Forum: empire-en

Board: [580] Update Questions & Feedback

Topic: [370475] Discussion Thread: No Burning Global Effect

[5094374] king clone (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 4:51 a.m.

why is the effect on anyway?

[5094381] sNeakY (INT3) [INT3] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 8:41 a.m.

did some of you miss the part where they said  it is a temporary effect ? just carry out your burning when the effect is not active ? The only thing that can mess it up is if it becomes permanent.. which is impossible unless gge is ran by kids .
EVERYTHING HAS PROS AND CONS and not everyone will be happy and some people are fighting so hard to look at the WORST CASE SCENARIO and completely ignoring the good things about this.

[5094390] makarona (BG1) [BG1] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 9:57 a.m.

Abouth the update for that effect i like it.I want to give another idea abouth it because a lot of the ppl playing this game arent kids but they are adult ppl who work i offer to attacks will be disbaled from 1:00 till 7:00 morning.So many ppl can play and dont disturb them and that effect should pe pernamently.

[5094392] sNeakY (INT3) [INT3] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 10:05 a.m.

makarona (BG1) said:

Abouth the update for that effect i like it.I want to give another idea abouth it because a lot of the ppl playing this game arent kids but they are adult ppl who work i offer to attacks will be disbaled from 1:00 till 7:00 morning.So many ppl can play and dont disturb them and that effect should pe pernamently.

never

[5094443] Philt123 (GB1) [GB1] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 3:02 p.m.

i really dont see the point in this change?

Firstly pvp is almost dead in the game anyway.  So the number of fires in the game is already massivly reduced.

Secondly the effect on food production from fires is also massivly reduced with  all the new food  items  not effected by fires already.  So even with 100% fires everywhere  its very possible to maintain high food production anyway, so the days of starving players out by  setting fires in their castles is already long long gone.

The traditional war tactic of removing rv's and setting fires to ensure your opponents cant hold big troops numbers is already pretty much dead with Prv's and uneffected food items.

War is now dominated by who can buy the most troops for the longest, and is normally dominated by players using armies of proxies to ensure they can buy them cheaper than their opponents.

So i dont really get the point in this change, the coffin has already been well and truly nailed shut on PVP  so  sticking in another nail is going to make zero diff.

Why GGE insist on focussing their attention on things that are in reality goign to make zero impact on the game whilst totally ignoring the things that  would have a a massive positive impact is quite beyond me.

[5094457] Ranjan Barua (IN1) [IN1] :: Jan. 12, 2020, 4:15 p.m.

I think, GGE should introduce this feature in the subscription, no fire at all if you have no fire subscription. 

GGE should think a lot of their offers:
1. Their special offer is waste now after new wof is introduced, why i need to waste 5k for 120k horrors when i can get a lot of other stuff along with troops. with every spin of 450 tickets, i am getting like 160-200k troops (defense and offence)., give 500K horrors (400k range and 100k melee) for 5k then we will think to buy those special packs.
2. Rs. 1000 subscription is kinda waste after level 15 storage item introduced, subscription gives nothing hence people are not going for it, if gge add some more value to it then can be think about it. like giving 50k more storage to all places. 
3. Why gge doesn't have marketplace to choose the items, make a package and buy rather then forcing players to buy their packages?
4. What the use to keep discount all the time with high price tag, rather get the price down and give discount on the special occasions only.
5. GGE should think about the kids who can spend only pocket money, you can fill a pot with each drop of water. so go with good business strategy. keep the price low with low level boosters so everyone can afford the game. 

GGE business team can contact me to get more ideas about how to get money out of Players Pocket.

HAPPY GAMING

[5094521] StuartChampion (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 4:03 a.m.

I like NO Burn day as a one time thing every once in a while. It gives everyone a rest for a day.  If it were to become permanent then I'm not a fan.  You might as well forget about alliance rankings too, if it becomes permanent..  Without a way to hurt your enemy with fire then the top alliances will remain at the top and there will be no way to defeat them.  All the ruby buyers will go to the top alliance and bully the rest of us. (like they do now).

[5094537] Crom Cruach [Community Manager] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 8:34 a.m.

@Wasso (INT3) well the feedback has been read, I'll consider it now (despite it actually not being very useful) so please feel free to knock two of those items off your previously mentioned list.

I would very much appreciate some constructive criticism on this feature, at the moment there seems to be a lot of complaints and a few likes. Anyone want to help?

[5094538] bernhardt (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 8:47 a.m.

Here's the deal @Crom Cruach: Anybody who's played for an extended period of time and remembers how the game used to be, don't want fires eliminated.  You(GGE) permanently eliminate the fires, that will kill all hope that the endless event race will eventually conclude and the game will again become a game of strategy, planning and tactics. 

