DeletedUser3157
Thanks for the information Blacksmith. So in retrorespect all the past PvP pts(and hence the ranking points) get recalculated, right? Hence some rather noticeble changes in rankings.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
DeletedUser276
in some aspects yes. I think the biggest will be the people that farm weaker opponents. From the points scheme it looks like higher age troops have gotten quite a boost in points delivered while weaker troops have dropped. So if your farming weak players for points expect a good drop... but if you spread your attacks out through the ages you wont notice much if anything.
DeletedUser
However, we believe these changes (detailed below) will make gameplay fairer across the ages.
Deal castle: Maximum medals have been decreased.
Ask and you shall receiveThe point change on troops will be retro active not the great buildings though. We have been finding ways to try and balance the system and this is what was come up with. So everyone will notice some point changes when this update comes into effect.
Silly me to think you people can do something good for a change. Fairer gameplay all right...
First of all many of us made that huge and rather useless Deal Castle for medals only and dont give a damn about that defense bonus. Now that we finally made it to level 10 we discover that it was for nothing. For 96 medals per day its nothing but a space consuming mutant and I will probably have to delete it. Thanks. Its probably my fault that I didnt had a crystal ball to guess you will render that building useless someday.
Second, by not recalculating the medals won by those who got the Deal Castle you give an unfair advantage to diamond players who got it before the rest of us. Some of them built the Deal Castle in a matter a days and got to the top while we the regulars had to wait for a month or two to gather all the BPs and build it to level 10. If you really wanted to be fair you`d recalculate the medal gain through Deal castle as well and not just troops. Talking about fairness...
The only good thing you did was the fact that after you attack a player you dont have to scroll all the way back LOL. Congratulations for that. Must have been hard to do.
Not sure "rebalancing" is the right term here. More like let`s make a complete mess out of everything. So a guy with a rifle gives more points than a siege unit or a highly trained cavalry unit? Not sure where is the logic there.
Seriously, who exactly takes decisions inside the FOE staff? I mean really. Do they try to make things as realistic as possible or they just flip a coin?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser5904
Yeah, nerf those GB's so Crunchyz can win at PVP lol. I mean really, the guy is actually SICK of HAVING to fight impossible enemy cities, so maybe you should just give him a tactical nuke and make sure all of his enemy cities have 2000 troops with 1 attack 1 defense and make sure each troop killed gives him 20k battle points. I mean really, no game should actually force you to attack a city and make you sick..../sarcasm off.
Really dude? So you have a few enemy cities with the defensive GB's in your neighborhood. It's not like you have to attack them, and it's not like you go in blind to what they have so don't do it. As for the guys attacking you daily with the offensive GB's, you already touched on the fact that the AI is so p00ned that it wouldn't matter if they had the GB bonus or not. I just find it amazing that the first thing people like you think of when they see that buffed up army happens to be "they need to nerf that" instead of "I need to get me one of those!". The only thing that ever made GB's unbalancing was making them unlockable with RMT $$$$ via diamonds but even then it was only incrementally unbalancing as the further we get away from the release of GB's the more non diamond purchased GB's are making it on the board and the playing field is being leveled.
The people who whine about GB's and calling for a nerf are seeking the same instant gratification as the RMT players who used $$$ to unlock them in the first week of release...except the whiners are worse because when they don't have the drive to bring themselves up the the level of the competition, they would rather not make the sacrifice of time and effort but instead complain until their competition is brought down to their level. Sad really.
DeletedUser14299
How can you go from 20 seconds training time on the spear man to 1 hour training time on the slinger?? that makes no sense to me, it should be more gradual. Its the very next unit, i havent gotten any further yet but thats a bit much in my opinion. Whats the next unit training time? 3 hours??
DeletedUser7128
I for one got the deal castle for the medals to get space, my next expansion is 5000 medals I average 350 a week on PVP... so with deal castle at lvl 10 and 196 medals it will take just over 3 weeks for expansion. Now it will take 6 weeks!! Will expansion Medal requirements also be lowered?
