Forum: empire-en
Board: [589] Strategy & Tactics Discussion
Topic: [345852] the end of strategy in gge
[-345852]
sir o the wise (US1) [US1]
:: Dec. 28, 2017, 9:51 p.m.
this game purports to be a strategy game, and for a very long time it was. over the last several years, however, this strategy has gradually disappeared from the game in a variety of ways.
One of the most important of these is with regards to the battle system. Many of what where once the most strategic aspects of battle have been either removed or toned down. Perhaps the best known example of this is the commander/castellan system. once, building a good commander or castellan was a tradeoff between a number of stats, where you knew you couldnt max all of them. this led to a level of long term strategy before the battle even began. with our premade event comms and casts, this disappears, and any player who really knows the game can list the best comms and casts easily, in more or less an order everyone can agree on.
Another crucial change to the battle system has been the shift in emphasis from strategy to troop stacking. years ago, battle was a clash of minds between the attacker and defender over how many flanks could be held or broken, and troop losses were heavily reliant on this clash, which formed the core of strategic play. now, with the ability for alliances to stack huge amounts of troops in courtyards, it is a fully valid strategy to fight only 1 flank, solid melee with lime bombs, which is essentially impenetrable, and stack the courtyard heavy enough to get a favorable kill rate. this has made it so that rather than strength and skill being the cornerstones of victory, speed, to reduce the amount of enemy support, has become paramount. this has changed a once complex and multidimensional battle system that made this game great into one where the keys to victory lie in two simple factors, comm/cast strength and speed. Combined with other issues, such as the heavily event based system where victory comes from persistent repetition rather than skill, this game really no longer deserves to be called a strategy game.
Im not even sure what my intent in writing this is. i guess mostly to express my deep frustration with the destruction of the game i have loved and enjoyed for years. It is my hope, although probably a futile one, that these changes can be reversed and this game revived. Anyway, if you have actually read through my monologue, congratulations, and id like to hear your thoughts.
One of the most important of these is with regards to the battle system. Many of what where once the most strategic aspects of battle have been either removed or toned down. Perhaps the best known example of this is the commander/castellan system. once, building a good commander or castellan was a tradeoff between a number of stats, where you knew you couldnt max all of them. this led to a level of long term strategy before the battle even began. with our premade event comms and casts, this disappears, and any player who really knows the game can list the best comms and casts easily, in more or less an order everyone can agree on.
Another crucial change to the battle system has been the shift in emphasis from strategy to troop stacking. years ago, battle was a clash of minds between the attacker and defender over how many flanks could be held or broken, and troop losses were heavily reliant on this clash, which formed the core of strategic play. now, with the ability for alliances to stack huge amounts of troops in courtyards, it is a fully valid strategy to fight only 1 flank, solid melee with lime bombs, which is essentially impenetrable, and stack the courtyard heavy enough to get a favorable kill rate. this has made it so that rather than strength and skill being the cornerstones of victory, speed, to reduce the amount of enemy support, has become paramount. this has changed a once complex and multidimensional battle system that made this game great into one where the keys to victory lie in two simple factors, comm/cast strength and speed. Combined with other issues, such as the heavily event based system where victory comes from persistent repetition rather than skill, this game really no longer deserves to be called a strategy game.
Im not even sure what my intent in writing this is. i guess mostly to express my deep frustration with the destruction of the game i have loved and enjoyed for years. It is my hope, although probably a futile one, that these changes can be reversed and this game revived. Anyway, if you have actually read through my monologue, congratulations, and id like to hear your thoughts.
[4891855]
benja084 (ES1) [ES1]
:: Dec. 28, 2017, 10:13 p.m.
My thoughts are... that I want to play chess with you.sir o the wise (US1) said:this game purports to be a strategy game, and for a very long time it was. over the last several years, however, this strategy has gradually disappeared from the game in a variety of ways.
One of the most important of these is with regards to the battle system. Many of what where once the most strategic aspects of battle have been either removed or toned down. Perhaps the best known example of this is the commander/castellan system. once, building a good commander or castellan was a tradeoff between a number of stats, where you knew you couldnt max all of them. this led to a level of long term strategy before the battle even began. with our premade event comms and casts, this disappears, and any player who really knows the game can list the best comms and casts easily, in more or less an order everyone can agree on.
Another crucial change to the battle system has been the shift in emphasis from strategy to troop stacking. years ago, battle was a clash of minds between the attacker and defender over how many flanks could be held or broken, and troop losses were heavily reliant on this clash, which formed the core of strategic play. now, with the ability for alliances to stack huge amounts of troops in courtyards, it is a fully valid strategy to fight only 1 flank, solid melee with lime bombs, which is essentially impenetrable, and stack the courtyard heavy enough to get a favorable kill rate. this has made it so that rather than strength and skill being the cornerstones of victory, speed, to reduce the amount of enemy support, has become paramount. this has changed a once complex and multidimensional battle system that made this game great into one where the keys to victory lie in two simple factors, comm/cast strength and speed. Combined with other issues, such as the heavily event based system where victory comes from persistent repetition rather than skill, this game really no longer deserves to be called a strategy game.