Currently all the game is a series of whack a moles where how well you do in any given event is based on how much you spend and the number of mindless clicks you're willing to endure.

[5094567] Philt123 (GB1) [GB1] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 11:58 a.m.

I guess what i am trying to understand is what is the point of this change?  What were you trying to achieve?  Whats the thought process behind it?

Until we know what you hope to achieve with the change  how on earth are we supposed to comment on if its sucessful or not?  For example are you trying to encourage PVP or kill it off totally ?

Pros
It will to some degree protect less frequent players from logging on to see a load of flames in their castles and having to take a week to get rid of them all, I can imagine if this is the sight you are welcomed with every time you log on you are going to get fed up of it pretty quickly.

It prevents trolls & Shells sending sabs to set fires just to annoy real players.

Cons
It wont stop trolls and shells being a pain, as they can still tool clean etc.

It takes away yet another reason to defend your castle if its attacked, stick a loot reducing cast on remove all troops, and basically ignore the fact there was ever an incoming as you lose nothing.

It takes away the strategic element of war in that one of the stratergies was to reduce your enemies ability to hold troops by setting fires, stealing rv's etc.  You have pretty much already killed this element of the game already with the advent of Prv's and food items that give fixed amounts of food no matter what etc.  So in reality it doesnt make huge a huge difference at this point.

Most servers have developed their own rules to some degree try and protect players from being bullied from the game, and most reasonable players accept this is not a good thing to happen so try not to too agrssive towards the same player all the time.

If you want to encourage PVP in the game you are going to have to understand why PVP has died off in the first place.  And take steps to address that.

1) One of the key elements of the game was (and still is) achieving a high glory ranking, when PVP ruled it was the only way to achieve glory,  there were no NPC targets that gave glory, so players had to engage in PVP to participate in this key element of the game.  When you brought in NPC targets that gave off Glory, you pretty much killed of PVP stone dead, simply because hitting an NPC for glory was much much easier, there was no risk, you know the setup you were going to face you knew how many defenders were going to be there, you basically knew the result before you sent the attack.  And the NPC wasnt going to retaliate at 3am when they logged on!!  So why on earth is anyone going to send a PVP attack for glory when they are going to probably gain a lot less glory, lose a lot more troops, risk annoying the player they hit and get attacked back.  When they can achieve a lot more for a lot less by hitting an NPC.

2)  When PVP ruled there was a lot, less events, Nomads was once every few months or so, berrimond every few months, then TK, BC on rotation every month.  But basically PVP was the game at that point.

3) When Pvp ruled there were many many less troops in the game, armies were capped at approx 1200 troops, the ability to hold troops was tiny compared to today.  Basically if you could get a good attack in with no support (including self support) there was a good chance you would beat your opponant.  So firstly it was worth sending a PVP attack out as there was a realistic chance that you could actually win. Now in the game food production is so high 100,000+ per hour food production is a very real possibility and the holding of  50,000 + defenders per castle is an increasing reality add into the mix relic bakeries and that could get a whole lot more..  Basically meaning even if you catch your opponent offline, even if you manage to get there with no support you have literally zero chance of gaining a win against big players.  The downside to this is that PVP attacks get pushed to a smaller and smaller pool of players, ie ones you have a chance of beating.  As the ability to hold troops increases across the board the chance of gaining anything meaningful from PVP diminshes, and the PVP that does go on is going to be directed towards the same group of weaker players which is also a very bad thing.

So to bring back PVP you have to make a number of changes to the game, Firstly you have to consider risk vs reward, hitting a real player in PVP is a risky thing you stand to lose lots of (normally premium) troops and a lot of tools (always premium) So the cost of sending out a single attack is very high. The chances of you actually gaining something of value through it is very low.  High cost vs low reward is not a good mix.  

You need to think very careful about the balance of the game attack vs defense.  and how that impacts PVP.  Its a very very fine balance. Good attacks mean a good chance of breeching the wall, good defense meaning a good chance of the wall holding.  but a real chance for players of equal strength to have a chance against each other.

You need to think about attack speeds and how to deal with attacking at distance.  The way the game has evolved over time has meant the amount of defenders in the game has increased exponentially.  There has also been significant changes to support speed, over the years with 110% support speed commanders possible,  +390% perminant support speed boost for pretty much all alliances at this point.  +100% subscription support speed.  +300% temporary support boost.
What this effectivly means is that PVP becomes pointless over about 30 clicks, or you are going to run into a brick wall of support in any decently sized alliance.  Which means one of 2 things either you are only ever gonna hit weak alliances / players.  Or you have a very very limited pool of players that are very close to you to hit.  So reducing the travel time to distant targets is a must, to open up the whole map to all players.  

