Prestige > Level

So the other day on my level 8 alt i attacked a level 3 who left 200 cats out, took his out with my 170 (due to speed) and lost 60 foot troops in traps, i gained no prestige for this due to his level (3).

Ok so you may be thinking hmm lvl 3 against level 8 no wonder, BUT he had higher prestige than me just didnt upgrade his general title.

i think that the prestige gained from wars should be based on the pretige difference between players and not the general title of the player

Anyone else think the same ?

Cheers

Shakezz

i do, i am currently sat at lvl 17 and bbattled a lvl 9 with the prestige of a lvl 14 but gained nothing because i lost 150 inf to his traps as well,

can we have a new formula based on army size rather than lvl so that battles are not excessively one sided

but it wouldnt be fair if u lose so much prestige that it goes below ur current lvl... would u lose a level?

It's a glitch that a lot of people like to use... they can be a lvl 3 and yet have a lvl 20 prestige ... they could wind up having 20k cats out and you wind up killing all the cats and like like 100 infantry and you would gain no prestige at all. I think this I very un fair. It's because of their lvl that protects them from loosing so much prestige much less any at all. It really sucks for people who actually use the task in the living system.... in a way it is cheating because they are using the haypi protection for glitching ... haypi please fix this . Thanks

but it wouldnt be fair if u lose so much prestige that it goes below ur current lvl... would u lose a level?

It says in the Tutorial that prestige from battles will never put a player at less prestige than is required for his or her current general level.

you are all off.

the larger the level gap between players, the more prestige you lose when attacking a lower level, and the less prestige you take when you kill their troops. ie, level 9-10 against level 3-4, taking 200 cats, would normally get 2k prestige. thats 10 prestige per cat. however, they really only get 4 prestige each... so 800. then when you figure the troops you lose at say, -8 per soldier, -16 per cav, and -etc. it comes out to next to nothing. srry. that and a little of what arythy said.

but it wouldnt be fair if u lose so much prestige that it goes below ur current lvl... would u lose a level?

It says in the Tutorial that prestige from battles will never put a player at less prestige than is required for his or her current general level.

This doesn't have anything to do with them going below the lvl they are . This has to do with them being a very low lvl such as lvl 3 with the prestige of a lvl 14 or higher

Example a lvl 3 with 400,000 prestige would be a lvl 14 if they actually used the task and lvled . yet we cannot get any prestige from the even though they have WAY OVER the amount of being a lvl 3 being a lvl 3 requires what about 1,000 prestige ? Where if they have 400,000 prestige . They should be able to loose what about 399,000 prestige .

It's the fact that they can't loose any prestige because they are lvk 3 and yet have well over 1,000 with 400,000 prestige

And because we are such a higher lvl then them if we are a lvl 14 and they are a lvl 3 yet with lvl 15 prestige then we can't get any of their prestige. Does ANYONE EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT ?

IT'S THAT they are staying lvl 3 and getting tons of prestige and not lvling on purpose so that higher lvls CANNOT get prestige from them

although they cant actually lose the prestige, it still gives us the prestige. it is the scenario that i stated.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but besides not losing prestige from battle; what benefit could not moving up in rank give a player? Sure they don't lose prestige, but I can't imagine they are winning many battles either due to their low stats. A low level player also can not expand so their army would be relatively small.