DeletedUser
Guest
Please leave any feedback on our update here in this thread.
You can find the details here.
You can find the details here.
-
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 in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
DeletedUser9666
Guest
Let me summarize it for everybody:
1. Out of the flood of ideas in various forums, InnoGames addressed 14.
2. If I count correctly, out of 14 addressed, InnoGames rejected 12, agreed with 1 because they were thinking about doing it anyway, and accepted one new idea - negotiation attrition.
I might be wrong but it looks to me like InnoGames is just going to stick to the idea they had in mind from the beginning. Like they always do...
Edit: Originally, I wrote here something really harsh about old dog and learning new tricks but I decided to reconsider...
Let me put it this way - I do not get the sense that InnoGames put enough effort into considering ways to implement some truly brilliant ideas. That's all.
1. Out of the flood of ideas in various forums, InnoGames addressed 14.
2. If I count correctly, out of 14 addressed, InnoGames rejected 12, agreed with 1 because they were thinking about doing it anyway, and accepted one new idea - negotiation attrition.
I might be wrong but it looks to me like InnoGames is just going to stick to the idea they had in mind from the beginning. Like they always do...
Edit: Originally, I wrote here something really harsh about old dog and learning new tricks but I decided to reconsider...
Let me put it this way - I do not get the sense that InnoGames put enough effort into considering ways to implement some truly brilliant ideas. That's all.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser10091
Guest
Agree with this. It does seem that they are reluctant to take on much feedback from players, even though they ask for it.
I'm not sure what you wrote before the edit but it sounds like along the same lines as what I was thinking.
Let's be clear, this is not a unique or original feature by any means as it's already present in numerous other games (it's a popular feature of MMOs). i take no issue with them taking inspiration from other games, certainly not something that is fun to play and works well in those games, and of course they will want to put their own spin on it, but that might not always be for the best...
I think the biggest problem with this proposed feature is that in the attempt to cater for vastly different play styles and keep things balanced they end up adding yet another negotiation option (e.g. luck not skill based) and essentially put hard limits on the gameplay. This is really disappointing and makes it feel like yet another grind feature and they have sucked a lot of potential fun out of it by going down this route. Also, the lack of any actual direct battles with opponents will certainly make it less exciting to play than GvG.
in other games the maps are in a constant state of flux as there are no limits on the amount you can fight (only how much time you want to invest). It's a hard job already trying to get a whole guild to complete GE each week and battlegrounds will not be fundamentally different if Inno build it like they proposed.
qaccy
Emperor
@TwoRivers I think you might be expecting too much regarding the playerbase being allowed to design game features if you're going to gloss over Inno responding to and even working a player suggestion into these battlegrounds. I think that's pretty remarkable considering we can't even play with them yet, and thus can only speculate about what an 'improvement' or 'good idea' would even look like. This is why I can't personally provide much feedback of my own, since until I'm able to play with the feature, there isn't really much to comment on.
Tigertjheu
Squire
About the 5th rejected item, i do not understand it, i can't find the correct meaning of attrition, different translators, different outcome's...
And that point is for me very interesting. Cause i'm really worried that it's gonna be a little bit similar tot GvG, and the guild has to be online 24/7.
So who can help me out to find the correct meaning of attrition?
Or can explain me what they are really saying? It's rejected that you have to worry? I don't get it...
"There's a worry that you will have to be online 24/7 to protect provinces, etc
Players actions are soft-capped via attrition, once that cap is reached then you cannot perform anymore actions, on that day, without significant cost in units or goods, therefore there's no reason to "watch" the battlegrounds anymore. It's also performance over a battleground period that counts, not the actions of a single day.
"
And that point is for me very interesting. Cause i'm really worried that it's gonna be a little bit similar tot GvG, and the guild has to be online 24/7.
So who can help me out to find the correct meaning of attrition?
Or can explain me what they are really saying? It's rejected that you have to worry? I don't get it...
