Feedback Guild Expedition Update

[MooingCat]

I like that GE5 is challenging, but I think it might be a bit too hard for younger cities. In the Space Ages you have the colony to produce a lot of goods, and it shouldn't take too long or too much space to get enough defense boosts to fight at least half of GE5. The scaling in the last couple of encounters might be a bit too high, but it's manageable. It will be tougher in the couple of ages before that, but I think it should still be possible to do. But in the lower ages, with smaller cities, I think 1k+ attack boost enemies or 10k goods to negotiate the entire thing is too much to ask for.

I think the enemy attack boosts could be lowered a bit more in the lower ages, but I think the main thing I would introduce is scaling goods costs based on age. I don't think it's fair to ask the same of HMA and SAJM players, the ability to produce goods in these ages is so different.

 

[MooingCat]

Right now the Fortifications are very underwhelming. The only one that feels worth getting right now is the -1 option fortification.

I feel like for the most part the attack boosts are either too little, or not required at all, I'm not sure if there's a big middle ground where they're actually needed. Because I don't have high enough boosts on beta to fight (except the 1st encounter) that might not be accurate, but that's my current impression. The infiltration option is probably decent, but haven't been able to test it.

The fortification for cost reduction is just bad in it's current state. I've made a table below to break down why:

Encounter	Cost	Reduction	Uses Required for Breakeven
2	50	2	25
3	60	2	30
4	150	2	75
6	80	2	40
7	90	3	30
8	190	3	63.33
10	110	4	27.5
11	120	4	30
12	240	5	48
14	140	6	23.33
15	150	7	21.4
16	280	8	35

I negotiated all but the first encounter in GE5 today, the average number of uses I would get out of the fortification was 16.2 times, highest 21. So I would have lost goods for all encounters if I bought this fortification. The only reason to get this fortification is if you do multiple attempts at an encounter, but you don't know up front if you'll win or not, and even then it's not always worth it for 2 attempts. And realistically, I think most people would spend some diamonds for additional attempts instead of starting over, considering the goods costs.

 

[Hildebrandt]

At this bull**** I will not take part

 

[xivarmy]

I think the enemy attack boosts could be lowered a bit more in the lower ages, but I think the main thing I would introduce is scaling goods costs based on age. I don't think it's fair to ask the same of HMA and SAJM players, the ability to produce goods in these ages is so different.

I don't think it's a bad thing that "this would be easier in a higher age" is a feature. Sometimes the game loses track of the notion that we should *want* to advance our cities.

Perhaps some amount of scaling could be implemented that maintains that - but not to the extent that it's desirable to camp lower ages rather than have the cost go up. Most complicating in this is the dominant nature of CF - which is often much easier to exploit in lower ages.

But if it was 5k goods a week in iron age instead of 10k I don't think that'd be the end of the world. It might still seem like too much, but if someone feels so and that they could do better with more space, then age up already!

 

[Fenix]

Just a silly question. Why do you persist in trying to make players lose resources/diamonds without the slightest possibility of making any profit, or having anything that promotes their evolution? Players are not stupid or ignorant, they don't want to sacrifice themselves for anything. Yet another innovation doomed to complete failure.

 

[drakenridder]

The more I think about it, the more I start to feel that this is some kind of marketing trick.

Come up with something outrageous / shocking, make the community boil over it in the forums, discord, whatever and then come and slash those ridiculous army stats in half or even more and paint yourself as a game developer who actually listens to his community.

I'm afraid you're right. There seems to be no rational reason to assume or even estimate for players to have sufficient buffs to beating such ridiculously buffed foes. Even if they would very significantly buffing defence GB's accordingly to new "standards" of defence buff efficiency. It's probably just for the best to put GE5 and GbF rebalances to the side and simple focus on what actually maters in the mean time. Spoilers, it ain't def. buffs at all.
With no one coming forth with actual concepts of city configurations to making 2,5k% def. buffed armies plausible beatable, other than just filling up the city with phantom towers, praying for Virgo+Kraken+AO to save the day in a perfect streak, I consider the claims to be speculative myths. Closer to trolling than actually seriously well thought arguments. Wake me up when actual doable concepts surface. The negotiations seems to be okay-ish balanced but fighting seems not to be the case at all. For sure this is just what Astrid described and nothing to be taken seriously in its current state.

