I didn't get many in the feeder legion. Mostly glass 5's we do and I have seen more crystals in a shorter period than I did previously. Maybe the ENRGY was against you doing lvl 5's. because your ship is beast! lolol

2 crystals reported from a glass 5, 15 people hit it. Only 15.......whaaat?

I just got a crystal from a glass 5 yesterday actually. Never gotten one from a 6/7, always seems to be 5s that drop them for me.

We're talking trends here, not random anecdotes. You can go on believing large crates are veritable crystal mines, but I'm sticking with my long term numbers and the numbers from people who tracked it comprehensively over time.

17jul2014 - 23 total attackers from 2 legions on level 5 base
Rewards: 1 - 5: 5, 6 - 10: 4, 11 - 20: 3, 21 - 30: 2, 31 - 40: 1
level 5 base protean / thraccti 100% raid line 12th

2. JediPotato Ancient Untouchables 16711 - 5
3. Senatorhung Ancient Untouchables 13504 - 5
4. Techion Ancient Untouchables 7606 - 5
5. Thorson Ancient Untouchables 3070 - 5
7. Johnnyb Ancient Untouchables 1119 - 4
8. Damodred Ancient Untouchables 1060 - 4
9. Covolsky Ancient Untouchables 1042 - 4
18. Bartok Ancient Untouchables 121 - 3
20. Danisimo Ancient Untouchables 40 - 3
22. Herman56565 Ancient Untouchables 23 - 2

AU totals: 40 silvers; 7+ large base crates

16jul2014 - 37 total attackers from 5 legions on level 6 base
Rewards: 1 - 5: 6, 6 - 10: 5, 11 - 20: 4, 21 - 30: 3, 31 - 40: 2, 41 - 50: 1
level 6+ base protean / thraccti 100% raid line 15th

4. Senatorhung Ancient Untouchables 1200 - 6
7. SimpleSimon Ancient Untouchables 600 - 5
8. Envy7 Ancient Untouchables 600 - 5
18. Hudson Ancient Untouchables 600 - 4
19. Damodred Ancient Untouchables 600 - 4
24. JediPotato Ancient Untouchables 600 - 3

AU totals: 27 silvers; 3+ massive base crates (+1 from cuniculus ... which gave me my first crystal for this week)

There are so many glass 5, 6, and even 7's out there that it does make more sense for legions to kill bases on their own rather than share with a battle group. That wasn't always the case though. Previously it did make sense for smaller legions to share bases with battle groups. The game is always evolving and I love how people are constantly coming up with new methods to achieve their goals.

You mean like by getting stronger, and forming more Battle Groups whilst Bases stay as weak as they are?

all this yacking about whats better feeder legion or solo.... and not one mention to the young player who asked the question about what he or she could do to increase thier own raid chance? just kinda struck me as odd and funny

Yes, exactly like that. The game is evolving though. Just because that is the way things are now doesn't mean it won't change in a few months or a year from now. I love seeing how people come up with new ideas that I would never think of.

A few thoughts on this thread: this is going to be long, so bear with me.

1. Most of the assertions made in GL (not exclusive to this thread) are made without concrete data. The sample sizes are extremely small, and there are no reliable records kept on anything. So, most people just assume that their recollections of events. Statements like:

a. “Just my experience,” or
b. “All I know is what I know”, or
c. “always seems to be”

really carry no weight in any type of debate.

Basically, what I’m saying is that the people making assertions without any concrete proof, I’m just throwing your thoughts out the window.

2. That being said, I think that the data that both SenatorHung and Tree7304 are presenting are valid, but the results are hard to interpret. Specifically, the 2 sides seem to value the results differently. What is more important? Crates or silvers? And by how much? With the number of silvers varying between 0 and 8 per ship in any given base, and the chances of a raid going from 0% to 100%, there is no standard that all parties can agree on for any type of “scoring system.” Without any common ground, I think SenatorHung and Tree7304 can never come to any agreed conclusion to their argument.

3. One thing that I will say about this debate that I believe both SenatorHung and Tree7304 are forgetting. One major component that has been lacking in this argument is the energy spent for both sides. And to break it down further, we can talk about:

a. Amount of red badges (or at least scan attempts) to find the right type of base for either side, and
b. The amount of energy spent hitting a base to get the desired silvers and/or raid chances.

As GL veterans, some of us might forget that hitting a base for a new player isn’t a given. Rank 100 ships with 1000 attack will barely scratch even a half-built level 6 base with 30K defense, or even an OK level 5 with the smaller damage cap. So, we can’t expect a smaller ship to do the same amount of damage as a bigger ship would. So, whether or not a legion shares bases with another legion or not, the fact is that the smaller ships will always feed to the bigger ships, either in their own legion, or to a different one.


So, what do we do with this debate? Unless we can get ships to accurately record and honestly report how much energy, this argument will just go round and round w/o any real winners. And knowing the reliability of GL players, we might as well save our forum energy to more pressing issues, like when will Dan implement a Use All Button!

uh ... reading fail much ? here is the clarification from the OP:



and the responses:






plenty to chew over there ...

since the OP clarified that he was specifically interested in crystals / crates, i focused on pulling crate info, but i included silvers as well because i understood that some players might focus on that instead. i agree that it is tough to interpret ... hence my willingness to change methodology when Tree expressed his concerns about not including non-100% raids.

my initial thought was that since every one of those non-100% raids could fail, even at 97%, that including them would not give an accurate comparison. even including them at full odds was a concern for me, and i considered dividing the phantom crate total by 2 (for the final binary success / failure), but decided to leave it up to probability.


yeah, which base you lock is indeed a very critical question. since i had the cuniculus ability for the most recent raid today, i focused on locking on a glass 6 ... whereas normally i try to save on red badges and will take a glass 5. but i do have a stockpile (Red Badges: 2947), so i am willing to be a bit more patient than some. we also only allow officers / leaders to lock bases in AU, and we track data on all locked bases so that we can avoid the worst energy sinks in the future.

despite ICBLF's assertions, it is pretty clear from the overall data, that if a legion locks a glass 6, that legion will get more crystals by sinking it themselves. if a legion locks a weak 7, feeding it to a stronger legion would net more crystals. so, the legion's locking philosophy is definitely something to consider in terms of improving the odds of getting crates.


and you can see from the data that AU usually locks glass bases. as detregets indicated, this allows for a one-hit policy that equalizes the legion members' returns on crates / silvers. those who are online at the free for all time will be able to move themselves up, but that generally only affects the top 5 spots.

i'm not trying to 'win' any argument with Tree. like him, i was curious about how the two basing philosophies would compare and was willing to provide the data and limited analysis to see what came up. each forum reader should make up their own mind based on the data provided. would i be happy if the data affirms that AU's basing policy is competitive ? you bet ! but i do not take it as a given.