• 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.

Petition concerning GB changes update

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser13082

Coltfan1313 said:
The "lol" was a chuckle @ how when I was here a little over a month ago complaining about the nerf to goods producing great buildings, I may as well have been tilting @ windmills. Every argument that was made for it (mostly by the 5-10% minority of the player base that actively PVP's on a daily basis) can now be turned around against. I even referred to the fact that those kind of changes to long standing content, especially those with a premium component to them, would set bad precedent and sooner or later it would hit one of the sacred cows of PVP'ers...and now it has. The "lol" also refers to my expectations of this changing nothing. The only time I have seen Innogames make an about-face in the 19 months I have played is over the bruhaha surrounding the points recalculation about a year or so ago (which never hit the live servers as badly as it hit beta, since it was a retroactive nerf there). I just had to get it out of my system...sorry 8). And yeah after being told more or less to embrace this last awful decision of Nerfing the goods GB's I suppose I could hold that grudge, thumb my nose "neener neener neener" style why repeating the mantra of "consider it a challenge" lol. But I won't do that, not my style.

Now, as to the opinion of the impending update I am still on the fence. On one hand something needed to be done to balance the attack/defense system which has been heavily skewed in favor of the attacker. But on the other hand (if only on principle) I oppose changes to long standing content to make a square peg (upcoming content) fit into a round hole (existing content). And just like the last nerf and many of the other bad decisions they have made they seem to reside at one end of the spectrum or the other, as if finding the middle ground is a foreign concept. If they can't be innovative enough in their development to bring us something worthwhile without breaking something else then back to the drawing board I say. For the love of gods and dogs the name of the company is Innogames, be innovative!

Diatribe over and apologies to you and the rest for it. Put me in the disagree camp with the "somewhat" caveat byeordie was given.
Click to expand...

No apology needed buddy, you make a very good argument. As you know, I was in favour of the GB nerf that concerned goods production (to an extent). With mentioning that, I will say, I was strongly agreed with it to begin with however I have began to notice a few more cons rather than pros which I hadn't thought of before. If history were repeated, I would now be on the fence with that update rather than on a specific side of it.

Again as mentioned in my previous post, I do agree that attack is overpowered, I just don't think this update is the correct way to change that. Their are multiple reasons for that but I won't go into detail unless you would like me too.

The final sentence of you post seems a little blurry, have you been drinking? ;p lol. I assume you are saying to put you on disagree list with (somewhat) next to your name but I will wait for you to confirm that :)
 

DeletedUser5904

No drinking, I just think faster than my hotdog fingers can punch these keys, leading to incomplete thoughts lol.

Yes, I disagree (somewhat) with the impending changes.
 

DeletedUser13082

Coltfan1313 said:
No drinking, I just think faster than my hotdog fingers can punch these keys, leading to incomplete thoughts lol.

Yes, I disagree (somewhat) with the impending changes.
Click to expand...

Your the opposite to me then, I'm always proof reading before I post or it would just be a drunken rabble of letters haha
 

car54

Private
death ouron said:
I've noticed a lot of players saying they want to "take a stand" against this update and I think the best way, without causing too much hassle, is a simple petition to show just how many people are against this idea.

Click Here to see the announcement thread in question.

Click Here to see the discussion thread for this topic.

I am not looking for new ideas or anything like that. A simple "I agree" or "I disagree" will be enough. I will then add your name to the list which you have chosen and this, in my opinion, should help to show whether this update should or should not go ahead. Also in my personal opinion, this is the sort of thing that inno should be doing themselves. We are the players, and in some cases, paying customers. We deserver the opportunity to be able to say whether an update should or should not go ahead. Our decisions should count too!

Disagree with GB changes update:
1. Death Oruon
2. ddevil
3.vlahia
4.Pzkpfwv1d
5.Huscarl
6.vossos
7.byeordie (somewhat)
8.mink
9.desypete
10.Greywolf
11.necromancer66
12.Coltfan1313 (somewhat)
13. car54
Agree with GB changes update:
1.Mizar
2.Bartimaeus46
3.Micheal K.
4.cliff
5.FacetiousMike
6.naterichster
Click to expand...