 

[Jubilee]

I got to say good thinking 99, I like that you have made having City defence valid in GE. Bravo. Good move. I have not fully developed my City defence but not neglected it either I do have some. Looking forward to trying it out. Good we have some Special Buildings that would Aid us in Level 5. So my Beta is not as advanced as my other worlds cities, I can manage to get through level 4 in those. It will be a challenge in beta to just get through to level 5, will do what i can & at least do as many as I can in Lvl 5. Ho ho... a challenge indeed.

 

[Emberguard]

do Virgo and Kraken work in level 5 ?

they should

Virgo says first 3 battles and not: when you attack
View attachment 9138

Kraken battles too
View attachment 9139

I had not even considered that, but suddenly Virgo got a whole lot more interesting beyond just for fun.

 

[Dessire]

A better solution, please read:

- blue potions which gives you +50% of defense should give you 50% of your total defensive attack and defense. If you have 500% of defensive attack and defense, then this blue potion increases that number to 750%.

- Drink another one: it increases the number from 750% to 1125%

- The limit is up to 3 times. Drink another one: The number increases from 1125% to 1688%

- Activate the defensive bonus of the tabern, the 30% one. The number is increases from 1688% to 2192%

With this change, Innogames will finally give a better use to blue potions, a better use to the defensie bonus of the tabern and you will not need a lot of defensive buildings in the city.

You only need 500% + 3 blue potions + tabern bonus to have 2192%!!!
And if Innogames add to any of the new buildings production something like: 25% of chance to get 1 50% blue potions, you eventually will have enough to weekly do the level 5.

Innogames, please, do this change instead of decrease the % of attack and defende power of enemies.

I want a challenge, no free stuffs for an easy lvl 5 :/

Still thinking this is a good solution.

 

[Goldra]

During the last years, the game has focused on attack. At the beggining, fp was the key to grow up, but with the Guid Battleground, you made players focus their cities in full attack to make more battles. The explanation is simple, the more battles you do, the more prices and ranking points you take.
With this, it seems that you try to change again the course of city development to a full defense cities, giving us very good buildings. But GB continues giving better prices, so that change wont be done. As you do that new expedition level, we cant battle hard in GB and do 5th GE. We must choose one option, and GB wins. And why i say this? Because there are 4 types of city development:
- Fp cities. Just for level up GB, but it arrives a moment, that this become to expensive for the results it give. Can make a lot of battles in GB, but imposible to do 5th GE defending. And negotiations are to expensive for them.
- Goods cities. Their growing are the slowest, but they can do the 5th GE if they produce more than 10k goods/week. If they do 5th GE, they cant negotiate too much in GB.
- Attack cities. Faster growing. Lots of battles in GB, but not enough production of goods to make 5th GE every week, and obviosuly, not enough defense.
- Defense cities. Slow growing. But the ones that can defeat every week the 5th GE.

The other important thing, is that, no matter what you choose for your city, you can do everything; efficience will depend of your city. But with this 5th GE, this has broken. Its imposible to complete expedition every week for most of us. It needs a rebalance.

 

[Nessie]

Still thinking this is a good solution.

The account "Dessire" is always activated by support when positive feedback is commented on absolutely unacceptable decisions made by the devs. Dessire: guild nothing, points 2114, won battles 4. For me a hint that InnoGames manipulates the posts in the forum. I probably will get banned for my opinion for a week or forever lol

 

[Balinor]

The account "Dessire" is always activated by support when positive feedback is commented on absolutely unacceptable decisions made by the devs. Dessire: guild nothing, points 2114, won battles 4. For me a hint that InnoGames manipulates the posts in the forum.

your joking right
Talk about delusional

 

[Emberguard]

I don't see why people are complaining about the difficulty it's supposed to be harder than level 4 as level 4 is already hard until you advance far enough into the game, however, I do think the rewards aren't that good as of now except for the Forgotten Temple. I don't know maybe the portraits will get replaced with diamonds but for now not so good.

