Welcome to the Candy Crush Saga Community
Do you have a question or need help with your game? Ask the Community.
What's happening in Candy? 🍬
❄ Candy Holiday Season ❄ - More info HERE
👽 Astros vs. Aliens - How does it work? - More info HERE
❄ Candy Holiday Season ❄ - More info HERE
👽 Astros vs. Aliens - How does it work? - More info HERE
⛔ Connection Issues All Games - More info HERE
New Year - New device? 📱 Check out how to sync it! Android 🤖 | Apple 🍏
New Year - New device? 📱 Check out how to sync it! Android 🤖 | Apple 🍏
Do you think scoring mechanism is fair in Music Tournament?
lucky_261
Posts: 14
Level 2
in Discussions
We see most people who are leading are around 1500-3000 levels and they have won 1200-1500 levels in last one week. People who are at higher levels, say 5000 or 10000+ can’t score at that pace since levels get fairly difficult, and it takes more time to finish the level and you get less orange candies. Sometime, you also wonder those who started Tournament at 400-1000 levels may have additional account to play this Tournament. Ideally, candy crush should have introduced same set of levels for all to make it same level of difficulty for all which would have made this lovely Tournament even better. What's your view?
1
Comments
-
No, there are objectively easier and harder sections of the game. Ideally everyone would play on identical boards of a few hundred levels with specific pre 3000 mechanics.
1000 - 2500 is the ideal section. Before 1000 you have some messy sections. After 2500 you get into a pretty bad section to about 5000. 5000-10K is a mixed bag. Post 10K is just a losing option.
3 -
No, there are objectively easier and harder sections of the game. Ideally everyone would play on identical boards of a few hundred levels with specific pre 3000 mechanics.
How I missed having a forum eat my posts constantly.
2 -
Yes, above 10000 it is difficult, and believe me above 16000 it is impossible with 3-4 different blockers. Candy Crush team should come up with better format for such Tournaments.
1 -
It’s not fair at all. I’m at level 12400 and there’s so many nightmarish levels. Many levels that don’t contains oranges. The top person on my leaderboard is level 2000. Get this. She’s completes total of 875 levels and I’ve completed 930 levels , yet she’s beating me by 500000 points. How is that fair??? I know the total is for the week and not the levels completed for the stage tournaments. Also, if anyone’s curious, I managed to completed so many level because I have time due to the hurricane.
1 -
I am.at 16500+ level. I completed 800+ levels in the week, and even after winning 200+ levels in 12 hours I was lagging 6th in 2nd stage of Final round where I gave up as all toppers were in 1500-2500 range, and they were moving so fast. I can’t catchup with them.even though I didn't lose a single level.
1 -
Exactly! Even when I started at the same time as them and beat every level, they beat me by a huge margin. Yet, Candy crush says it’s likely due to them being offline. I can’t even imagining competing while past level 16,000. If it was going to be like this, we should’ve made new accounts. :/
1 -
I reached round 3 being on level 16500+ . And in the whole group there is only me with such a high level . Every one is on the range 2000 to 8000 max. And scoring at insane speed . Above 12000 even if you pass all levels in one try and max speed there is no way we can catch the other players . This is bad scoring mechanism by king and totally unfair for players playing for so long and highly competitive.
Only if created a new account and started just for tournament would benefit. I guess they just want people to have new accounts and buy all those boosters for the tournament.
1 -
Some levels give out more candy than others. That's known. Now I don't believe that restarting an account to access the easier levels was breaking rules. By the time I got to the final final though I was 7000, maybe lower, finished 8000s. I was one of the higher levels in the room for sure. But even at lower levels, people weren't able to legitimately outscore me. Over 10,000 I'd imagine you'd be screwed. I was probably at the limit.
0
