One sides loses, say you lose 1 arrow, the other wins you probably will get one. Negating it. That is what I think
It would be cool if could just wager on regular clan wars And then the clans warring could see the amount wagered for or against them pre war And everyone gets all nervous and folds under the pressure . Or we can have people purposely losing wars to knock people off the arrow leaderboard Think of the drama!
Will you be releasing the stats of the weapons? Are all arrows a player get displayed in the EB record? Thanks.
That's correct. Here's an example: Purple Vagrants 1 vs Green Drifers 1 Purple Vagrants 2 vs Green Drifers 2 Purple Vagrants 3 vs Green Drifers 3 Purple Vagrants 4 vs Green Drifers 4 Purple Vagrants 5 vs Green Drifers 5 In the above matches, as the different Purple Vagrants clans won 3 of the 5 matches, those who bet on Purple would have won.
Re: The Battle of the Nomads I I totally understand this new betting system, it's 93% luck. You can't manipulate the wars to affect the betting because your betting on the outcome of an overall team. Putting a ps alt with gold out in one war isn't necessarily going to affect the outcome of the betting because other people could be doing the same thing for their other wars.
I'm just curious, have you checked to see if this gambling scheme is legal in all jurisdictions this game operates?
Really... Betting? What the .... Is next? Isn't betting against TOU and CODES OF PRACTICE! My god!. How ATA have the balls to run this in the first please is beyond comprehension. Talk about hypocrites! Bring back the old ways. :wink:
There is barely enough time to analyse your own indi war b4 war starts, let alone 8 or so wars Also what happens if the green and purple teams win equal numbers of wars?