equipment, which ran out in 4 or 5 days, making the defense practically unsustainable.

In case you didn’t know, there are two alliance bonuses that help with this situation:

  1. Reduced durability loss after death – This decreases the amount of durability lost from a character’s gear when they die, and it also benefits defenders. Each Distillery upgrade increases this percentage.
  2. Increased defender gear durability – This boosts the total durability of defender equipment. Each Alchemist Table upgrade raises this percentage.

With both bonuses active, defender gear will last significantly longer.

random zinc
hybrid quartz
#

I simply believe we need a league where registration is required, and where certain requirements must be met to register. There, we'll fight to be the best in the Hall of Fame. And that Hall of Fame will offer a reward to the very best.

#

@random zinc @halcyon zealot what would you think?

#

Even if it was just once a month

#

to give all alliances a chance for 3 weeks, but that a special league will be open for only one week

spring anchor
spring anchor
whole ore
#

Even in Gold1 there are many opponents who are mere cannon fodder for us. We yearn for a real competition, not some pseudo league where your rank is determined purely, totally, 100% by chance.
As having this daily would be too expensive, the idea of a monthly "super league" sounds really interesting.

hybrid quartz
tranquil hinge
#

I don't mind getting an occasional empty base. Its nice to send weaker new members on to practice gearing up and running around a dark base at night. Learning what routes to take as if the place were active and manned. A large now dead alliance can have a nice full safe too.

But when you get then day after day, and get paired with a lot of weaker bases on top of that, it takes the fun out.

I think there needs to be better mix. Within so many tiers, limit on # of less active or inactive bases. You need to go against stronger ones for challenge but weaker ones because not everyone is at tier of the HQ in all alliances.

If you eliminate larger alliances in gold tier with lvl 4 or 5 HQ from going against anyone say in silver league, and say only against same level HQ, then you are basically telling alliances they shouldn't bother adding one less than the tier of their HQ as members because they will just be taking gold and not able to contribute.

Basically im saying there is a huge gap between established alliances with higher level buildings and and the lvl 90 player looking for membership.

Points are wrapped up in gold and kills and defense or stealing the safe. Or about how big the hq is or the gold production. There's no benefit for someone going against a base in lower lvl gear. Or any perks to taking in lower lvl players.

ripe lichen
earnest echo
hybrid quartz
#

I mentioned this topic in my weekly report. All ideas are welcome and appreciated. The team will then decide what to do and how to do it. Thank you all.

#

You know that all suggestions and ideas are discussed. They have to evaluate them and will give us more information later. These aren't things that can be done in a week. Greetings and good night from Spain.

wanton flame
#

Lol my alliance is t5 and we get attacked by t7 I hope they work on matchmaking

Screenshot_2025-11-17-07-29-54-798_com.heliogames.westland.jpg
#

Level 2 hq

hybrid quartz
hybrid quartz
halcyon dune
hybrid quartz
halcyon dune
hybrid quartz
#

@mild bolt knows about that better

ripe lichen
mild bolt
earnest echo
verbal crest
#

We r getting 2 -3 per wk

#

Some we are able to pull,some left

random zinc
heady blaze
#

I am following your debate. Those are super interesting suggestions and I am up for it even if I have a solo lvl 1 alliance. I think it could benefit all of us. I think having extra league(s) and improving the matching system will really change the game. I will not be scared anymore of initiating attack because I would know that the opponent will be more or less my level (and not a crazy lvl 3 12 players alliance). In my mind **it would help non-raiding alliance to start raiding. ** 🙂

hybrid quartz
heady blaze
#

Teaching with 12 members alliance noooooo way. You would died instantly 01_laugh I would prefer an in between... Like between 1 and 4 players sounds not too scary. 🙂 Some of us are chicken 😜

