Update Update 1.41

[DeletedUser96867]

SO thats how much importance they give to their customer feedback ...

It's funny they are actually asking for player feedback on beta. Half the stuff people are asking for is ridiculous the other half of players are asking for the things we've been telling INNO about over and over again for months and years. They have more feedback than they could ever need, but it's pointless if they don't listen to it.

 

[DeletedUser97349]

Please note that the information of "maybe it's due to the slow performance of game when opening army management section with large no of units" is only given as a thought by mods and even the mods too dont know the exact reason on why there's a army cap limit.

Actually, I have already stated why this cap is necessary.

The game cannot continue to load with ever increasing numbers of units. It is not simply slow loading of army management, as I have already stated, ultimately the game itself will not load, you will be stuck looking at ~65% loading and no more. Recoding the entire way the game handles units is no solution, it is not possible to do and an unrealistic expectation. I'm sorry, but in this case the unit cap is the only viable solution.

 

[DeletedUser99588]

Recoding the entire way the game handles units is no solution, it is not possible to do and an unrealistic expectation. I'm sorry, but in this case the unit cap is the only viable solution.

Would it be possible to provide the technical issues that makes the above statement true. I'm finding it difficult to appreciate why it would be impossible to implement the alternative ideas suggested. There is a difference between 'not possible' and 'not willing'.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

but how can it then be possible that the dude at fr5 has 924,000,000,000 ranking points if all items are capped at your value :eek:

Ranking points are not an item

 

[DeletedUser96901]

Recoding the entire way the game handles units is no solution, it is not possible to do and an unrealistic expectation. I'm sorry, but in this case the unit cap is the only viable solution.

I have already proven there is another solution :p
storing them in the inventory would be possible

no much change in the handling of units

only storing new unattached units in the inventory and not putting them in the army management
a button to move them into army management
and maybe a button to move units from army management to inventory

Ranking points are not an item

but they must also be stored as a number
or do you think the developers took a "bigger number" to store ranking points because they already knew at that point that someone will ever get more than 2 billion points

 

[DeletedUser97349]

Would it be possible to provide the technical issues that makes the above statement true. I'm finding it difficult to appreciate why it would be impossible to implement the alternative ideas suggested. There is a difference between 'not possible' and 'not willing'.

Because they cannot stack in the way suggested, it would mean reprogramming the way units are handled, each unit is unique. The designers and developers are not able to simply clear their schedule for x amount of time in order to make such significant changes to the game.

There is no purpose to accruing ever increasing numbers of units. Effectively there was always a limit to the number you could have, in the past it was simply that you could no longer log in once the number was critical, now there is a limit a little earlier than that to prevent any such issues.

Ultimately, the intended purpose of units is for them to to used in battle, not to be gathered exponentially. 2000 units should be more than enough for any purpose you intend to use them for; there is nothing in the game which should require more units than this.

 

[ddevil]

Actually, I have already stated why this cap is necessary.

The game cannot continue to load with ever increasing numbers of units. It is not simply slow loading of army management, as I have already stated, ultimately the game itself will not load, you will be stuck looking at ~65% loading and no more. Recoding the entire way the game handles units is no solution, it is not possible to do and an unrealistic expectation. I'm sorry, but in this case the unit cap is the only viable solution.

So why was this not thought of before itself ?? Even when they thought of having a GB that will give everyday free Units ?? Surely a game with Huge player base will start having loads of units over a period of time when free units are distributed everyday by a Great Building... anybody and everybody I think can understand that basic fact ... And then again why did they not think of it when they thought of uncapping the levels of Alcatraz that it will take up even more huge resources ....so huge that it will not load the game itself??? Shouldnt they have thought of changing the way the units are stored when the Gb was still capped at level 10 itself ?? Why release a feature knowing very well that it will hog the resources and then nerf the benefits of the feature ?? ...