You need to bring out reason to PVP again, you need to bring out a new bonus that can ONLY be gained by hitting real players, and that can never be gained though NPC's and you need to make it a very good one, one that is really worthwhile having to reflect the very high risk / cost of PVP.  (back to the risk vs reward balance again)

You need to bring out a new scoring mechanism, one that doesnt require you to win against a player, as frankly the way you have pushed troop numbers that simply isnt a reality anymore agaisnt an ever increasing number of players.  You need to make it attractive to hit stronger players not just weak ones, so the mechanism needs to take into consideration the strength of the player / cast you are hitting in the calculation not simply troops killed.  Otherwise you are going to make people target the weakest players in the game as it is right now.  You also need to make sure the scoring cannot easily be manipulated like glory can be.  Ie if you remove the cast and fill with defenders you can give the attacker HUGE glory.  So something that takes into account the rankign strength of the player, the cast strength of the player, and 

Once you are satisfied that you have a scoring mechanisn that cannot be manipulated you can then roll out individual "pvp" tourneys, and alliance "pvp" tourneys.  To supliment the new bonus.

You need to make it so players have a big incentive to defend, either that they lose points if they dont, or at the very least get some sort of penalty if they dont, or give some sort of bonus if they do.  But you need to try to get away from players removing all troops and using fire/ loot casts.  Or PVP will become OG city.  

You have clearly decided that you are not going to address multi accounting in the game, so you are going to have to accept that there ARE players in the game that have access / run accounts in almost every alliance in the game.  There are players that have 2 or more accounts in a single alliance one being used either as an account to play on rotation to gain superior bonus and or to provide defensive cover for their main account.  That there ARE players with a stash of "spare" accounts stashed for if they need them.  There are alliances out there that basically can only function by abusing these rules.  There ARE players out there abusing proxies.  

You need to accept all these things and also accept the fact if events / bonus's etc can be manipulated they will be, and you need to design the game / events / bonus in such a way you minimise the chances of it being manipulated. 

This basically means you cant make it like the beyond the horrison event where points can be collected then swapped between parties with both parties being able to gain benefit from that swap.  You cant make it like the old glory bonus where players can send a fully loaded / boosted attack at a shell account stuffed with defense, remove the cast and kill tens of thousands of troops and gain a huge bonus.  You need to think a little smarter than that.   

[5094609] EdMohrmann (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 4:21 p.m.

       I've read all the commentary and it seems to me MOST (remember, 1 more than half)  of the players won't

      see that PVP died when the multi--accounters and BOT users decided to go hog-wild with attacks,

     knowing that no matter what, they always have a fall-back (or 2 or 3 or more) position from which to

    play the game.    This 'fire-free'  day does nothing to fix any of that, so useless.

[5094611] DarkAni (BG1) [BG1] :: Jan. 13, 2020, 4:32 p.m.

That game turned into Commercial.I think that effect will be cool for the Players who cant spend a lot of cash for troops and etc,It should be balanced.U made shop for attack is okey but deffence im fully versus,So i think this effect will be cool PVP are almost dead anyway.Better add it and make some Balance between non ruby Players and ruby one

[5094673] dliu3 (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 14, 2020, 1:57 a.m.

Crom Cruach said:

@Wasso (INT3) well the feedback has been read, I'll consider it now (despite it actually not being very useful) so please feel free to knock two of those items off your previously mentioned list.

I would very much appreciate some constructive criticism on this feature, at the moment there seems to be a lot of complaints and a few likes. Anyone want to help?

I will.

What people don't like:
- The majority of attacks are sent to either kill off troops or to set back enemies by lighting fires or destroying buildings in their castle, both of which lower their food production with public order loss or just straight up there goes your food production building. With this effect, we have no way to set back enemies.
- It lets players do whatever they would like without fear of retaliation. If the effect was on for a few days I could go steal a person's monument and they wouldn't be able to punish me at all for stealing it. Now you can argue that "fair play" isn't part of official GGE rules. But if 90% of players on a server agree to play by this rule, it is pretty much part of the game at this point. Same goes for RV theft, etc. Yes, there are players who don't play by these rules. You annoy us and we burn you back. It's a war game after all.
- Some players have spent a lot of time working on making commanders that specifically do fire damage. With this effect, their time and possibly money has been wasted.
- Fire damage reduction castellans are also now a waste of time and money.
- It really is the player's responsibility to prevent fires in their castle. If I'm the CEO of a company and one of my employees screws up something on the server, is it my responsibility to get them out of the situation? No. Similarly, is it the attacker's responsibility that the defender doesn't end up with fires? No, that was your problem that you didn't put up the proper tools and defense.
- If this shows up too much, people have spent a lot of rubies investing in the fire station. What will become of a fire station when everything is fireproof? Maybe they'll start burning books like in Fahrenheit 451. Then you end up with a brainwashed, uneducated population... but also nuclear weapons!

