• 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.

Discussion Inno's strategy vs actual FoE revenues

Big boss said:
I think making GbG cross world (like GEX) will be better (but I don't want see fight with only my guilds all same names)
Click to expand...
WRONG! It won't make it better, it will have the same mis-match mis-hap like the in server GBg where the uber-powerful guilds will rule at the top, and all others will quit. And those guilds at the top will be bored to be facing the same opponents or having dead maps that won't go anywhere.

Cross-world in GE was different because it relied on everyone to complete said encounters first in order to be at the top... until to the point that no one really thinks it mattered anymore as getting 25% more guild power at a toddler's allowance isn't appealing.
 
Thunderdome said:
WRONG! It won't make it better, it will have the same mis-match mis-hap like the in server GBg where the uber-powerful guilds will rule at the top, and all others will quit. And those guilds at the top will be bored to be facing the same opponents or having dead maps that won't go anywhere.

Cross-world in GE was different because it relied on everyone to complete said encounters first in order to be at the top... until to the point that no one really thinks it mattered anymore as getting 25% more guild power at a toddler's allowance isn't appealing.
Click to expand...
Exactly, there is no competetive goal in the game any more, only like mentioned plenty of times for the top 2 Guilds(ok, sometimes top20).
The way its evolving, is back from competetivness more towards single player experience.
In GbG all guilds could be 1. Place each and every round, just dont score at all. But then alot of diamonds will be missing.
The mistake in GbG was to think its a competetive mode. Instead of collaberation in flipping provinces, we should have fixed it so all active guilds finish with exactly the same Vicotorypoints.
But something in us wants to create a competetive side so hard, even if the game would gift all 8 guild the first place reward, we do not tolerate it since we want to stand out and dont see everyone as equal.
 
knarre sbeat said:
Exactly, there is no competetive goal in the game any more, only like mentioned plenty of times for the top 2 Guilds(ok, sometimes top20).
The way its evolving, is back from competetivness more towards single player experience.
In GbG all guilds could be 1. Place each and every round, just dont score at all. But then alot of diamonds will be missing.
The mistake in GbG was to think its a competetive mode. Instead of collaberation in flipping provinces, we should have fixed it so all active guilds finish with exactly the same Vicotorypoints.
But something in us wants to create a competetive side so hard, even if the game would gift all 8 guild the first place reward, we do not tolerate it since we want to stand out and dont see everyone as equal.
Click to expand...
It wont work. Unless you also do the minimum progress to qualify for rewards.
That is only 40 encounters, but still a guild that doesn't get no rewards even if they are "first" with everyone else.
 
Fury the Avenger said:
It wont work. Unless you also do the minimum progress to qualify for rewards.
That is only 40 encounters, but still a guild that doesn't get no rewards even if they are "first" with everyone else.
Click to expand...
Yes the minimum would indeed be 1 fight before taking over the province. Bulletproof
But the maximum is up to reasearch. Becouse everyone could also have 200155 Points at the end, not only possible with 0. Nearly guaranteed going to fail.
 
In the cases of tie numbers, I think the first guild that gets the VP will take 1st while as the second guild that gets the same amount of VP as 1st will take in 2nd thus all guilds placing 1st with the same VP made will be impossible.
 
Thunderdome said:
In the cases of tie numbers, I think the first guild that gets the VP will take 1st while as the second guild that gets the same amount of VP as 1st will take in 2nd thus all guilds placing 1st with the same VP made will be impossible.
Click to expand...
You might be able to keep the same ranking IF you get the points at the same rate.

This is pretty difficulty because the vp/hour need to be the same at the hour for every hour of the whole session.
It might not work if the calculation is done in sequence so there is an actual time stamp difference.
 
Fury the Avenger said:
You might be able to keep the same ranking IF you get the points at the same rate.

This is pretty difficulty because the vp/hour need to be the same at the hour for every hour of the whole session.
It might not work if the calculation is done in sequence so there is an actual time stamp difference.
Click to expand...
The latter in your statement is exactly why a tie in placement is impossible. Also, I think a guild will have to get the same sectors giving out the same VP as well as building camps to bring in the same VP. The only way I can probably see (if they didn't have time stamping as part of the process) is that all guilds getting the same base building (HQ) set up, but then probably boils down to that 40 progress in order to get the rewards and if all guilds cooperate with each other for this as well. Could be one hell of an exploit if was pulled off.
 
Thunderdome said:
The latter in your statement is exactly why a tie in placement is impossible. Also, I think a guild will have to get the same sectors giving out the same VP as well as building camps to bring in the same VP. The only way I can probably see (if they didn't have time stamping as part of the process) is that all guilds getting the same base building (HQ) set up, but then probably boils down to that 40 progress in order to get the rewards and if all guilds cooperate with each other for this as well. Could be one hell of an exploit if was pulled off.
Click to expand...
The problem with the building can be solved by just not building any. If you are not pushing encounters (and you shouldn't if you want to keep it synchronized).

If you have enough you can target sctors with the same value. Prepare them for conquest on each guild time and then flip them all together at an agreed on hour.

The problem is that I'm not sure each guild can always do that. You might have to take the first province to the side initially, because the ones in front has different values, and some guilds have only one to choose from, to the side you have two. It would be very complicated to organize to keep in perfect sync. Also I think the is less variation in the value in Bronze than in higher league.

The 40 minimum requirement is the easiest part, just spread it on different provinces without flipping any (it's a guild requirement, not an individual player one). You can spread it out even in bronze league.
 
Thunderdome said:
Cross-world in GE was different because it relied on everyone to complete said encounters first in order to be at the top... until to the point that no one really thinks it mattered anymore as getting 25% more guild power at a toddler's allowance isn't appealing.
Click to expand...

I found people stopped racing in Guild Expedition when Lvl 5 was introduced because it made it impossible to have enough medals to do a race

knarre sbeat said:
In GbG all guilds could be 1. Place each and every round, just dont score at all.
Click to expand...
As Fury keeps mentioning, there is a minimum of 40 advances required to participate. Good luck getting everyone to do only 40 in the manner necessary to pull that off
 
Emberguard said:
I found people stopped racing in Guild Expedition when Lvl 5 was introduced because it made it impossible to have enough medals to do a race
Click to expand...
That could be true since sometimes I kind of stopped when it hits the 1m+ per attempt requirement, that I let time be the replenisher. So, I feel ya on that one.
 
One thing InnoGames could start doing, is to make in-game polls for future updates. It's a small easy thing where you can't go wrong.

Take a look at OSRS.
 
I have to wonder what the top guilds are doing with all their gbg coin since they get 2 level 2 buildings at the end for sitting on 40 encounters - what else is there for them to buy? :p

I really struggle spending my red coins. At the start, I buy out all the dimes, then I buy out all the secondary building, then I have to squalor to the last seasons secondary building...
 
Markus Stormrider said:
i guess we have to face it: if it continues the way it is going right now, FoE will be ending by late 2027, if not even earlier than that.
Click to expand...
I wish no there was I death of game feom innogames last year. Irony was that another game died month ago/before. I made about 100 videos from FoE (one from games that died) and I don't want make as 1000th video last video from FoE

FoE will never end
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top