Cleitomachus
Marquis
We probably need to redefine the word "feedback"...
-
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.
Feedback PvP Arena
- Thread starter Dudettas
- Start date
TheFlyingMan
Merchant
Oh, look! What a surprise! 3 fights in SAAB (I'm in Modern), and the lower reward has more attack/defense than the middle one...
I'm so done with this. :-(
I'm so done with this. :-(
Arwaren
Squire
The PvP arena is a flop because the name suggests something different than it represents. Seeing this name, I imagine a place where two players are fighting each other in real-time.
How is it now?
Fights are the same as attacking your neighbor.
- you don't see neighbor units(player units in PvP Arena)
- defending units use defense bonuses
- the defense units are controlled by the computer
- the attacker has a big advantage because of a manual battle (example: 1 unit and 7 rogues)
- you need to set up a defensive army to defend against your neighbor (against a player in the PvP Arena)
Differences:
The neighborhood is from the same era. In the PvP Arena, you can meet players of all ages.
After winning the battle with your neighbor, you can loot something. In the PvP Arena, you get points and win mediocre prizes every week.
The developers literally introduced a function that is a copy of another function with some minor changes. In fact, it could be done so that the points we earn now in each fight (with the neighbor, GE, GBG, continental map) are limited to neighborhood fights and increase some medals that are now in the towers on live servers. And look, we have a PvP arena for each age with a neighborhood change every 3 weeks. We don't have to set up another defensive army. There is no favoring of players who are in the highest era.
Why do we need another same function?
How is it now?
Fights are the same as attacking your neighbor.
- you don't see neighbor units(player units in PvP Arena)
- defending units use defense bonuses
- the defense units are controlled by the computer
- the attacker has a big advantage because of a manual battle (example: 1 unit and 7 rogues)
- you need to set up a defensive army to defend against your neighbor (against a player in the PvP Arena)
Differences:
The neighborhood is from the same era. In the PvP Arena, you can meet players of all ages.
After winning the battle with your neighbor, you can loot something. In the PvP Arena, you get points and win mediocre prizes every week.
The developers literally introduced a function that is a copy of another function with some minor changes. In fact, it could be done so that the points we earn now in each fight (with the neighbor, GE, GBG, continental map) are limited to neighborhood fights and increase some medals that are now in the towers on live servers. And look, we have a PvP arena for each age with a neighborhood change every 3 weeks. We don't have to set up another defensive army. There is no favoring of players who are in the highest era.
Why do we need another same function?
Last edited:
Proven Legend
Merchant
Inno is looking into your complaints so take a seat and wait, on second thoughts take a bed its taking longer than anyone thought 
(
(
Thunderbummy
Marquis
Inno - Week 4 starting tomorrow. If no improvement tomorrow, I'm out. Seriously had enough of this. I know that Rome was not built in a day but this, most definitely, is not Rome and I honestly believe that any half competent development team should be capable of sorting this mess out long before now.
oudegrijze
Farmer
actually it is simple. If we don't play it anymore they won't post it on the other servers.
DeletedUser10402
Guest
Can’t agree more with the matchmaking comments. I fail to believe there are that many SAAB players on beta. Almost at the point of ditching as the troops are impacting on my GBG.
Proven Legend
Merchant
Read and learn Inno:
“Success depends upon previous preparation, and without such preparation there is sure to be failure.” – Confucius
“Success depends upon previous preparation, and without such preparation there is sure to be failure.” – Confucius
planetofthehumans2
Emperor
Your in game avatar perfectly represents the appropriate reaction to your situation.
Yekk
Viceroy
We asked for manual fights and Inno delivered them. Kudos for that
Now we ask for a fair system for those fights. I suggest fights only from the age you are in, the one below, and the one above. A simple system that rewards the best fighters/cities with reasonable limits on whom you fight. The player pool would be large enough to allow random draw. The age above would give 200,the players age 100, and fighting an age down 50. Only age that would have the 200 fight being of that age would be the top current one. Thoughts on or improvements of the above?? What we have does not work nor in its current form ever will...
