• 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:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.
  • Jupiter Moon Era now taking passengers!


    Our latest era, Jupiter Moon is soon to be ready to explore! Read all about it here!

Unformatted: Nice game, but so Unfair

Benspeel2

Private
Thanks for this nice game... I only start 1 or 2 months ago. But now that I see and play more I see that I can not win agents a lot of players.
Look at my profile, I am building but same are staying in one area ... stop growing they playing there, build them self up and keep winning and growing strong.

Antoninus the fair 1120 /Rank 4279 but still in Early Middle Ages ????
Medals- rank 2362 and more, Take my profile and compare. It's very nice for him to play the game this why but so Unfear to new players.
When I saw this and I look at other players I saw a lot doing the same!!!. Nice to build up your resource and, and.
But there come a time for this player to move on so new players can also have same winnings and build up.
Just my point of view.

Suggestion:
Add same formula in game as soon as player Rank is ???? he can not play in lower areas. Make it like the Forge Points, -not a Friend I can not give Forge Points. (Of cause this can help me get more Medals and FP...but I am limited to play with friends)
I was very demoralize and thinking to stop playing. Its nice to win same thing in the game and you work hard... only to see that all your planning and more is just for nothing!!!!
For me its hard to win battles in the PVP Arena

Just a player point of view.....
 

potatoskunk

Master Corporal
Yes, I strongly recommend camping in a low era long-term to get your GBs built up, and only move up to later eras once you have a really solid foundation.

Stay in a low era (LMA or below). Find a guild with a 1.9 thread and get them to teach you how to use it; make sure it's a guild that lets new players use the 1.9 thread, since some guilds won't let you use it until you have a high-level Arc (which seems like a dumb rule to me, but whatever). Get your attacking trio of GBs (Zeus, CoA, CDM) up to level 10, get your ToR build and up to level 4-5, get your Traz up to level 10-15, and then take your Arc to level 80. Then, once you have a really solid foundation, you can look at other GBs to build and think about moving up to a higher era.

It's recommended that you not age up until you're consistently one of the top people in your neighbourhood. It will take you a while to get there, but it's a slow game and you shouldn't expect to instantly become a high-level player.
 
Yes, I strongly recommend camping in a low era long-term to get your GBs built up, and only move up to later eras once you have a really solid foundation.

Stay in a low era (LMA or below). Find a guild with a 1.9 thread and get them to teach you how to use it; make sure it's a guild that lets new players use the 1.9 thread, since some guilds won't let you use it until you have a high-level Arc (which seems like a dumb rule to me, but whatever). Get your attacking trio of GBs (Zeus, CoA, CDM) up to level 10, get your ToR build and up to level 4-5, get your Traz up to level 10-15, and then take your Arc to level 80. Then, once you have a really solid foundation, you can look at other GBs to build and think about moving up to a higher era.

It's recommended that you not age up until you're consistently one of the top people in your neighbourhood. It will take you a while to get there, but it's a slow game and you shouldn't expect to instantly become a high-level player.
Agree with this.
LMA is a good place to camp for a while to build and stock.
I'd put CF as a high priority GB on the list. Maybe after Arc though.
A small goods + supply boost GB like LoA is good to have as well. To level 10 along with Zeus, CoA and CdM maybe.
Traz important too.

Many new players build all the GB's they can as soon as they get the bps for them. They have big, useless, low level Colosseums, Deal Castles, Notra Dame's, Basil's. RaH's and whatnot. Better to focus on a few of the best basic GB's.
 
Last edited:

PeePee Pleb

Lieutenant
Thanks for this nice game... I only start 1 or 2 months ago. But now that I see and play more I see that I can not win agents a lot of players.
Look at my profile, I am building but same are staying in one area ... stop growing they playing there, build them self up and keep winning and growing strong.

Antoninus the fair 1120 /Rank 4279 but still in Early Middle Ages ????
Medals- rank 2362 and more, Take my profile and compare. It's very nice for him to play the game this why but so Unfear to new players.
When I saw this and I look at other players I saw a lot doing the same!!!. Nice to build up your resource and, and.
But there come a time for this player to move on so new players can also have same winnings and build up.
Just my point of view.

