• 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.

Possibility to repeat a GE level instead of advancing

  • Thread starter DeletedUser103370
  • Start date

Vote


  • Total voters
    20

DeletedUser103370

this time when you are summarizing them can you put me as a she please

Uh, I'm really sorry, I correct it immediately! And I'm quite happy we have ladies here too!

you dont even think you'd use it all the time, casual players probably wont use it much (but its to encourage them to play more), but dedicated players & guilds will use it extensively, and the gap between the 2 sets of players will grow, i dont think you comprehend the huge impact & imbalance this change could make
in some worlds i struggle to finish level 1 but in another i can finish level 4 without issue, i would love to keep repeating it there as i will always gain more than i lose

How could I say, that yeah I will use it 10 times a week? I mean perhaps only hardcore players could make a statement like that, but I don't see what's wrong with it.

And yes, we could say that dedicated players will have more advantages, since they can "exploit" the system even more! But let me ask. What do you think who benefits from the Treasure Hunt, for example? The casual players? No, the dedicated ones. Exploiting the fact that they spend more time with the game, they gather more rewards!
Or here is another one, who benefits from buildings, which you can set to short productions (5 minutes? 15 minutes, even 8 hours?)? The casual players who logs in once a day maybe? No. The dedicated players who spend more time here, again they are able to gather much more rewards!
And that's just the way it supposed to be! If you think about it, the game should and does reward you if you spend more time here, it would be very illogical, if it would reward players for not being dedicated! And just as the Treasure Hunt didn't imbalance the game, a possible repeat in GE wouldn't either imo.

Regarding small/big players gap, with the right rules this gap can actually be closed (but even if not, it could be implemented in a way, to favor small players, after all what we want seriously, a small player even if repeats a lot of times, won't be even close in points to a big one, so they don't have to be afraid of anything), so I don't think it would have a negative impact.
Although let me add, that the reason of the huge gap existing between small and big players lies elsewhere, and I don't think this should be the feature to stop or lessen that, this one's purpose (supposedly) is to increase GE participation, especially favoring those who are not strong enough yet to advance further, still they would be willing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser103370

I think what is puzzling people is the idea that increasing participation is a bad thing...

Yeah, imo most people only looking at things from a personal-gain perspective, and if they feel it doesn't benefit them, then they disagree. In theory a smaller guild would be able to compete against bigger ones, thanks to repeats. However, even that could be regulated, I mean standing in GE is calculated by the percentage of participation basically right (I know it's not the whole formula but that's the base). Repeats would not essentially mean that a small guild would do a hundred repeats and beat the bigger ones, if nothing else because smaller players obviously doesn't have the number of troops would be needed, especially on the long term.

But hell, that's just me, that's why we make these props. If they like it fine, if they don't that's fine too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Im all about this but before I give my vote just wanted to ask would they get points over and over and would TOR work ? Also would the percentage of the guild ranking go up ?
 

DeletedUser653

Read the proposal and it seems not to have got the detailed thinking behind such a major change and as such I am against it at this time. If the OP wants to add much more details about how this would work then i might reconsider my vote. There are many questions from players which have been ridiculed or ignored and we need those questions answering in detail before any such proposal should be approved.
so -1

And why has all test had many of his posts deleted and we can only see them because they are included in some replies??
 

DeletedUser103370

Im all about this but before I give my vote just wanted to ask would they get points over and over and would TOR work ? Also would the percentage of the guild ranking go up ?

What do you think how would it be the best?
If it was up to me, I'd introduce a gradually decreasing system (so every repeat gets less by some percentage), OR repeats wouldn't have special rewards (diamonds, special buildings), then adjust it weekly, till we get the desired results. @Augustavian thinks repeating should give the same rewards. But we should really see it in practice first!

Read the proposal and it seems not to have got the detailed thinking behind such a major change and as such I am against it at this time. If the OP wants to add much more details about how this would work then i might reconsider my vote. There are many questions from players which have been ridiculed or ignored and we need those questions answering in detail before any such proposal should be approved.
so -1

And why has all test had many of his posts deleted and we can only see them because they are included in some replies??

Could you elaborate please @HRC which questions has been ignored or ridiculed?
Regarding Test's posts, he himself deleted them, you ask him why :)
Luckily I've quoted them so you can see what he wrote.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One issue I've not seen addressed is to do with the concept that repeating the same level will give lesser rewards.

How DO you give less when the prize for a stage/encounter is one unit? You get a fast unit on the first pass through and ⅝ of a unit on the second time through?
 

DeletedUser103370

One issue I've not seen addressed is to do with the concept that repeating the same level will give lesser rewards.

How DO you give less when the prize for a stage/encounter is one unit? You get a fast unit on the first pass through and ⅝ of a unit on the second time through?