What people like:
- It's great that you don't have to wake up to fires and troops dead. Now you only have to wake up to troops dead. If you send your troops on an overnight support to birdy, you lose 0 troops and just resources.

Suggestions:
- Make this a lot less powerful. I see that on the effect it says "reduces fire damage from sabotage and defensive defeats by 100%." Does this mean that it can be changed to, say, reduce fire damage by 20%?
- Instead of preventing fires, make them (slightly) easier to put out. Maybe something like "reduces the time needed to repair a building by 10%." Or even just "you have to wait 10% longer before you can attack the castle lord again", giving you more time to fix fires.
- Allow players to trigger this, sort of like the bird. Obviously, the bird should be more expensive because you can't be attacked, while with the "Essence of Carbon Dioxide" (no fires effect) you could still lose resources and troops.

I think the overarching thing is that GGE shouldn't be the one to help players avoid fires... rather it is your job to put up a well-tooled defense and strong castellan.

Wanted to keep this quite respectful as @Crom Cruach does have a lot to do.

[5094696] Crom Cruach [Community Manager] :: Jan. 14, 2020, 9:28 a.m.

Thank you all for the feedback, we have collated it and will deliver it to the studio in the next few days.

[5094739] Kyriakos (GB1) [GB1] :: Jan. 14, 2020, 2:10 p.m.

Osiris (GB1) said:

Whilst I understand why the target player might be pleased not to have fires to extinguish when attacked and defeated, I am a bit puzzled at what the purpose of this "fire free" day is actually supposed to be.

Unless this is something GGE are trying out with a view to implementing it permanently in the future much as it is in Beri.

I would imagine this is usually implemented in response to the plethora of Veteran Demons that have recently cropped up in the Outer Realms rewards, and it mostly used to save smaller players a lot of fires in the ensuing PvP chaos that comes with a bunch of players suddenly having access to 10,000 Vet Demons they didn't have before, and who want to spend their time hitting everyone they can to save their food.

[5095194] k1027 (NL1) [NL1] :: Jan. 16, 2020, 8:51 p.m.

[5095222] dliu3 (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 17, 2020, 3:16 a.m.

Translation (Google Translate)


Dear Lords and Ladies, We brought your feedback on the "global no burn effect" to the studio. Since the vast majority of the feedback was very negative, we decided not to use the global "no burning" effect for the foreseeable future. Thanks again for your feedback on this and all other matters.  Greetings,  Your empire team

[5095223] bernhardt (US1) [US1] :: Jan. 17, 2020, 5:29 a.m.

Awesome.  Inform one forum that serves a relatively small population base, while ignoring the forum(English) that serves the one language that is spoken by more people worldwide than any other.  Sure the German server might have more players than any other (but I have never seen an official confirmation of this) and a higher spend rate(no confirmation of this either), but ignoring the largest potential player base is just stupid.  To quote Forest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does."

[5095261] Philt123 (GB1) [GB1] :: Jan. 17, 2020, 10:15 a.m.

Of course no official posting on here, they are too busy trying to translate the document that explains to us how taking away 2600% worth of troops and equipment on top of any ruby's purchased including any ruby bonus.  

And it being replaced by up to 1000% bonus with no prime multipliers and no rubies is a good move for us players.

For example IF i spend £99 previously on a 200% prime.  I get the rubies times 1 plus the rubies x2 so 3x the base rubies, the chest bonus of circa 2600% is based on the overall ruby purchase so  2600%  x3   7800% bonus.

Vs the current offer of 600% -1000% depending on which £99 offer you choose to buy.

so 3 times the base rubies Plus 7800% bonus vs 600-1000% bonus plus zero rubies.

I cant wait for this translation. lets see if GGE try to re write the laws of maths when they do.

[5095302] dandelion1958 (GB1) [GB1] :: Jan. 17, 2020, 11:04 a.m.

was going to add my comment that fires give a level of protection while you build troops back up - as on uk server in the fairplay we don't hit burning castles - without fires you lose troops and resources and the only quick way to replace is to buy - which i won't do - so transfer from other castles and outposts in short term running feasts 18 hrs a day to replace losses !