Im not even sure what my intent in writing this is. i guess mostly to express my deep frustration with the destruction of the game i have loved and enjoyed for years. It is my hope, although probably a futile one, that these changes can be reversed and this game revived. Anyway, if you have actually read through my monologue, congratulations, and id like to hear your thoughts.
It's the most accessible real strategy game available, and it's completely free.
Because if your hopes are that GGE is again what it used to be, then it's definitely a futile hope, at least by now. However, we all know that Stillfront has bought GGS, and although there aren't actual changes made in the company this far (And the sell is someting little less than stupid in my opinion) this means that they will have some more time to improve.
Now it's their decision to do or do not improve it.
But I was totally serious about the chess thing, chose a site and let's play once.
[4891880]
JYT (US1) [US1]
:: Dec. 28, 2017, 11:41 p.m.
Once I was having some major shower thoughts and realized how the seasonal competitions were both a gold idea and an absolute garbage idea.
My thought process went as follows:
Originally, the seasonals were a huge boon, as the sets introduced in them were quite powerful.They encouraged spending from smaller players and larger players who would put in work to expand and improve, to get that great new set.
But the seasonals also spoiled GGS customer base a little, as they expected (with good reason imo) to have the ability to acquire a better set each round.
The seasonals are now a bane for GGS, as each new one is expected to deliver a new, better set of equip. After all, if it doesn't, no one will put down more money to acquire it, as it is not as good. So GGS has had to release either a better all-round set, or a more PvP or PvE tailored set. Now the issue with this is quite obvious: they can't release new, better sets indefinitely without a major overhaul of the current game system.
Of course, it makes more sense for GGS to release new PvE sets in the seasonals, as events are what the seasonal is all about.
But more and more new players are joining, then quitting: not everyone can spend hours running trains or repeatedly clearing 10 crapcrows (as @Herveus (AU1) so wonderfully puts it), and many who can are woefully unprepared when they hit lvl 70. They realize how much of a tedious struggle it will be, and most have enough sense to walk away from it all.
tl;dr, seasonal competition was a great short-term fix to a failing company, but I believe that in the long run it will hurt more.
My thought process went as follows:
Originally, the seasonals were a huge boon, as the sets introduced in them were quite powerful.They encouraged spending from smaller players and larger players who would put in work to expand and improve, to get that great new set.
But the seasonals also spoiled GGS customer base a little, as they expected (with good reason imo) to have the ability to acquire a better set each round.
The seasonals are now a bane for GGS, as each new one is expected to deliver a new, better set of equip. After all, if it doesn't, no one will put down more money to acquire it, as it is not as good. So GGS has had to release either a better all-round set, or a more PvP or PvE tailored set. Now the issue with this is quite obvious: they can't release new, better sets indefinitely without a major overhaul of the current game system.
Of course, it makes more sense for GGS to release new PvE sets in the seasonals, as events are what the seasonal is all about.
But more and more new players are joining, then quitting: not everyone can spend hours running trains or repeatedly clearing 10 crapcrows (as @Herveus (AU1) so wonderfully puts it), and many who can are woefully unprepared when they hit lvl 70. They realize how much of a tedious struggle it will be, and most have enough sense to walk away from it all.
tl;dr, seasonal competition was a great short-term fix to a failing company, but I believe that in the long run it will hurt more.
[4891961]
Nebulous (US1) [US1]
:: Dec. 29, 2017, 4:10 a.m.
tl;dr : the constant introduction of re-skined events/tool/equipment is an issue, but the greatest issue is GGS mismanaging how they handle issues, customer service, and expand the game.JYT (US1) said:1) But the seasonals also spoiled GGS customer base a little, as they expected (with good reason imo) to have the ability to acquire a better set each round.
2) But more and more new players are joining, then quitting: not everyone can spend hours running trains or repeatedly clearing 10 crapcrows (as @Herveus (AU1) so wonderfully puts it), and many who can are woefully unprepared when they hit lvl 70. They realize how much of a tedious struggle it will be, and most have enough sense to walk away from it all.
I both agree and disagree with you.
1. As Sir o the wise pointed out, all equipment in the game were not sets and this created trade-offs. We had to try to get equipment to make 90/90 castellans/commanders while getting extra bonuses like wall, gate, moat protection. However the introduction of the Executioner and Radiant set changed that allowing near maxed out stats.