Some amount of critique of the difficulty is warranted - not because we can't do it *now* - that's fine - but whether we view it as a challenge that's reasonably desirable to approach over time.

i.e. I could throw together a theoretical layout for a SAJM city that can handle GBG by fighting as-is, without consumables or fortifications. I'm not sure how many years it'd take me to get there, and I consider it worse than the alternative of negotiating. But "it's impossible!!!?!" doesn't fly - we have more than enough power to divert some of our city to defense and still be perfectly serviceable in other regards (I have a SAJM city that uses a bit under half its space on wells/fountains and autos GE4 fine ; and a plan to make another that uses a bit *over* half its space on wells/fountains - using that space on watchfires and tactician towers instead of wells would be enough).

The issue is that I wouldn't even *consider* building that as-is. It would take *far* less sacrifice (quite possibly none because a lot of good attack event buildings also give nice amounts of goods) to make a city capable of negotiating the whole thing. The only "no-sacrifices-made" layout right now for fighting it is tiled phantom towers I think

Let’s put it this way, new player comes along. How quickly can you set them up to be self sufficient on negotiating?

Lvl 4 I can give a player the goods for the first week and by the time they run out they’re probably getting somewhere close to being self sufficient if they’re stuffing as many goods buildings as they can into the city. Maybe they’d still need another week or two but they’d have an idea of what it takes to beat Lvl 4. Because the rewards are full rewards the player can use what they already got in Lvl 4 to build up their city further.

Lvl 5? I’m not even confident on whether or not my 3-year old city could sustain it for myself. I’m excited for a challenge but it’s more of a maybe at best on whether I could reasonably sustain it (Arctic Future) and avoid using goods in anything outside of Lvl 5. A new player wouldn’t stand a chance, and there’s no point in giving them the goods as a once off given they wouldn’t receive anything usable for completing Lvl 5 if it’s just a bunch of fragments

 

[bornempire]

Just finished GE80. City at end of tech Space Age Jupiter Moon. Last Expedition costs 78 goods. PER TYPE. For only 1 neg. So that's about 400 goods for one round. Had to do 4 negs. So that last one costed: about 1600 goods. GE 72 costed 58 goods per type, So that's about 300 goods for one neg round, Another 1200 goods gone. The minimum of one level is about 40 goods, so 200 per level. times 4 negs is 800 goods.

Yes, officialy you can also fight, 'using your defense bonus'. Well nobody was prepared for that. I have a St. Basil at level 70 and TA at level 100. No chance at all to win from attacking army of the GE army with double my bonus, So that's no option.

All in all finishing level five will cost you every week 15 thousand goods and costing diamonds when you choose to still finish it with negotiations. But wait is that the max of goods? No: in previous levels, if the costs were too high and you didn't want to spent extra diamonds, you could still 'give up' and start again. But now? Really? Starting again on spending 200-400 goods for one attempt with minimum 3 more rounds to go? Wow.

No neg of level V was finished in less then 4 negs and on some I had to take a fifth neg, so costed diamonds. Not any reward gave diamonds, so taking this level in Space Age Jupiter Moon will cost you minimum 10 thousand goods for the whole level. For what? Some ritual flames? From the new introduced buildings you only get a handful of 'fragments' while they all need like 200 fragments for one complete set.

Then the 'highest' reward of level V is a 'hidden temple'. Which takes many season to get it. And then will only produce it's rewards for less then a month. Very unclear what that 'FP bonus' includes. Does that include a bonus on daily FP collection of your GB?

Summarizing: GE level V is a cash burner on diamonds and out of reach for most of the very high end players who didn't take care for their goods producing Great Buildings.

Today I raced through the levels to get a good impression. The medal costs increased at insane rates. I took a hold today after I noticed one attempt costed 2 million medals. Then I waited 8 hours and for the GE79 and 78 I had to spent 5 and 6 million medals. So not a sustainable amount. A RACE between guilds to finish in a few days to win a weekly challenge between guilds will be out of reach for most top guilds. And for sure for all other guilds.

Much less 'free attempts' today. And the rewards from incidents on level V are not higher then on any other level.

I have in stockpile 111 one up kits and 51 renokits since the last new era was introduced. And not any sight the new era will be introduced soon, So I can sell the Temple of Relics? Or the Flying Island? For what in return?

GvG has still low attendace because the rewards are too low for most players. The conclusion of today: for GE level V it is the same.

The second 'big failure' after the introduction of the max cap on attrition of 66% last year, which is still not launched on the other servers.