#

But your right, the number of defenders is something to take in account in the matching system

hybrid quartz
#

That is

heady blaze
#

Maybe also the first attack could be for free. It will help some players to jump start. 🙂

hybrid quartz
stiff parrot
#

Match making based on player count, so solo match up with solo only, this way big clan will get more point as more kills while solo player won't climb high enough as they get less point

nimble ravine
#

There is no more points for more kills, where did you get that? You have same points for one kill like for 14 kills, there is only dumb "penalty" for raiding empty bases, like we could choose not to raid them.

nimble ravine
#

Problem of this game is that you can buy gold mine with basic income for price of one solid horse and some T3 resources. Current matchmaking system is to eliminate solo players, it makes sense whether people like it or not.

whole ore
# stiff parrot Match making based on player count, so solo match up with solo only, this way bi...

No way. A Solo wants to get all the gold alone, intentionally. So he/she has to take the risks alone, instead of complaining.

Matchmaking is not as easy as that. It has to take into account the number of members, their gear, level of the base... It has to prevent strong solos from stalking the lower leagues, it has to give low level alliances a fair chance, while giving high level alliances a challenge once in a while.

#

The problem is, the current matchmaking system has succeeded in eliminating the solo problem, but has devastatingly failed in every other aspect.

#

This has been reported since week one of this new system, but nothing has changed so far.

stiff parrot
#

They can also meake league based matchmaking, this will automatically push weak alliance in lower and strong alliance in high league over time

heady blaze
#

I love this game but I have to play solo for multiple raisons that I will not explain again here (and no it is not to get all the gold myself). Solo alliances are getting less gold and we can't grow if we don't attack so we are capped at low gold income... So it is not really an advantage. That is funny to say we are complaining. We are not... **We are making suggestions so everyone can have fun playing this game whatever he/she wants to do it. 🙂 **

spring anchor
#

Hey devs, don't forget us please đŸ„ș

halcyon zealot
crisp mortar
hybrid quartz
crisp mortar
hybrid quartz
crisp mortar
#

i m not asking to negate the gold from their stash ... but if a member isnt defending on a particular raid he or she shouldn't be consider to collect the rewards either

#

message is clear you defend you earn ... you dont defend you dont earn

#

trust me the entire Gold rush will become extremely active and also the blood hunters would love to hunt in raids too

#

also more points coming up and more challenge in escalating leaderboards

spring anchor
#

📱 Suggestion: Reworking Resource Distribution to Incentivize Alliance Growth
Summary: Adjust the current gold/resource distribution model so that adding alliance members does not reduce individual rewards. The current system discourages cooperation and favors solo play.
🔮 The Problem: "The Solo Tax"
Today, resource nodes (like Gold Mines) have a fixed output divided among participants. As more players join, individual profit decreases.
Current logic:
Individual Profit = Total Production Ă· Number of Players
Result: Recruiting new members becomes economically disadvantageous. Alliances are incentivized to remain small, limiting cooperation and community growth.
🟱 Proposed Solution: Stabilized or Synergy-Based Output
Option A – Fixed Individual Yield
Each player assigned to a node receives a base amount (example: 20 gold/day) regardless of the number of participants. This turns recruitment into a net positive for alliances.
Option B – Synergy Scaling (Recommended)
Increase the node’s total output as more players contribute, maintaining fair rewards without harming the economy.
Example:
‱ 1 Player → 20 total (20 each)
‱ 5 Players → 110 total (22 each)
‱ 10 Players → 250 total (25 each)
🚀 Benefits for the Game
Retention: Alliances will actively recruit instead of avoiding new players.
Strategy: Players focus on upgrading structures and coordinating growth.
Engagement: More gold circulation leads to increased trading, conflict, and late-game activity.
Closing Thought:
Players should be rewarded for cooperation, not punished for it. Strengthening alliances strengthens the game.

hybrid quartz
# spring anchor 📱 Suggestion: Reworking Resource Distribution to Incentivize Alliance Growth Su...

This is an interesting point about how resource nodes distribute rewards within alliances.

If adding more players reduces the individual reward, it can naturally discourage alliances from recruiting new members and push them toward staying small, which works against the cooperative and social aspects of the game.