I speak for myself but nobody should have expected continuously better equipment each seasonal event. Personally the first earnable castellan, the Heritage of the North set, is still my go-to defense set. I understand that people wanted to have better-and-better sets but that doesn't change that GGS should have foreseen the issue with always pumping out a new set.
2. I completely agree, once people who just started get a scope of how much time and/or money it will take to reach LL800 people will ditch the game and for some reason GGS doesn't understand that. It also doesn't help GGS that they do not take care of issues in their appropriate order. Just a couple days ago they patched the bug where people got free tools from the Shapeshifters and put the double-decay of glory on hold. I personally lost a ton of glory and not I'm not willing to play Bloodcrows, ForeignLords, or other players because I'll lose all my progress in a few hours anyways.
With the income of over $16 million USD, it's amazing GGS can't hire programmers to fix issues instead of artists to cover issues.
[4892026]
EU.Street_Dog (INT2) [INT2]
:: Dec. 29, 2017, 11:05 a.m.
they just lost the control of the game .
before all players were useing 1200 solders + 60 ruby mantlets and all attacks were similar to each other and for capitals we had 25k def. all servers were fighting for capitals there weremore PVP and capital battals . all players were same 70lvl same commanders same things(only ruby players had some advantage-god commanders or casts) . max loot per a week was 10milion.
now small players are too weak. big players are extrime strong. too much loot doing big players , there are not wars as whole because no time for war (evet after event). and dameges from war are very big not like before to loose 1000 def , and as attacker the same loses are very big.
commanders and cast from event made some of players very strong even they non-ruby players, some players event ruby are not so strong like them becasue they are no active so much.
by removing skips they kill small players like a leader of allaince i cant find small players.
by giving super commanders they did some players with 21 super commanders and when a player like that attack you no way almost to def all of your castles and this is other unbalance.
by giving so much food items players has +8 000 solders everywhere , this makes 1 players more powerfull from most of alyes from my server.
i can write much more ...if someone from gge write this please listen to me - make a small castle in test server 70/10lvl and another 800 with full 21 super commanders and test them please.
thanks,
before all players were useing 1200 solders + 60 ruby mantlets and all attacks were similar to each other and for capitals we had 25k def. all servers were fighting for capitals there weremore PVP and capital battals . all players were same 70lvl same commanders same things(only ruby players had some advantage-god commanders or casts) . max loot per a week was 10milion.
now small players are too weak. big players are extrime strong. too much loot doing big players , there are not wars as whole because no time for war (evet after event). and dameges from war are very big not like before to loose 1000 def , and as attacker the same loses are very big.
commanders and cast from event made some of players very strong even they non-ruby players, some players event ruby are not so strong like them becasue they are no active so much.
by removing skips they kill small players like a leader of allaince i cant find small players.
by giving super commanders they did some players with 21 super commanders and when a player like that attack you no way almost to def all of your castles and this is other unbalance.
by giving so much food items players has +8 000 solders everywhere , this makes 1 players more powerfull from most of alyes from my server.
i can write much more ...if someone from gge write this please listen to me - make a small castle in test server 70/10lvl and another 800 with full 21 super commanders and test them please.
thanks,
[4892047]
Watt38 (PT1) [PT1]
:: Dec. 29, 2017, 12:53 p.m.
I´m a level 30, but I know the game since 2015, and in the last month I decided to play GGE again, but, I got quickly bored. Here's the main problems:
- No new good events. When GGS makes a new event it's either trash (Shapeshifters) or it gets removed (Royal Capital)
- The "Big 4" (Nomads, Samurais, Foreigners and Bloodcrows) appear every time non-stop, witheout pauses between them. This makes players NOT wanting to do PvP, since they'll be focoused on the events.
- We're given too much soldiers. I mean, how does GGS expect a low level to hold -8k food? Not everyone can have a pre-built OP. This also almost makes attacks from low levels impossible to defend, since we're given ALOT of attack soldiers, but we barely get defense ones.
- And to end this rant, I also believe that PvP could be encoraged away more. Bring back the glory events WITHEOUT foreigners and bloodcrows, I believe that will make people want to do more PvP.
[4892171]
flug (NL1) [NL1]
:: Dec. 29, 2017, 6:09 p.m.
it's simple, players don't want to play a game the hard way, only the easy way . don't 'build' your comm. the comm has to be given to yousir o the wise (US1) said:this game purports to be a strategy game, and for a very long time it was. over the last several years, however, this strategy has gradually disappeared from the game in a variety of ways.
One of the most important of these is with regards to the battle system. Many of what where once the most strategic aspects of battle have been either removed or toned down. Perhaps the best known example of this is the commander/castellan system. once, building a good commander or castellan was a tradeoff between a number of stats, where you knew you couldnt max all of them. this led to a level of long term strategy before the battle even began. with our premade event comms and casts, this disappears, and any player who really knows the game can list the best comms and casts easily, in more or less an order everyone can agree on.