Suggestion:
Add same formula in game as soon as player Rank is ???? he can not play in lower areas. Make it like the Forge Points, -not a Friend I can not give Forge Points. (Of cause this can help me get more Medals and FP...but I am limited to play with friends)
I was very demoralize and thinking to stop playing. Its nice to win same thing in the game and you work hard... only to see that all your planning and more is just for nothing!!!!
For me its hard to win battles in the PVP Arena

Just a player point of view.....
So you are basically suggesting that players who play wise and grind really hard should be punished.
 

Burpo

Sergeant
LMAO. You cannot start a game and within 1 or 2 months expect (with minimal effort) to be able to beat players who have been playing for years.
The beauty of this game (and most others) is that there are a number of ways to play.
The 2 main choices for this game are builder or fighter.
If you are a builder, just accept that you will lose most battles.
If you are a fighter, then plan your progress to ensure you are strong before moving up in ages.
 

Emberguard

Legend
You cannot start a game and within 1 or 2 months expect (with minimal effort) to be able to beat players who have been playing for years.
Yeah and that'll be true of every game you come across. You can have the goal of beating those players but be prepared for that to be a long term goal and set some smaller goals you can achieve in the short term that'll act as stepping stones towards that larger goal.
 

PeePee Pleb

Lieutenant
Yeah and that'll be true of every game you come across. You can have the goal of beating those players but be prepared for that to be a long term goal and set some smaller goals you can achieve in the short term that'll act as stepping stones towards that larger goal.
Plus, in FoE you can't be punished by strong players that hard (even plundering 1 building every day is almost nothing) as you are punished in many other online games.
 

Deleted member 97052

I can see where the author of this article is coming from, and I agree this game has lost it's focus in "my" opinion.

When I started this game 8 odd years ago, it was an extremely well balanced game, basically you were reasonable equally balanced in your hoods etc and stood a fair chance of competeing in the game.

Now with the way players spend and era camp the game is grossly unbalanced now and far less fun to play, again "my" opinion, I think there should be a restriction on the ability to build GB's out of era.

For arguements sake if a GB is PE, then should only be able to build it if you are Colonial or above.
 

Emberguard

Legend
Now with the way players spend and era camp the game is grossly unbalanced now and far less fun to play, again "my" opinion, I think there should be a restriction on the ability to build GB's out of era.
While I agree that would have helped enormously with curtailing era camping, the problem with if that were introduced now is you’d have everyone already having high era GBs and no way for new players to gain them.

So there’d need to be some way of addressing that if such a restriction were added now to make it fair to new cities and new players
 

Paladiac the Pure

Brigadier-General
While I agree that would have helped enormously with curtailing era camping, the problem with if that were introduced now is you’d have everyone already having high era GBs and no way for new players to gain them.

So there’d need to be some way of addressing that if such a restriction were added now to make it fair to new cities and new players
Simple. Anyone with has GB's from an Age ahead of that player's current Age, would have the GB made inactive (or inert for those preferring a different term), which would then automatically reactivate the moment the player reaches the Age of that inactive GB. And for players that would complain about it, and about space restrictions ... well, their own fault for building something that they should not have had access to build in the first place. GB's would not be destroyed, no bonus' would come from them, etc, until the correct Age was reached. As well, no loss of FPs, goods, etc, that were gained while those GBs were active before they were made inactive. It would leave players still out of balance, but allow the newer players some opportunity to play catchup.
This would also remove much of the Age camping, since players would want their GBs back again. They would have the choice - continue camping, or work on reactivating their GB (or leave the game, which is always a choice, regardless of what else is happening)
 

Emberguard

Legend
Simple. Anyone with has GB's from an Age ahead of that player's current Age, would have the GB made inactive (or inert for those preferring a different term),
Somehow I think this far into the game’s life cycle that’d result in mass exodus and kill the game

And for players that would complain about it, and about space restrictions ... well, their own fault for building something that they should not have had access to build in the first place.
I disagree on the “their fault” bit. It’s the game design. It’s unreasonable to expect players to have seen that coming when it’s been that way since the introduction of GBs. It’s even present in Inno’s new game Rise of Cultures.

no loss of FPs, goods, etc,
There would be a loss though. The loss would be in real estate and the GB not being active. You’d be expecting players to work with a fraction of their available space while aging up.