DeletedUser3157
Well, new points values seem to put following value on diffirenet unit types:
1) Short range - most points
2) Long range
3) Heavy melee
4) Light melee
5) Fast units - least points
So this means a defense of only dragoons would give the opponent who beats it the least of possible of PvP points. I personally think that fast units are being undervalued right here a bit, esp the later age ones as they are no longer not that bad at all. Overall the increase of short range value seems a bit like like a mentality from someone who often fights with L+S ranged units and finds most annoyance in such troops facing against. But I think that mentality is little outdated by now. Most my nabers nowadays who wish to hurt me the most, defend with rangers and dragoons and mixes of those 2 types, the units that by new changes would actually be least benafical to kill in regards to points. They do so because I will find it much easyer to kill their FG+musketeer combos than face the melee that can usually reach me at some end. And even more so if they have defensive GBs. Anyways it is actually not wrong the whole idea of giving short range more points, but then againt why the downplaying of fast units so harshly. For some reason heavy melee still stays strong though when it comes to points.
1) Short range - most points
2) Long range
3) Heavy melee
4) Light melee
5) Fast units - least points
So this means a defense of only dragoons would give the opponent who beats it the least of possible of PvP points. I personally think that fast units are being undervalued right here a bit, esp the later age ones as they are no longer not that bad at all. Overall the increase of short range value seems a bit like like a mentality from someone who often fights with L+S ranged units and finds most annoyance in such troops facing against. But I think that mentality is little outdated by now. Most my nabers nowadays who wish to hurt me the most, defend with rangers and dragoons and mixes of those 2 types, the units that by new changes would actually be least benafical to kill in regards to points. They do so because I will find it much easyer to kill their FG+musketeer combos than face the melee that can usually reach me at some end. And even more so if they have defensive GBs. Anyways it is actually not wrong the whole idea of giving short range more points, but then againt why the downplaying of fast units so harshly. For some reason heavy melee still stays strong though when it comes to points.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser12149
Another derp who didn't read my post. Likewise I didn't read your whole book of a post either.
Making the short ranged units worth the most points is stupid. Who comes up with this stuff? The same people who programmed the AI to be useless at using short ranged units? This AI just sends them out to the front line to die anyway. Absolutely useless to have short ranged units in def right now, and will be even more useless after the update. Seriously the AI needs to be worked on very soon.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser276
You dont really have to play you know if you really dont like how the system is done.
That was your choice in reasoning to build it. In fact everyone was building it and going out of their way to get it which showed that it was over powered.
Medals are medals mate. If you dont want it then feel free to invest in another building. If you want a crystal ball though I am sure we can provide some in exchange for diamonds. I believe I have said in a few posts in the forums here that Great buildings AND other aspects of the game will be adjusted according to what is the best fit. Just because you dont like it yourself doesnt mean its not the best fit for everyone. Your looking at it as just you. Which I guess explains the rudeness.
ok and with the change of some of the buildings that give out coins we did a while ago I guess we should retro that too and put a bunch of people in the negative for coins and supplies. Should make everyone happy that and is in all fairness. Points arnt calculated past a week for defeating units for tournaments so not much of a drawback for retro the points for units. But for great buildings your talking about a long time and a great chance to PENALIZE players who worked hard to get ahead.
Well I am glad we did something right. I was starting to think you were my boss or something coming down on me. though in the future I would advise against using that attitude in the forums as its not conducive to a long forum stay.
the AI is being worked on in preperation for guild wars.
DeletedUser5904
Another derp who didn't read my post. Likewise I didn't read your whole book of a post either.
Oh you read the entire post, just as I read your whining tale of woe. The very best part of this thread is that those impossible cities will not be going away, nor will those buffed up attacking armies it seems, in this change log. All hail the fail of Cap'n Crunchyz and his fabulous Empire of Herpderpistan.
DeletedUser
when people understand: THIS IS BETA!
every day chnage can be.
beta is NEVER fair, is test ground!
when dev not happy, he change. then he listen to player and check feedback, maybe change again.
BETA=NOT FINISH! every body must learn that. if you not accept dont play beta, and dont by diamond. only buy diamond when you understand what beta is and you have fun test beta. but stop cry like wolf.
BETA IS NEVER FAIR!
DeletedUser12149
Write me another story.