 

[DeletedUser96901]

Because they cannot stack in the way suggested, it would mean reprogramming the way units are handled, each unit is unique. The designers and developers are not able to simply clear their schedule for x amount of time in order to make such significant changes to the game.

no need to remove the unique handling in the army management
simpy put them in the inventory: there they don't need unique handling:
the only two things that can be done with things in the inventory: delete and use to create an unique handled unit in the army manangement

getting them: creating an entry in the inventory or increase the number of already existing entry
inventory --> army management: same code when getting a new unattached unit, and delete on in the inventory
army management --> inventory = deleting unit from army management and then same like "getting them"

 

[DeletedUser96867]

Because they cannot stack in the way suggested, it would mean reprogramming the way units are handled, each unit is unique. The designers and developers are not able to simply clear their schedule for x amount of time in order to make such significant changes to the game.

Each unit being unique is the problem. It's sad that the programmers don't have the time to program something correctly, especially when it would solve multiple problems players have been complaining about for a very long time.

I find it unbelievable that such a SIMPLE change would ever be considered a significant programming problem. Send me the source code and give me an hour or 2.

If they can't fix this it's no wonder they can't get the gvg log working after a year, or the mail button to stop flashing after 3 years.

If that is the final answer I can not say how disgusted I am again at INNO's EXTREMELY poor handling of game design and player feedback.

Clearly we are all just wasting our time here. Just shut down the forum and stop pretending you care.

 

[DeletedUser97349]

So why was this not thought of before itself ?? Even when they thought of having a GB that will give everyday free Units ?? Surely a game with Huge player base will start having loads of units over a period of time when free units are distributed everyday by a Great Building... anybody and everybody I think can understand that basic fact ... And then again why did they not think of it when they thought of uncapping the levels of Alcatraz that it will take up even more huge resources ....so huge that it will not load the game itself??? Shouldnt they have thought of changing the way the units are stored when the Gb was still capped at level 10 itself ?? Why release a feature knowing very well that it will hog the resources and then nerf the benefits of the feature ?? ...

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose, so recoding something to enable this to be possible when it was never the intention and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion.

 

[DeletedUser96867]

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose, so recoding something to enable this to be possible when it was never the intention and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion.

It also serves the purpose of greatly reducing the lag in army management that players experience at well below the 2000 limit. It solves the need for the unattached filter which has been DEMANDED for going on a couple years now. It organizing the army management window in a much more user friendly way. It makes it possible to determine how many of which types of units a player has. The most requested improvement asked for to INNO's REQUEST for feedback on another server is for multiple improvements to the army management feature. Unattached stacks basically solve all the multiple problems with the army management window. So IMO it has a purpose, the least of which is removing the need for the unit cap. A large number of players agree that the army management window needs improvement.

 

[ddevil]

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose, so recoding something to enable this to be possible when it was never the intention and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion.

Who's collecting them for the purpose of collecting them ??? I dont understand this talk of using the units ... yes we do use the units ...Most of the players who have alcatraz do use the units ..why else do we need that huge GB in our city ....so does it mean that by using the units we lose them ???? I thought battles are to be fought with the least damage to our units which then would give us more Battle points ?? I am not the one collecting ...I fight everyday ...and still it gets accumulated because unfortunately i dont lose that many units when i battle... I think most of the players also try to do the same ...Nobody goes to the battle thinking I have around 2000 units so let me lose 4-5 in all the battles everyday ... Again 2000 units need not be the same era units or same type units .. we would be having different types of units for different purposes ...to fight GvG in different Eras ..to fight PvP in different towers ....


Anyways if there was to be a cap on the number of total units My only quesion is why do we then need an uncapped GB that gives so many units everyday ??? ....Why not leave it capped at just level 10 itself ?? Why the promises that we can get infinite number of units as we keep levelling our Alcatraz?? What use of the GB giving so many units if we dont have that much use of the units and neither can we store it?? Or maybe we have to go to battles everyday from now on with the intentions of losing our units .... As i said before just because of no contingency strategy from the dev's now we have to change the way we play the game ?? Now we have to adjust the way we were used to playing this game?? So What you mean is from now on everytime we go for a battle we should lose units so that that GB doesnt become useless ?? So that we can train attached units in future??