Another crucial change to the battle system has been the shift in emphasis from strategy to troop stacking. years ago, battle was a clash of minds between the attacker and defender over how many flanks could be held or broken, and troop losses were heavily reliant on this clash, which formed the core of strategic play. now, with the ability for alliances to stack huge amounts of troops in courtyards, it is a fully valid strategy to fight only 1 flank, solid melee with lime bombs, which is essentially impenetrable, and stack the courtyard heavy enough to get a favorable kill rate. this has made it so that rather than strength and skill being the cornerstones of victory, speed, to reduce the amount of enemy support, has become paramount. this has changed a once complex and multidimensional battle system that made this game great into one where the keys to victory lie in two simple factors, comm/cast strength and speed. Combined with other issues, such as the heavily event based system where victory comes from persistent repetition rather than skill, this game really no longer deserves to be called a strategy game.
Im not even sure what my intent in writing this is. i guess mostly to express my deep frustration with the destruction of the game i have loved and enjoyed for years. It is my hope, although probably a futile one, that these changes can be reversed and this game revived. Anyway, if you have actually read through my monologue, congratulations, and id like to hear your thoughts.
[4892342]
bernhardt (US1) [US1]
:: Dec. 30, 2017, 1:22 a.m.
Good luck 'building' a commander or castellan these days. They don't run thorn/blade/underworld anymore - where people who are unfortunate enough to get to lvl 70 without any decent equipment can actually remedy that situation with some work. I'm surprised at the number of people who do reach lvl 70 without any decent equipment - all these LTPE not withstanding. As a lvl 70 hitting sams/nomads with something like 50/50 commander is going to take a long while to get enough tokens/tablets due to troop loss. Apparently GGE has noticed the number of new lvl 70 with garbage for equipment as the below lvl 50 lpte commander set is 90/90 out of the box without any upgrades. This set will have some unintended effects I'm sure.
As for strategy and bringing it back in attacking other players, perhaps some form of limit on the number of defensive support troops that participate in a battle might be an answer. There is after all a limit on how many troops you can attack with. Not only that, but once the attackers arrive, they're committed to instantly attacking - they don't have the option of laying a castle to siege and starving the defenders out like in real life(which happened more often than not). Right now as Sir o the wise said, the only hope is speed.
As for strategy and bringing it back in attacking other players, perhaps some form of limit on the number of defensive support troops that participate in a battle might be an answer. There is after all a limit on how many troops you can attack with. Not only that, but once the attackers arrive, they're committed to instantly attacking - they don't have the option of laying a castle to siege and starving the defenders out like in real life(which happened more often than not). Right now as Sir o the wise said, the only hope is speed.
[4900785]
DK Banana (GB1) [GB1]
:: Jan. 17, 2018, 9:27 p.m.
For defence there is one element of strategy left, just one. Sure you have 550 on the flank with nails/bombs, which makes it impenetrable to 6 waves.
So in comes the attack. Attacker of course has to put melee somewhere for the courtyard - obvious place is the front, since no one is stupid enough to defend front.
Quick defence switch to front, take out attack (likely 2 waves of ranged and 4 of melee) at low cost, with just flank troops to deal with in courtyard.
Of course if you are offline, then you depend on other allinace members pushing a few thousand into the courtyard.
Otherwise there is little strategy left, and some 9myself included) are looking for another game to emigrate to.
As for level 70 being hard, the first 100 or so legendary levels have been compared to treacle. Slow, sticky. Lots leave, both those who have no clue and learned nothing to level 70 and those who did.
The answer is not to make level 70 easier, but to increase the challenge of the previous levels, so that players are better prepared and get there slower.
I think the game will slowly die off. Profits are up, but it looks like the number of active players is down. In any business that should ring alarm bells.
So in comes the attack. Attacker of course has to put melee somewhere for the courtyard - obvious place is the front, since no one is stupid enough to defend front.
Quick defence switch to front, take out attack (likely 2 waves of ranged and 4 of melee) at low cost, with just flank troops to deal with in courtyard.
Of course if you are offline, then you depend on other allinace members pushing a few thousand into the courtyard.
Otherwise there is little strategy left, and some 9myself included) are looking for another game to emigrate to.
As for level 70 being hard, the first 100 or so legendary levels have been compared to treacle. Slow, sticky. Lots leave, both those who have no clue and learned nothing to level 70 and those who did.
The answer is not to make level 70 easier, but to increase the challenge of the previous levels, so that players are better prepared and get there slower.
I think the game will slowly die off. Profits are up, but it looks like the number of active players is down. In any business that should ring alarm bells.