Now we ask for a fair system for those fights. I suggest fights only from the age you are in, the one below, and the one above. A simple system that rewards the best fighters/cities with reasonable limits on whom you fight. The player pool would be large enough to allow random draw. The age above would give 200,the players age 100, and fighting an age down 50. Only age that would have the 200 fight being of that age would be the top current one. Thoughts on or improvements of the above?? What we have does not work nor in its current form ever will...
planetofthehumans2
Emperor
Solutions to the matchups:
- 1 token "refreshes" the matchups. Temporary fix that wont help low age people who do well in pvp
- Only matchup the neighborhood. This system is already in place, everyone is already the same page, limited people to match up with though.
- Completely new matchup system with only people in the same age calculated every week or two with neighborhoods.
FoETipps
Farmer
New Idea: Create PVP leagues based on the number of login days.
This keeps the challenge, gives fresh motivation to make progress in the game and possibilities to succeed to many more players.
While keeping the current rewards, the creation of leagues brings the opportunity of achieving high ranks to many more players.
Reason: In personal messages and emails, I received a huge number of complaints about the new pvp feature. Most criticize 2 things:
- It is absolutely unfair that Iron Age players get opponents from SAAB so often
- The rewards (especially for low ranks) are not a motivation for most players, the rewards for the highest ranks are not a motivation for the best players
Details: The first league is for players who played less than 30 days when the tournament week started. If they achieved a certain number of ranking points they will be moved with these to the next league for the next tournament week once they played more than 30 days.
The second league then is for players with less than 60 login days. More leagues for players with less than 90 login days. less than 180 login days, less than 360 login days, less than 720 login days, and last but not least those with 720 or more login days.
With several leagues, more players can achieve a high rank with motivating rewards which would also solve the 'bad reward' issue.
Balance: This avoids that players with normal progress get a SAAB opponent while still being in the first ages.
At the same time, it provides a new motivation to progress faster through the ages instead pf camping in a low age to get an Arc on level 80.
It also avoids the risk that iron age battle cities dominate all iron age battles if leagues would be based on age instead of login days.
Abuse Prevention: The best cheat would be to get higher age units faster by advancing fast through the ages. But in that case, such a player cannot level up great buildings that much. So this is a revitalization of the balancing between fast progress in ages or GB levels.
Another 'cheat' would be to simply buy good event buildings with diamonds. But this will also be a possibility in such a game and we all know that someone has to pay for server maintenance and developers. So this should be acceptable for all.SummaryInnoGames invest so much empathy, ideas, and energy in realizing a great new feature, pvp, that it is so bad to see the extremely negative responses from most players. Have you looked to see if this has already been suggested?
This keeps the challenge, gives fresh motivation to make progress in the game and possibilities to succeed to many more players.
While keeping the current rewards, the creation of leagues brings the opportunity of achieving high ranks to many more players.
Reason: In personal messages and emails, I received a huge number of complaints about the new pvp feature. Most criticize 2 things:
- It is absolutely unfair that Iron Age players get opponents from SAAB so often
- The rewards (especially for low ranks) are not a motivation for most players, the rewards for the highest ranks are not a motivation for the best players
Details: The first league is for players who played less than 30 days when the tournament week started. If they achieved a certain number of ranking points they will be moved with these to the next league for the next tournament week once they played more than 30 days.
The second league then is for players with less than 60 login days. More leagues for players with less than 90 login days. less than 180 login days, less than 360 login days, less than 720 login days, and last but not least those with 720 or more login days.
With several leagues, more players can achieve a high rank with motivating rewards which would also solve the 'bad reward' issue.
Balance: This avoids that players with normal progress get a SAAB opponent while still being in the first ages.
At the same time, it provides a new motivation to progress faster through the ages instead pf camping in a low age to get an Arc on level 80.
It also avoids the risk that iron age battle cities dominate all iron age battles if leagues would be based on age instead of login days.
Abuse Prevention: The best cheat would be to get higher age units faster by advancing fast through the ages. But in that case, such a player cannot level up great buildings that much. So this is a revitalization of the balancing between fast progress in ages or GB levels.