"There's a worry that you will have to be online 24/7 to protect provinces, etc
Players actions are soft-capped via attrition, once that cap is reached then you cannot perform anymore actions, on that day, without significant cost in units or goods, therefore there's no reason to "watch" the battlegrounds anymore. It's also performance over a battleground period that counts, not the actions of a single day.
"
DeletedUser8743
Guest
The original announcement explained nutrition from a fighting standpoint. Now they wisely decided to implement negotiation attrition too. Attrition should mean top players will be able to do more but they shouldn't utterly dominate.
https://forum.beta.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/guild-battlegrounds.10399/
DeletedUser8743
Guest
I think INNO chose wisely. Don't have any issues with the ones they decided to reject or defer. No reason to waste time addressing problems that may well never occur. No reason to add complications that don't add much value.
DeletedUser8351
Guest
Do we have the date of the beginning or not yet? I have not seen it noted
Mr.Quib
Squire
In this case: "the action or process of gradually reducing the strength or effectiveness of someone or something through sustained attack or pressure."
In other words, with every fight / negotiation you win, the next one will become harder.
DeletedUser
Guest
Please read again.
How could there be a date when they did not even start developing?
smh.
DeletedUser8362
Guest
As long as it doesn't end up like GvG where the strongest guilds tend to group together and it becomes just a dull exercise of watching RR on all the strategic hexes at reset...
Make sure the reward/s are enticing enough to finally encourage them to fight against each other... enough of the fluffy bunny alliances between giants... it's boring...
Make sure the reward/s are enticing enough to finally encourage them to fight against each other... enough of the fluffy bunny alliances between giants... it's boring...
Logain Sedai
Baronet
They say it should be at the end of the year on the beta. This is only a prediction since they are only starting the development.
And (before you ask
), they also said that it would take a longer time to test it on the Beta before implementing it on the live servers.
FrejaSP
Viceroy
This I don't like. I did look forward to fight against guilds in different size. It's not fun always to be up against the same guilds of same size as your own, I wish to learn what other guilds, who are powerful in GBG. Guilds of same strength is great but not always of same size.
Yes I know, it can be harder for a large guild but it is also hard for small guilds, as they have hard getting more members if only other small guilds know them
Hiep Lin
Viceroy
"Random goods for buildings could be a problem for many guilds.
We believe that as costs are randomized there will always be something that guilds can build; having looked at guild inventories, we've seen that a lot of guilds have a lot of goods from a lot of eras so we're not anticipating this to be a problem. It should also help bring relevance to the goods of lower level eras for higher level users."
I concluded that the developers want to further incite the construction of The Arc from the beginning of the game because it will be the consequence.
All guilds will ask their players very quickly, to ensure the necessary cash.
-----------> Absolute horror!
We believe that as costs are randomized there will always be something that guilds can build; having looked at guild inventories, we've seen that a lot of guilds have a lot of goods from a lot of eras so we're not anticipating this to be a problem. It should also help bring relevance to the goods of lower level eras for higher level users."
I concluded that the developers want to further incite the construction of The Arc from the beginning of the game because it will be the consequence.
All guilds will ask their players very quickly, to ensure the necessary cash.
-----------> Absolute horror!
DeletedUser9191
Guest
Like at GE, we need to know which members of our guild are effectively participating in GbG and how much effort they are making.
They're saying it's by strength - so you will fight some larger but less active guilds. They're talking about results-based leagues - so the top 10 or 20 guilds (in strength, via winning regularly) will be in the top league in a few months and the only way you'll face them is by winning enough rounds to get up there. A strong active small guild will probably be able to reach the next league or so down I imagine and fighting a variety of other active small guilds and some not-so-active large guilds.
In theory you'd always be striving to promote to a higher league and tougher competition the next week - but at some point you'd likely hit the wall where to go further you need more active members. It's not like they're talking about doing GE championship style sorting where 5 player guilds only ever see other < 10 player guilds.
LastWarrior
Regent
looking good, we are looking forward to it, I will cease the bugged GvG when this arrives thx