Trading down would likely be harder with everyone trying to do it simultaneously.

What about Guild Battlegrounds costs? If the idea is to not put people off competing against those that came before them, then you’re going to have to address the power difference and ability to maintain treasury for Guild Battlegrounds if you remove advanced GBs. You’d have no Arc for the vast majority, Atomium isn’t that ideal to raise if you haven’t yet got the Arc and you’d have less access to 1.9 unless those without an Arc are willing to provide 1.9 out of pocket. CF would no longer exist below Progressive Era. Guilds already don’t like adding players in lower era’s due to added treasury strain. This’ll widen the gap
 

Paladiac the Pure

Brigadier-General
Somehow I think this far into the game’s life cycle that’d result in mass exodus and kill the game

I disagree on the “their fault” bit. It’s the game design. It’s unreasonable to expect players to have seen that coming when it’s been that way since the introduction of GBs. It’s even present in Inno’s new game Rise of Cultures.

There would be a loss though. The loss would be in real estate and the GB not being active. You’d be expecting players to work with a fraction of their available space while aging up.

Trading down would likely be harder with everyone trying to do it simultaneously.

What about Guild Battlegrounds costs? If the idea is to not put people off competing against those that came before them, then you’re going to have to address the power difference and ability to maintain treasury for Guild Battlegrounds if you remove advanced GBs. You’d have no Arc for the vast majority, Atomium isn’t that ideal to raise if you haven’t yet got the Arc and you’d have less access to 1.9 unless those without an Arc are willing to provide 1.9 out of pocket. CF would no longer exist below Progressive Era. Guilds already don’t like adding players in lower era’s due to added treasury strain. This’ll widen the gap
There is no perfect solution to fixing the issues today - the only solution is to try to balance the wants of the existing players with the needs of the new players. Inno has caused the significan problem by not addressing this a long time ago. And if Inno were to ever finally try to address, it most likely would have to be done in phases - with nobody happy, but with a long term plan in mind, to minimize player loss and/or exodus.
To argue/debate this issue and suggestions that other players make, really is fruitless, since there is no knowledge of these problems to be addressed. And the longer it takes to address (if ever) the worse the problems will get.
Whether this game eventually dies from a mass exodus, due to a severe restructuring, or dies from a thousand cuts, due to the unbalancement of existing vs new, as well as the bigger and bigger hurdles new players will enounter over time - is only up to Inno to determine.
 

GADfan

Warrant Officer
I totally agree with the comments that we shouldn't be having much-higher era GB's. I've long believed it's a daft thing to be able to do.
Should have been kept to within 1 era above only.
An Arc sat in an Iron Age city surrounded by Roman buildings? Looks stupid.

If space is an issue then Inno can grant a special storage feature where GB's are stored in the inventory at their current level and can be (re)built when the player gets to the Era before the GB's era. They should get plenty of expansions by the time they get there.

Can't see it happening though. Inno won't take the risk.
 

Xeon of Camelot

Lieutenant
From what I have seen the game is quite well balanced for new and old players alike.
Initially just be the best in your age and don't take on opponents above your age. Eventually, you will move on to expand your city and have a stronger army for things like GE. That's the FOE goal and it works pretty well here IMO.
 

Deleted member 97052

While I agree that would have helped enormously with curtailing era camping, the problem with if that were introduced now is you’d have everyone already having high era GBs and no way for new players to gain them.

So there’d need to be some way of addressing that if such a restriction were added now to make it fair to new cities and new players

Yes I agree Ember, unfortunately the fault falls at Inno's feet for not having the foresight, I know it is to criticise but they are the experienced people here.
 

Deleted member 97052

From what I have seen the game is quite well balanced for new and old players alike.
Initially just be the best in your age and don't take on opponents above your age. Eventually, you will move on to expand your city and have a stronger army for things like GE. That's the FOE goal and it works pretty well here IMO.
If you have been in the game as long as some of us, you will see the inbalance, if you are relatively new you won't and just accept it for what it is.
 

GADfan

Warrant Officer
Yes I agree Ember, unfortunately the fault falls at Inno's feet for not having the foresight, I know it is to criticise but they are the experienced people here.

It's something Inno could think about when they introduce the next new world.
Players beginning cities will have to adapt and think of it as a challenge to play in a different way
 
Top