Another 'cheat' would be to simply buy good event buildings with diamonds. But this will also be a possibility in such a game and we all know that someone has to pay for server maintenance and developers. So this should be acceptable for all.SummaryInnoGames invest so much empathy, ideas, and energy in realizing a great new feature, pvp, that it is so bad to see the extremely negative responses from most players. Have you looked to see if this has already been suggested?
kleopatra911
Squire
now it's #3350 - today, at the beginning of the week (slightly rising during the week)
btw: anybody noticed that all icons (not only in the arena) are completely broken? Particularly bad when fighting, can't see how much the units are wounded ..
Berenice la Sauvage
Squire
I like your idea @FoETipps!
There are a lot of good ideas for the matching system. What it could take in account:
- the number of login days;
- the era of the player;
- the units of the player;
- the bonuses of the player.
What it shouldn't take in account: the number of Combat points, which is good for rewarding the players but not for finding opponents.
I'm out of the Arena and I will stay out until the matching system makes sense.
There are a lot of good ideas for the matching system. What it could take in account:
- the number of login days;
- the era of the player;
- the units of the player;
- the bonuses of the player.
What it shouldn't take in account: the number of Combat points, which is good for rewarding the players but not for finding opponents.
I'm out of the Arena and I will stay out until the matching system makes sense.
Last edited:
Axter1x
Farmer
The new PvP is pitiful !!
It only favors the top players.
We want to compete only with neighborhoods, that serve GE as artic orangery and kraken (why are they despised now ?, and decent prizes (current ones are mediocre)
But give us back the old towers (they should never have been removed)
For my part I will not fight anymore in that garbage that is the current pvp.
It only favors the top players.
We want to compete only with neighborhoods, that serve GE as artic orangery and kraken (why are they despised now ?, and decent prizes (current ones are mediocre)
But give us back the old towers (they should never have been removed)
For my part I will not fight anymore in that garbage that is the current pvp.
Proven Legend
Merchant
I have not missed a day playing PvP Arena hoping things would change but the powers that be are not listening so no more, goodbye PvP Arena.
Outlaw Dread
Baronet
I want to be challenged in a manual fight. This is not a challenge, it is impossible >> boring >> insulting
This is 2nd out of 3 matches that's not reasonable. Losing 6 units repeatedly just to get to a winnable combination is designed to sucker newer players into spending diamonds.
PvP could be saved, lost of great ideas above. E.g. have matches within 2 ages of your Age; e.g. 200 points for 2 ages above; 100 points for 1 age above. 50 points for your own age.
While PvP can be fixed, not so sure about FoE itself........ The concept of 'sunk costs' applies. What's been spent on FoE to date is lost (sunk), nothing to be done. All that matters is how I choose to spend my time and money in the future. Each day I'm finding less reasons to spend time or money on FoE; there are many alternatives in life.
However, I don't blame the Devs. I blame Inno's senior management. They set the tone, and right now that seems to be "extract as much money from players as possible."
Maybe they're focused on short-term profits over long-term growth, to inflate Inno's revenues so they can sell Inno. Lot's of startups cash out while profits are still good. Fidelity Growth Partners Europe bought a stake in Inno in 2010; they also may want to cash out.
Dear Inno Senior Management: IF you still want FoE, brush up on customer retention and customer service strategies for the 21st century, not the 19th.
You need customers a lot more than they need you.
This is 2nd out of 3 matches that's not reasonable. Losing 6 units repeatedly just to get to a winnable combination is designed to sucker newer players into spending diamonds.
PvP could be saved, lost of great ideas above. E.g. have matches within 2 ages of your Age; e.g. 200 points for 2 ages above; 100 points for 1 age above. 50 points for your own age.
While PvP can be fixed, not so sure about FoE itself........ The concept of 'sunk costs' applies. What's been spent on FoE to date is lost (sunk), nothing to be done. All that matters is how I choose to spend my time and money in the future. Each day I'm finding less reasons to spend time or money on FoE; there are many alternatives in life.
However, I don't blame the Devs. I blame Inno's senior management. They set the tone, and right now that seems to be "extract as much money from players as possible."
Maybe they're focused on short-term profits over long-term growth, to inflate Inno's revenues so they can sell Inno. Lot's of startups cash out while profits are still good. Fidelity Growth Partners Europe bought a stake in Inno in 2010; they also may want to cash out.
Dear Inno Senior Management: IF you still want FoE, brush up on customer retention and customer service strategies for the 21st century, not the 19th.
You need customers a lot more than they need you.