 

[DeletedUser100832]

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose, so recoding something to enable this to be possible when it was never the intention and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion.

yes, but the problem is that the army orders page runs slowly even for people who do not have thousands of units. It's part of a more general problem: that there is too much stuff in FoE that is fancy but eats up computer resources. A simpler, 'stripped down' version of the game without the fancy graphics is something worth doing imo.

 

[DeletedUser914]

forge of empires in dos hihi

 

[DeletedUser]

Ultimately, the intended purpose of units is for them to to used in battle, not to be gathered exponentially. 2000 units should be more than enough for any purpose you intend to use them for; there is nothing in the game which should require more units than this.

Units are intended for battle.
GvG allows for a lot of battles, it is intended that we can fight in multiple eras using era specific troops.
As people keep pointing out, using math no less, there are a lot of varieties of units to use. Most would agree that to be effective in GvG one needs to be able to use all the different types of units for that era.

In order to wipe out a well established enemy in say 5 or 6 eras in one day would require more than 2000 units. (lets see, 80 defending armies, even at minimal losses would be say 15 of your armies dead which is 120 units dead, for say average of 8 sectors would be 960 dead units per age, times that by 5 ages and oh, well over 2,000!) Thanks to the auto battle feature, it is completely reasonable that one person could do this if they had enough units. Thanks to ghosting it is completely reasonable that someone would want to wipe out an enemy by themselves. Thanks to rogues, completely reasonable to attack in all eras every day if you have the opponents.

I think that disproves your quote.

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose

except for, as stated above, saving them for something really big and epic to happen... destroy 1 sector in GvG? No big loss, save up enough units to destroy all the sectors that guild owns in GvG in one day, yeah that is a big loss.

 

[DeletedUser5399]

On a positive note, I really love the new Birds, Bunnies and Deer.

 

[DeletedUser96867]

On a positive note, I really love the new Birds, Bunnies and Deer.

Thank goodness for that, after all......

designers and developers are not able to simply clear their schedule for x amount of time in order to make such significant changes to the game.

Glad they have allotted their time so wisely.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

Because Alcatraz does not give units for the purpose of collection... units are intended to be used, not stored in ever increasing numbers. Storing thousands upon thousands of units serves no purpose, so recoding something to enable this to be possible when it was never the intention and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion.

so the next will be a limit of FP packages you can have in the inventory :confused:
and at 2000 you can't store more FP in the inventory

the logic behind: FPs are intended to be used: not stored in ever increasing numbers
Storing thousands upon thousands of FPs serves no purpose

and serves no purpose would be a waste of valuable time, in my own opinion

making customers happy is a waste of the time of your programmers :confused:

sorry: for me that are only bad excuses
the players want to play how they want not how you think they should

poor InnoGames


AND BACK TO AN IMPORTANT QUESTION FROM THE BEGINNING:
what is when a quest to recruit unit comes to someone with more than 2000 units?
already implemented a solution?
if not everyone who already reached 2000 will waste valuable time of your support
because they have to finish those quests manually

 

[DeletedUser14394]

Actually, I have already stated why this cap is necessary.

The game cannot continue to load with ever increasing numbers of units. It is not simply slow loading of army management, as I have already stated, ultimately the game itself will not load, you will be stuck looking at ~65% loading and no more. Recoding the entire way the game handles units is no solution, it is not possible to do and an unrealistic expectation. I'm sorry, but in this case the unit cap is the only viable solution.

So the problem is how many units are going to be stored in your local cache, which the game will not load due to large number of unique units being received from server to local cache. It can be simply handled by limiting the amount of troops that can be displayed in the army pool and also limiting the amount of troops that are stored in the local cache. But anyway, I dont want to mess this discussion again like done before, there is a simple solution available and I dont know why they cant implement that.

Like fscch stated earlier, If it's true that army cap is only due to unloading of game due to large no on units, I can say that it's a POOR handling of code.

 

[DeletedUser5399]

Why couldn't the programmers stack the troop types instead of having each individual one in its own separate little box?