However, another factor should also be considered: alliances with more members have stronger defensive and offensive capabilities. More players mean more defenders available and more possibilities to organize attacks or revenge actions.

A smaller alliance might receive higher individual rewards from nodes, but it also risks being unable to defend itself or retaliate if attacked, which could leave it at a disadvantage. Larger alliances, on the other hand, can offset this with stronger defense and coordinated counterattacks.

Because of this, the current system may be trying to balance risk and reward between small and large alliances. Even so, it could still be worth reviewing the system to encourage cooperation without disrupting the game’s economic balance.

#

Another aspect to consider is that larger alliances also have an advantage when it comes to generating gold through successful attacks and defenses.

With more members available, it becomes easier to organize attacks and gather enough players to defend when needed. This increases the chances of achieving successful raids and defensive victories, which can generate additional gold for the alliance.

In addition, sharing the coin cost required to organize attacks is usually easier in larger alliances. Because of this, even if the individual reward from nodes is lower, that difference can often be compensated by a higher ability to earn gold through coordinated activity.

whole ore
#

Well, more defenders does not mean a base is well defended. A single strong t7 player can pulverize nearly any defense, even against strong alliances in gold 1 league. Even myself in late t6 am able to annihilate any defense in all enemy bases that have no strong t7 defenders.

cobalt flower
#

In fact, in my opinion, the way it is doesn't encourage collaboration at all. It was better before when there were more chests to collect, at least you had to synchronize to attack. Now you just have to give silver, and the strong player does everything else by himself, and you go and collect the loot.

#

I don't see any collaboration, maybe it's because I'm among those who are poor and aren't at the highest level

drifting gull
#

After all , the whole point of a raid is the gold . Not coffee , dynamite or Whiskey

#

Besides , if there is a bigger , stronger alliance to attack , we also need to synchronize and plan carefully

#

Colaboration isn't gone

gloomy stratus
# halcyon dune Fast paws is faster than albino?

It isnt fast paws in video. Fast paws folow behind,u cant any make distance. If u can get uncommon fast paws gator,as I did,u dont wont other animal for farming and raids. It runs faster than player,has provoke of 5,gets to attacker faster than he gets to you,recives 35% damage. Only rifles can do any much damage on him becouse of animal bonus,so just protect him against snipers in farming.

gloomy stratus
#

Simple solution,for alliances that dont have even one activ avatar shoud not be alowed to take part GR. If thay ona be out of GR let them,as thay wont get rewords.
As goes for others,if devs woud just incrise number of gold,or repair kits,players resiv at end of GR for all divisions some amount,it woud be more atractiv to compete instade of going as solo alliance. And solo woud not be punished,they woud recive same what thay do now.
And main problem is that leaders cant see,track down who donted what or coins also,so its quite a drag as this sistem rewords layze selfish players,that get protected by fog. Quite a few leaders tried and gave up orginizing GR,go back Solo,as thay had to keep remainding people to donate,but cant see who did or did not.

#

If thay incrised rewords in GR,and inprove machmaking,to make it true tug of war,betwen similar strength rivals,it woud be more intrasting but worth it for bigger rewords.
As it is now,alliace wars,I call it,War on wheasels.
As one shot kill on avatar often remainds me on collecting pelt.
Rearly its any chalange,maybe ones in 7 days avrage.

cobalt flower
#

To answer Mario, if we hadn't had so many players for all the crates, it would have been a reason to increase the number of players in the alliance!!! But here, collaboration isn't rewarded, but playing alone!

whole ore
drifting gull
gloomy stratus
#

All that woud change if GR gold reward where to be incrised. That woud tip the favor towards colabration of multiplayer alliances.
I woud suggest even beter solution,by intruducing rewords for taking places in Hall of fame,as usualy games have rewords for that kind of general competishion.

halcyon zealot
nimble ravine
#

I disagree, it's still very rewarding, only Gold Rush leaderboard is totaly luck based and pointless at the moment.