I've already answered that earlier @Prinza the Hunter! You reduce the chance of getting a unit, not the number itself. In a given level there are percentage chances of getting this or that. So for example at level 1 in an encounter let's say there is a 20% chance you get a unit. Then you halve the chance, so you're more likely to get coins for example. Another way is that usually you get a unit before every 5th (big) encounter, so you can reduce this gradually, (2nd repeat only the 2nd, 3rd, 4th / 3rd repeat only the 3rd, 4th etc.)
But as I said I'd NOT reduce the units at all! They're not only an incentive to fight more, but obviously as you fight you lose them too. Instead I'd decrease - or take away completely - the special rewards, such as diamonds, or special buildings.

Just for an example, last time I've completed level 1 I've got 4 units, but in overall I've lost 5... I think there is no reason to reduce on that one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've already answered that earlier @Prinza the Hunter! You reduce the chance of getting a unit, not the number itself. In a given level there are percentage chances of getting this or that. So for example at level 1 in an encounter let's say there is a 20% chance you get a unit. Then you halve the chance,
To state it accurately, there is a 100% chance you will get a unit, with a 20% chance that it wil be a specific unit.
2v0ik9w.jpg

So if you reduce the chance of each unit down to 10%. what would you do with the other half chance, just throw it away, so that there is a 50% chance you get nothing at all? I'm not at all sure that would go down well, given the amount of grumbling there is, for example, over the Summer Event having a chance of giving things that people are not very interested in (whether that is a portrait, a decoration building, a champion, or anything - the grumbling is being made). The furore over getting nothing at all would be deafening! :)
 

DeletedUser103370

To state it accurately, there is a 100% chance you will get a unit, with a 20% chance that it wil be a specific unit.
2v0ik9w.jpg

So if you reduce the chance of each unit down to 10%. what would you do with the other half chance, just throw it away, so that there is a 50% chance you get nothing at all? I'm not at all sure that would go down well, given the amount of grumbling there is, for example, over the Summer Event having a chance of giving things that people are not very interested in (whether that is a portrait, a decoration building, a champion, or anything - the grumbling is being made). The furore over getting nothing at all would be deafening! :)

No, definitely not nothing! There must be some incentive of course. And depends how you wanna handle it. If you still insist there must be a reduce in units too, then instead of 100% chance of getting one of the 5 different unit types, in 2nd round there could be 80% chance to get one of 4, and another 20% of getting coins for example.
But why does it matter if you get a unit at every 5th encounter or so? I mean you likely loose more units than you get anyway in a whole level, and we want people to play more right? So I'm saying just leave the units as they are, there is no harm in it. (for example you won't be able to stack up crap-loads of units by repeating level 1 a hundred times)

Also we must not forget, that the whole point of being able to repeat a level is not so that you can pile up tons of rewards. The goal is to be able to contribute more to your guild, even if you're not strong enough to advance to the next level! Sure, you could still collect nice things too, but it's like the Treasure Hunt. If you stay logged in for long enough and doing Treasure Hunt tirelessly again and again and again, then surely you can come up with some nice rewards. The main difference here is while Treasure Hunt's only and sole purpose is to keep you playing the game for as long as possible, and it's rewarding you as an individual player, repeating a level would reward your guild, in the meantime giving you some pleasant rewards too.

The only reason I'd reduce special rewards from repeats in the first place anyway, because under no circumstances repeating a level should stop capable players advancing to higher levels. To do that of course we must reduce the rewards in such a way, so that it cannot be abused.

And I strongly believe that this could be achieved with trial and error! The devs. can see the stats, how many people using what feature, in what way, if we had that data, we could easily adjust rewards to make it work how it supposed to.

That's why I said so many times that I think it doesn't really matter how it is introduced first! However you do it, there is a 99% chance that it will need re-adjusting. So I say it should be introduced along some base-lines what we all talked about here, then we can build on the feedback and fine-tune it week by week till it's satisfying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, definitely not nothing! There must be some incentive of course. And depends how you wanna handle it. If you still insist there must be a reduce in units too, then instead of 100% chance of getting one of the 5 different unit types, in 2nd round there could be 80% chance to get one of 4, and another 20% of getting coins for example.
But why does it matter if you get a unit at every 5th encounter or so? I mean you likely loose more units than you get anyway in a whole level, and we want people to play more right? So I'm saying just leave the units as they are, there is no harm in it. (for example you won't be able to stack up crap-loads of units by repeating level 1 a hundred times)
Sure you can. On some worlds, or at certain times of development through an age, I largely negotiate my way through. Going around and around will obviously cost but could be a way to build a healthy army.

This affects game balance since people newly into an age would be able to instantly have that age's troops for defence and even attack. That also might affect Inno's income because fewer people might buy the troop packs.

I'm really not trying to be difficult; I simply mean to examine the proposal fully.

Also we must not forget, that the whole point of being able to repeat a level is not so that you can pile up tons of rewards. The goal is to be able to contribute more to your guild, even if you're not strong enough to advance to the next level! Sure, you could still collect nice things too, but it's like the Treasure Hunt. If you stay logged in for long enough and doing Treasure Hunt tirelessly again and again and again, then surely you can come up with some nice rewards...

The main difference here is while Treasure Hunt's only and sole purpose is to keep you playing the game for as long as possible...
Ah, yes, that Treasure Hunt I hear of now and then. Interesting that you gauge its pupose as keeping me playing given that I have no access to it, as a second-class player on a mobile device.
 

DeletedUser103370

Sure you can. On some worlds, or at certain times of development through an age, I largely negotiate my way through. Going around and around will obviously cost but could be a way to build a healthy army.

This affects game balance since people newly into an age would be able to instantly have that age's troops for defence and even attack. That also might affect Inno's income because fewer people might buy the troop packs.

I'm really not trying to be difficult; I simply mean to examine the proposal fully.


Ah, yes, that Treasure Hunt I hear of now and then. Interesting that you gauge its pupose as keeping me playing given that I have no access to it, as a second-class player on a mobile device.

Hahahaha, I didn't know that :D I only brought it up because it has similarities regarding of it's repetitiveness and rewarding your activity/playing the game for longer.

But you keep saying the App is so inferior, why don't you play in the browser instead? I mean even on the phone you can access it from the browser right? Or it's useless on smaller screens?
 

DeletedUser103370

Sure you can. On some worlds, or at certain times of development through an age, I largely negotiate my way through. Going around and around will obviously cost but could be a way to build a healthy army.

This affects game balance since people newly into an age would be able to instantly have that age's troops for defence and even attack. That also might affect Inno's income because fewer people might buy the troop packs.

I'm really not trying to be difficult; I simply mean to examine the proposal fully.

No, I understand what you're saying. Well if that's the case, then the devs could see this from the feedback and reduce the possibility accordingly! This could be circumvented in other ways too, for example with negotiation you'd have less chance for units (ie. with combat you have 20% chance to get one unit out of 5 different ones, with negotiation this would change to 20% for 1 unit out of 3, plus 20-20% chance for coins/supplies. or we could rule out units completely if it was negotiated. or we could rule out negotiation completely from repeats)

What I really think is, that there is no such situation which couldn't be sorted, they really only need to examine the usage for a while - which I'm sure they do anyway -.
 

DeletedUser110195

update: As @Augustavian said, to make it work, advancing a level should always worth it more than to stay and repeat to avoid possible abuse, every repeated level should give gradually less rewards,
If there's one thing I'm not sure I've communicated my thoughts about clearly, it's what rewards you should get from repeating a level in GE. I think the chest rewards for doing level 1 a second time should be the same as doing them the first time. It is still less than what you would get for doing level 2. Yes, you would get 8 units doing level 1 twice, but doing level 1 and 2 once each would give you 12, the non-unit rewards are also better at 2. I'm quite sure that if you make the rewards for repeating a level worse than what you got the first time through, you will just ruin this idea if it was implemented like that.
 

DeletedUser103370

and repeating level 3 10 times give you 120 units :rolleyes:

Certainly, if you could do level 3 without losing a single unit :) Last time I've lost 6 units in level 1, in level 2 I've lost more than fifteen in the first 8 encounters... Of course that depends on many things, your bonuses, the time you invest in it (auto-battles suck we all know, but they're incomparably faster, etc.)

If there's one thing I'm not sure I've communicated my thoughts about clearly, it's what rewards you should get from repeating a level in GE. I think the chest rewards for doing level 1 a second time should be the same as doing them the first time. It is still less than what you would get for doing level 2. Yes, you would get 8 units doing level 1 twice, but doing level 1 and 2 once each would give you 12, the non-unit rewards are also better at 2. I'm quite sure that if you make the rewards for repeating a level worse than what you got the first time through, you will just ruin this idea if it was implemented like that.

Yeah I'm not sure about it either, that's why I'd like to see it in action. We can talk about it in theory how we think it'd work, but nobody knows really. People are very resourceful - especially players :) -, so if there is anything to exploit you can be sure they'll find it :D. Then we can do something about it.
 

DeletedUser110195

It's an idea to help the new player who needs the help, and it's a convenience to experienced players who for whatever reason don't have enough oomph left to do the next level. Sure, the people who can always breeze right through all 4 levels won't see any use for this, but those players don't really need what they can get from level 4 and do it for their guild, not themselves.
 
Top