Not sure if bottom feeding is working as intended - was 102k KS and was attacked by someone who was 192k KS and both lost a castle and lost 90% of my troops. I assume that is not working correctly, but maybe I am wrong. If this is working correctly - why can you both lose a castle and the majority of your army when getting hit by someone twice your KS? Should he also be able to cast a TS on me with such a KS gap?

We lost 1 Castle(s) sorrounded by 23 lands.
In this lands are also constructed : 11 Advanced Training Center , 24 Farm , 3 Forge , 13 Guard House , 1 Guard Tower , 74 House , 22 Market , 2 Medical Center , 15 Mill , 12 Mine , 39 School , 5 Training Center ,
In this lands also lived 2752 people who left our Kingdom.
We managed to kill : 291 Mage 1554 Swordman 1407 Lanceman 513 Caragous 3034 Archer 451 Elite Archer
But we lost : 463 Mage 455 Swordman 341 Lanceman 1026 Caragous 764 Archer 1233 Elite Archer

Elves need help. Ive lost 4 days worth of troops on every offense and defense so far this round.

I've done fine the rest of the round and elf seems ok in my opinion. What's concerning is getting demolished by someone twice my KS and he's able to cast offensive spells on me to boot.

He lost far, FAR more units than you did - that's exactly what the ks penalty does.

You wouldn't lose 90% of your troops though, the max you could lose is 80%. Which you could reduce to 60% with MC.

I would also suggest setting quick retreat if you want to limit losses. It reduces attack -50% on both sides, so there's a good chance you will lose less units (of course they can overcome that by send 200% attack points vs your defense).

    Lord Thane

    Did some quick math on units lost and I lost 172k more gold, while he lost 4.5k more wood and 7.5k more iron than me when factoring in the weapon and unit cost. I would hardly consider that's him losing FAR more than me. Especially when he's literally twice my KS and can replenish much faster. He sent alot of TC units so of course his total units lost is higher. Is the solution really running quick retreat with full army at home to prevent losing 80% of your military from a guy double your KS? That doesn't seem right, there has to be some reasonable measure to just make hitting that low not even possible.

        skigglez

        Sadly QR still won’t save your army when someone big enough hits you and does more than enough to kill your entire army even when attack power is reduced by 50%.

            trupheus
            Wouldn't it be better to just limit how far down you can attack someone, or make it not possible to take a castle hitting below 75% of your KS? Maybe scale your losses down by the same factor as it scales the bottom feeders losses up?

              skigglez we could make it so you can't attack people that are 1 ks lower than you, and people would still complain. 50% cutoff is fine, and the 50-99% ks penalty is fine. What may need adjusting, is increasing the ks penalty harshness, it's somewhat tame compared to what I think people are expecting. The attacker is getting a penalty, but it's not a god level penalty.

                  Lord Thane
                  The penalty isn't really a penalty though - sure he incurs more losses, but those losses are significantly less than if he was hitting a target more in his KS range. So he's getting a free castle while essentially zeroing the defending kingdom who has literally zero chance of defending. It shouldn't be as much about punishing the bottom feeder as it is preventing the defending kingdom from complete ruin. I wouldn't care getting bottom fed if it meant keeping the majority of my military intact. Maybe it's just me, but that's a horrible experience when you're on the receiving end, and it's something that will immediately deter new players when it happens to them.

                      skigglez that's one of the reasons why we made MC buffed so you can easily save 20% of your forces with 1:1 (for attacks AND defense). I wouldn't say it was a free castle at all. Do you think that loss of troops was worth it for the attack? Over 6k troops deleted for a measly 23 land. Nope, they're in big regret.

                      And your units costing more, the difference is mostly just skewed due to your mages - can't help that except change strategies to keep fewer of them, or keep them out in attacks, or use quick retreat and MC to protect them.

                      Overall, nothing wrong with that hit. He bottom fed sure, but he paid dearly for it. Now you get a buddy to pretal him, then you retal him - the classic toxic combo pre-re to teach him a lesson. If you asked for help on the forum I'm sure someone would be glad to help take down a bottom feeder lol

                          Lord Thane
                          If he hits the current number 1 guy right now he’s only taking a castle and 23 land, and would lose significantly more than the units he did against me. So I don’t see how it isn’t a benefit to just bottom feed in that situation even with the penalty. If he gets that benefit, why can’t we make it less punishing for the person on the receiving end?

                              skigglez we did, with castle based defense which saves 20-30% of your units, plus the huge buff to MC which can easily save another 20%. In total, you can save up to 50% from ever getting touched in a defense (while the 20% MC saves still get to run their attack and also absorb damages).

                              Ultimately it's a strategy war game, we can only baby it so much before all difficulty is removed. 50% ks cap prevents bottom feeding beyond 50%, and 50-99% gets penalty. The only potentially reasonable change from here out would be to increase the harshness of the 50-99% penalty.