DeletedUser276
be nice peoples. or I will start sitting
DeletedUser
Ok me again with a question... When you did a brainstorming on Deal Castle and you noticed it`s so nice and pretty and people just fall inlove with it and decided to make it a little less attractive did you take in consideration only the fact that people build it mainly for the defense bonus?
Because of the answer is yes then ok let`s agree that there was too much of a collateral bonus - the 190 something medals. So far so good.
However I guess you didn`t take in consideration those of us who liked it for its charming personality (medals) rather than its long legs (defense bonus).
So, as you pretty much kicked us in the family jewels with this move, how about you reconsider the whole thing. Do another brainstorming. Flip the coin again and maybe find a solution to accommodate all of us?
Hope its not too much to ask.
And maybe, just maybe, next time you actually establish a certain bonus can you do it right from the beginning? Because it`s not fair for the players, and no matter how you package this "recalculations" bottom line is you were wrong the first time. And punishing the players doesnt make it right.
Because of the answer is yes then ok let`s agree that there was too much of a collateral bonus - the 190 something medals. So far so good.
However I guess you didn`t take in consideration those of us who liked it for its charming personality (medals) rather than its long legs (defense bonus).
So, as you pretty much kicked us in the family jewels with this move, how about you reconsider the whole thing. Do another brainstorming. Flip the coin again and maybe find a solution to accommodate all of us?
Hope its not too much to ask.
And maybe, just maybe, next time you actually establish a certain bonus can you do it right from the beginning? Because it`s not fair for the players, and no matter how you package this "recalculations" bottom line is you were wrong the first time. And punishing the players doesnt make it right.
DeletedUser3157
Btw this thread is advacing so fast, that looks like I need to make a new post instead.
I wanted to comment on a feature about limiting mail msges to 100 posts. I have no idea why or who felt this change would be needed. Many guilds have guild wise mass msges that are active and are often used by members as means of some communication due to current lack of chat system in this game or anything better. So limiting them to some fixed amount would just mean extra spam and extra msges, as in active guild the cap of 100 could be reached quickly. As a player with towns in multiple worlds, I know already 2 of my worlds, guild mass msges 100 cap would usually get filled within a day. Current system where the number of displayed msges remained at 99 and then the earlyest one got erased seemed to work just fine, so why change it?
I wanted to comment on a feature about limiting mail msges to 100 posts. I have no idea why or who felt this change would be needed. Many guilds have guild wise mass msges that are active and are often used by members as means of some communication due to current lack of chat system in this game or anything better. So limiting them to some fixed amount would just mean extra spam and extra msges, as in active guild the cap of 100 could be reached quickly. As a player with towns in multiple worlds, I know already 2 of my worlds, guild mass msges 100 cap would usually get filled within a day. Current system where the number of displayed msges remained at 99 and then the earlyest one got erased seemed to work just fine, so why change it?
DeletedUser276
I guess you missed the part that was mentioned it is a beta. In a beta the game is created and tested to see the interaction and implementation of ideas. When the interaction or numbers are off, like say in the fact that everyone is building the same thing.... things are going to be adjusted. Things will not be set right from the start. If you want something set right from the start then dont play the beta version of a game. Simple... almost as simple as flipping a coin as you so prudently put it.
After a while the great buildings will be re evaluated again and the interaction and need of the buildings will be assessed and maybe things will change again.
There is a chat system based to come out soon for ingame. This is why the system for communication is being tweaked.
DeletedUser
when will this game leave beta? It`s been like a year already? Anytime soon?
Last edited by a moderator:
Greywolf
Sergeant
be nice peoples. or I will start sitting
Decreasing medals from Deal Castle? Cutting the medal output in half goes beyond simply decreasing it. A lot of players including myself are going to be very upset with such a huge 'decrease'. Several of my other GB's are affected in a negative way as well by this rebalancing, but these decreases aren't quite a big.
Looks like the devs are already planning to sit on me
I hope my poor back can hold all this weight
DeletedUser276
as I said it is set the way it is now to see how the function goes. After it is re evaluated it may be altered again. If it is too much downwards it will be adjusted back up.
DeletedUser6965
it is a beta and now it's time for rebalance everything and that's good, even if "hint" mentioned some good reasons, why this "rebalance" should be rebalanced in some time
Last edited by a moderator: