• 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.

Update 1.201 Feedback

Ati2

Legend
Do you really believe they are aware of the guides that are online?

If they want to avoid pissing off players, like they are doing now, then they should... But assuming they have the whole Internet firewalled off in their offices, I found a discussion on the CF from way back in 2017, on the FoE forums: https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com...rontenac-a-hopefully-healthy-obsession.20436/ That was three and a half years ago. Even @Emberguard commented on it, who is now a Senior Ingame Mod over there.

To circle back to the whole feedback idea, someone from Inno should at least read their own forums to see how people are using their game. That way, maybe they can avoid pissing off so many people.

What does money have to do with it? The money argument is getting very stale. Every change players don't like they tell they will stop buying diamonds and that they have heard of players that will leave the game because of this. Arguments would probably make a much bigger impact if for once that wasn't used.

I can only speak for myself here. I've personally never spent as much money on an online game as I've spent on FoE, and that was to be able to get all the CF prints I needed. Yes, I could have done it without spending money, but I did buy diamonds to be able to follow my "dream strategy" as soon as possible. And now Inno says it's an exploit? Come on...
 

Knight of ICE

If they want to avoid pissing off players, like they are doing now, then they should... But assuming they have the whole Internet firewalled off in their offices, I found a discussion on the CF from way back in 2017, on the FoE forums: https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com...rontenac-a-hopefully-healthy-obsession.20436/ That was three and a half years ago. Even @Emberguard commented on it, who is now a Senior Ingame Mod over there.

To circle back to the whole feedback idea, someone from Inno should at least read their own forums to see how people are using their game. That way, maybe they can avoid pissing off so many people.

OK, one final comment to make this clear. I have said it before, but it seems I need to say it again. Community Manager gathers all feedback and makes sure it reaches HQ. So someone from Inno is reading the forums.

As a Senior Mod, Emberguard is part of the Support team. They deal with bug reports. They do not handle feedback and they have no direct line to Inno or the devs.


I can only speak for myself here. I've personally never spent as much money on an online game as I've spent on FoE, and that was to be able to get all the CF prints I needed. Yes, I could have done it without spending money, but I did buy diamonds to be able to follow my "dream strategy" as soon as possible. And now Inno says it's an exploit? Come on...

I've never spent any money on an online game. I've spent it on BP's for attack GB's and during events to get multiple special buildings that give an attack boost. My dream strategy is to plunder my neighbours. Then Inno came with the Galata Tower. Come on.......
 

Ati2

Legend
I've never spent any money on an online game. I've spent it on BP's for attack GB's and during events to get multiple special buildings that give an attack boost. My dream strategy is to plunder my neighbours. Then Inno came with the Galata Tower. Come on.......
I realize this was sarcastic, but since it has to do with the current change, I'll respond. :)

"Luckily," I've never had neighbors worth plundering. In IA, I thought they were just abandoned cities—their owner tried the game, didn't like it, moved on. Here in LMA, one would think players have already put some effort into their cities. And they probably have, I'm just usually not sure what that effort is. When their entire defense is two spearfighters, then I think they deserve to be plundered. I'm a peaceful player, I rarely plunder, but when I come across two spearfighters, then yeah... Of course, these players will never have a Galata Tower, so all is well.

Yet... and here's where we circle back to the current change: why was the Galata Tower introduced in the first place? Was it needed? No. By the time you allow other players to attack you, you can have a city that has nothing that can be plundered. Players who don't want to fight, can very easily build a city where they won't lose anything, even if attacked. So who cares if anyone attacks? But newcomers don't want to read how the game works, they don't want to learn the tricks of the game. They cry that they are plundered, until Inno makes a GB for them. Pissing off people who know how to read and have learned to play the game. Same as now. I don't know who cried enough now that Inno made this change, but based on the reactions on the forum, the only people who say yeah, this change is needed and boo those who exploit the game, are newbies, who, instead of wanting to learn how to play, want others to fail instead. Psychologically, this behavior speaks for itself.

And when I realize that Inno is not making money from players who know how to play the game, but from players who have no idea what they are doing, then I come to the conclusion that from a business point of view, Inno needs to make the game appeal to newcomers, and they really don't need to focus on players who have been around for years. Changes like nerfing the CF are ways to slow down the gameplay, so newcomers don't feel like there's no chance for them to ever reach a good placement. They could make sure the players learn how to play the game, but it's a lot easier to just piss off existing players, making it look like newcomers without any knowledge can win the game within a month if they pay enough.

And that's what Galata Tower is about, that's what nerfing existing GBs is about. Seriously, the Arc should be nerfed as well, since people can make tens of thousands of FPs a day with that. Once that's nerfed, newcomers can really feel that they have a chance without having to read any of the lengthy strategy guides, and they can start giving their money to Inno. As for existing players... yeah, this business model does not build on them. We've outgrown our usefulness.
 
I've never spent any money on an online game. I've spent it on BP's for attack GB's and during events to get multiple special buildings that give an attack boost. My dream strategy is to plunder my neighbours. Then Inno came with the Galata Tower. Come on.......

A better example would be if you invested in all attack and Innogames would restrict the times you can attack.

Or having invested in a really high level Arc and then Innogames restrict the amount of GB's you can invest in.

Alot of people invested in more % reward for quest completion and now we get restricted to the amount of quests we can do.
 
Last edited:

Knight of ICE

Yes because your comment doesn't make sense.

You suggested that as a mod she couldn't forward feedback when at the time of the thread in the quote that's exactly what would have happened.

I am not sure she was a Senior Ingame mod at that time. Once you become a mod the title on all your old posts changes as well. Anyhow, that is the US forum, so what does her having been a senior mod here have to do with that?

On the US server as an Ingame mod she has no influence on what goes on at that forum at all. Even if she wanted she could not forward feedback. Besides that, it is not a feedback thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stiubhart.

Private
Another example of a player spreading misinformation that start to leads it's own life. Support has never been secretive about it. They had not been given the correct information and acted upon wrong information they had gotten. Wrong information started on the German forum by someone that isn't even a CM. You really should do some research before you come up with statements like this.
And I quote "We would like to clarify that this change is very much intended and is not related to a technical issue within the game.
While we do understand you would like further transparency on this matter, unfortunately, we cannot currently disclose the reason for this change."
Never been secretive about it? Really?
Research. Hmm. Great idea. And how do you do research on something when the devs refuse to talk to their players about it? When everyone is basing their information from guesses and hypotheticals, or half truths, because they have no concrete information to work off? I have 2 official sources of information right now. 1 is a message from a support staff and 1 is a message on a forum. And they contradict each other. Reading between the lines you could say that the forum messages cancels the support staff message, but it isn't confirmed. Last I read between the lines with Inno, I got given an abort limit.

Or are you trying to say that support should do research before giving people information from an official source?

If you are selective about what you want to read you should not complain if you miss something. That "Inno bot" is a message coming directly from HQ.
True. I guess it is unbecoming to be forthright when you make mistakes (if that is what the 'unexpected circumstances' are referring to), and it is better that as little people see it as possible.
I don't spend my time on the forum. I spend my time playing the game. But if you want put that on me, that is fine. I will take it. Still doesn't affect my point about being transparent though.
 

vfrmark

Master Corporal
Yet another fix with no announcement, nothing dicussed with players (yet again) a limit on 2000 abortions of a quest does not solve the problem of players using macros, but does hurt players who do lots of reoccuring quests. Time and time again players have suggested a way to stop the macro users by adding a random factor. Maybe every 50 aborts insert a new quest like collect 10 incidents, this will crash the macro but for normal players we will raise and eye abort it and move on. The other common proposal is to have the attack button move randomly within an area so any macro used for fighting will fail, that will then solve both the RQ and the macros used in GBG/GvG.
Why INNO do you never ever discuss a problem your having managing the game with the players/customers - Why do you always put in a solution which does not work get thosands of complaints, withdraw it for yet another solution you do not propose to the players? Maybe a massive improvement would be to post a problem and ask players for suggested solutions?

I just do not think INNO cares one bit about the players in this game other than making them spend diamonds - not good

Emberguard is a mod whom most players respect because of the way she talks to the players honestly and with integrity, she has done a lot over the years for INNO and i give her my vote of thanks for being a great mod who does consider that the players are customers.
 

vfrmark

Master Corporal
People this is a feedback thread on the update. If you want to hold a discussion on the number of RQ's you are allowed to have in a day start a new thread on that.
We are giving feed back on changes introduced in this update - thats what the post is called "Feedback on upddate 1.201" was this change introduced on this update - YES then we are intitled to discuss it here and stop trying to bully players
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RegV

Corporal
They are not putting a limit on a GB with this. CF is not nerfed. Number of quests you can do is.
Could you kindly explain the difference between CF not being nerfed and Number of quests you can do is?
I don't get it.
Nobody builds or levels up a CF for the coins. They do it for the quest reward boost. DUH?
Limited quests ==> Fewer CF rewards ==> CF Nerfed.
CF was nerfed. Let's not pretend it wasn't. It just makes Inno look clueless to say that.
 

Knight of ICE

Could you kindly explain the difference between CF not being nerfed and Number of quests you can do is?
I don't get it.
Nobody builds or levels up a CF for the coins. They do it for the quest reward boost. DUH?
Limited quests ==> Fewer CF rewards ==> CF Nerfed.
CF was nerfed. Let's not pretend it wasn't. It just makes Inno look clueless to say that.

Rewards you get from CF have not been nerved. You still get the same rewards for doing quests. You just can not do that many quests anymore. Not everyone with a high level CF uses it to do RQ's for hours on.
 

Ati2

Legend
Not everyone with a high level CF uses it to do RQ's for hours on.
Not everyone, sure. But honestly... I've had FoE open in my browser these past few days, and I just don't know why. There's nothing to do. A game that I could play all day has become a game that I can play for half an hour a day now. That's not the kind of game I was looking for when I started playing, and not the kind of game I had for the past three years.
 

r21r

Major-General
Still under lockdown , reading 3-4 forums instead of being playing, others like logging in 5-6 of their siblings accounts, i used to not but do RQ's instead, never sold FPs for money on global, nor thought i could be an e-gangster selling scripts and accounts for euros on a broken city emulator, but what can we do, we can't be always the elite , we must surve from time to time.
did i said that we have the 3rd or 4th Covid "wave" here ? great job - perfect timing. (is this for real ? lol)

please say something, it's a game, not a job, at least for me, let me play it, feels so frustrating being dictated how to play and being pushed in gameplays i dont want to go back to
 

Behelzebhu

Private
Being able to do endless UBQ's without any costs could be considered as an exploit. They did remove it from the RQ's in later ages for a reason. Why it has taken so long would be guessing. Probably cause the complaints finally got to them.

I do not believe UBQ is the problem why they introduce this.
Realistic, can only do endless ubq in very few eras, without cost; most of them low ones
From Iron to Late Middle ages (lvl 80-130), where rank points and goods arent even that valuable but getting well traded for gbg
and in Tomorrow era, which still needs a lvl 160 CF (which i have only found 2-3 in all worlds (EN server) together at this level), which also is an age most players pass very fast (hovers in sight... who wants to stop??), so goods from TE are rare
Rest eras is above 220-700, havent seen a CF past level 170 in any world, so doubt will get there anytime soon

Last 4 eras would need a CF over level 500 to be close to do it, so i won´t believe UBQ is the issue.

Clearly started with the Integrated army in Saab RQs, and players doing endless (this dont even need a CF!!!) fights with rank points at ABSOLUTE 0 COST, which i dont understand need to be there, but mostly understand less why they dont remove what is ACTUALLY causing the issue
 
well...most people do, and the reason why people stack up CF to over lv 100 is not cause they gave millions of fps, its for to do RQ for a hours
Most players? That's your assumption. My assumption is that most players do NOT level their CFs to do RQ's for hours every day. They just do it to get better rewards from a moderate amounts of quests.
I have a somewhat high level CF (not above 100 though, yet), and I'm happy with the reward boosts I get from it without cycling RQ's all day long (I have better things to do).
Actually, I don't know very many players who use their high level CF's to cycle RQ's for hours. It's mostly a few moaners on this forum.
 
Last edited:
Top