If the whole team cannot reach guild level V this GE will cause troubles in guilds, cause you can't reach the finish as a team.

No thank you,

regards, bornempire
founder Arctic Sunrise

 

[Sir Lancelot the Avenger]

I will not be playing Level 5 here or on live server. I have cities built on attack for GVG, GBG, PVP and GE (1-4). WHY should I decrease my attack so I can play this one level and hurt the rest of my play? Not worth it to me. This is a bust! Most of the players in my guild on live server have said "not interested".
Maybe they should have spent the time in coming out with Titan!

 

[DEADP00L]

I like that lvl 5 is harder than lvl 4, but again Inno seems totally out of touch with his game.
In ALL guilds only a minority of members will be able to finish level 5 each week, while opening it is very expensive. This will generate tension within a guild regarding the squandering of treasury.
The gains are not commensurate with the difficulty. This may appeal to some of the new avatars, but not to all, and what will they be replaced with when we get them all? There are not even 52 offered...
On all my worlds, my guilds achieve 133.3 every week and it is already rare, very rare, that the second ones are also at 133.3. So what would be the interest of my guilds to open the level 5?
In addition to whether you win or lose in the guild championship, there is no impact on the gains or losses of a guild.
In short, for all these reasons, you wasted a lot of time trying to offer us something new that will be abandoned even more quickly than the arena.
I'm going to repeat myself, but instead of always wanting to invent new things that are never appreciated by the communities, wouldn't it be more productive to improve or correct some old things that already exist?
When will it be possible to convert millions of gold coins into FP in a single operation?
When will the correction of the bug in GbG of the flags which remain even when the guild is no longer adjacent?
When will the change in the calculations of the rankings where the GvG penalizes players on the phone?
When will a team be REALLY attentive to its community?
We don't have the best solution for every problem, but it's good to see that we know the game better than you do. Learn to take into account our feedback and our ideas instead of making a list of suggestions not to offer while never implementing those that come to you.
I'm surprised to see that you don't even consider that some of your competitors are playing here and note all the players' expectations to soon offer us a similar game that will meet our expectations.
I really can't understand how Inno can still be so profitable with your attitude.

 

[Sir Lancelot the Avenger]

The old saying, "build it and they will come", does not apply here, lol

 

[Zuckerberg the Horrid]

During the last years, the game has focused on attack. At the beggining, fp was the key to grow up, but with the Guid Battleground, you made players focus their cities in full attack to make more battles. The explanation is simple, the more battles you do, the more prices and ranking points you take.
With this, it seems that you try to change again the course of city development to a full defense cities, giving us very good buildings. But GB continues giving better prices, so that change wont be done. As you do that new expedition level, we cant battle hard in GB and do 5th GE. We must choose one option, and GB wins. And why i say this? Because there are 4 types of city development:
- Fp cities. Just for level up GB, but it arrives a moment, that this become to expensive for the results it give. Can make a lot of battles in GB, but imposible to do 5th GE defending. And negotiations are to expensive for them.
- Goods cities. Their growing are the slowest, but they can do the 5th GE if they produce more than 10k goods/week. If they do 5th GE, they cant negotiate too much in GB.
- Attack cities. Faster growing. Lots of battles in GB, but not enough production of goods to make 5th GE every week, and obviosuly, not enough defense.
- Defense cities. Slow growing. But the ones that can defeat every week the 5th GE.

The other important thing, is that, no matter what you choose for your city, you can do everything; efficience will depend of your city. But with this 5th GE, this has broken. Its imposible to complete expedition every week for most of us. It needs a rebalance.

sounds like a good solution for the "GE focused" guilds that can't get many encounters when they're stuck in diamond league every 2nd season due to the top two guilds swapping with each other. Now they can focus on completing GE5 and get some more trophies.

GE focused guilds far outnumber the GBG focused ones.

 

[doughster]

More fragments!!! AND we need to use city defense/attack or negotiate! HA! The final straw to prompt my exit from the game, eh Innogames.

 

[UBERhelp1]

I think it would be cool if there was a guild payment you could make for an overall fortification or something, that could only be built once a season where it's either defense % or negotiation related. Even though it's a guild feature, GE has always been a little bit of an individual thing.