I disagree
 

DeletedUser4195

Disagree with the proposed change as I disagreed with the other GB nerf
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Agree because indeed, isn't a farm game..you have to work if you like to see your name in first page(not just 2-3 clicks for every won battle)
 

DeletedUser

I agree with the proposed changes.
Attacking IS too easy at the moment. This change will make it more interesting.
 

DeletedUser13082

Billy the Fish said:
I agree with the proposed changes.
Attacking IS too easy at the moment. This change will make it more interesting.
Click to expand...

I agree, as mentioned before, that attack is currently too overpowered, but these changes aren't a balance in the slightest, all they do is tip the advantage toward defence and make it extremely easy for players to create an invincible defence. I'm all for an extra bit of challenge here and there but invincibility is a bit too challenging for me. I like a challenge that I have the opportunity to overcome lol.

Test Ament said:
I agree

why:
because the people who complain now and disagree are the same who agreed with the goods changes from the GBs in version 1.17

and where is the petition for that nerf ?
Click to expand...

Your right, I was a player who was in favour of the goods change and I gave my reasons for that at the time. I mentioned earlier in conversation with coltfan than my view on that has changed a little now however I still don't see it as an all round bad thing.

"Where is the petition for that nerf" You could have started one if you wanted to the same as I have done here.

I will not be adding your name to either list at the moment. You have stated that you are agreeing simply to spite players who had a differing opinion to you in the past. That is not the reason for the thread. If you have a genuine view you would like to give then please do and then I will add your name to the appropriate list :)
 

DeletedUser13805

death ouron said:
I agree, as mentioned before, that attack is currently too overpowered, but these changes aren't a balance in the slightest, all they do is tip the advantage toward defence and make it extremely easy for players to create an invincible defence. I'm all for an extra bit of challenge here and there but invincibility is a bit too challenging for me. I like a challenge that I have the opportunity to overcome lol.



Your right, I was a player who was in favour of the goods change and I gave my reasons for that at the time. I mentioned earlier in conversation with coltfan than my view on that has changed a little now however I still don't see it as an all round bad thing.

"Where is the petition for that nerf" You could have started one if you wanted to the same as I have done here.

I will not be adding your name to either list at the moment. You have stated that you are agreeing simply to spite players who had a differing opinion to you in the past. That is not the reason for the thread. If you have a genuine view you would like to give then please do and then I will add your name to the appropriate list :)
Click to expand...

you leave yourself open to vote rigging accusations if you dont allow players to vote whatever there reasons there not for you to decide are they ? be it spite or because they like the colour pink if people vote its there choice so i do hope you will allow the players vote to count
ever heard of a protest vote ? do you think partys tell voters there not allowed to vote because there voting out of protest ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

I disagree with Test Ament's reason for voting, but that doesn't make his vote invalid.
 

DeletedUser13082

Test Ament said:
lol
rigging vote to your favour :rolleyes:
because you don't like the reason

95% of the people not even writing the reason of the agree / disagree

so these votes aren't allow either because they didn't prove that they have a genuine view
Click to expand...

I'm not rigging the vote in favour of either. Those who have stated that they agree/disagree have done so and their names have been added, they all have their own reasons for their view point. You on the other hand, stated that you are agreeing simply to spite certain players who disagreed with you in the past. That is not helpful for this thread, whichever way your vote was aiming, I still wouldn't have counted it.

Those who simply say "agree" or "disagree" have their reasons behind it, they have given me no reason to believe that they are voting for any reason other than their opinion of the update. You gave me reason to believe otherwise, that is why I am asking that you give your honest view point before I add your name.

Huscarl said:
I disagree with Test Ament's reason for voting, but that doesn't make his vote invalid.
Click to expand...

As mentioned above. If I feel he is voting because of his view on the update then his vote will be added. I don't want to add a vote to the list simply to spite other players as that is not the intention of the thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Every vote should be respected. The reasons for however a person votes is irrelevant. If you ask for people to justify their votes, and if their reasoning does not convince you, then this isn't a democratic vote anymore, but merely your subjective opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top