Praeceptor
Marquis
So true.
-
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
So true.
Owl II
Emperor
Now let's calculate this for a CE player(IA player) with the Arc of 180 lvl523M medals = 70 attempts in SAAB in the same week
no chance against diamonds spenders
70 attempts are only 3500 diamonds
for all who want to calculate
formula = age start value * (1,2 ^ (attempt -1))
(in SAAB it starts with 300)
Thunderdome
Emperor
If it was better worded for explanation from the get-go on the reason why such a feature was taken down (I don't know, like "trying something new" or even "the old PVP system was outdated and/or not used in terms of participation"), we'd probably understand. Heck, if this travesty was to be included, it should be included alongside the old PVP towers so players can at least test the new layout while still having fun with the old, maybe suggesting more things to make the new one worth while.
I know you are not a fan of PVP and that is respected as I had respected other players who just do the build and collect thing. However, there wasn't anything wrong on how the old PVP was set up. Matching was good (neighborhood), timing was good (every 24 hours) with about 79 (70 in some places) options to select opponent(s) to do battle with, and the reward (as well as ranking) structure was good (I often use those to see who is active in my hood so I can either chat with them, trade with them, or just have fun with them) for those who put forth their best effort in strategy for effectiveness.
Instead, we're presented with something that gives us about 12 attempts a day (if we don't want to spend diamonds or medals), opponents who are so many ages higher with defenses that is way higher than the #1 player in our neighborhoods (unless that very player is #1 in some), and cheap ass rewards that I often laugh at.
When I say "unfair matching" I mean two things:
1. The age of units being used (advanced ages often have better stats and features like hide/stealth, force fields, and the like). Imagine being that HMA player who has to go against the OF player and not making a dent on a unit because of this.
AND
2. The battle field for an advanced age player is at 1.5x while for one at a lower age (up to Industrial or Progressive, I don't remember) is just 1x. This means that an HMA player won't be able to move his units close enough to hit (including any artillery based ones, champions, or fast units) let alone having to wait for the opposing side to advance before being wiped out by said opposing side. Yes, I can pelt up to Industrial Age with just Rocket Artillery (PME) before their champions reach me. Usually champs/fast units would advance nearly across the screen when I was in the lower ages (before the 1.5x) that I often have a few rogues ready for them.
This is the reason (among others) why I left. If I can explain my reasons for not liking this feature (and seriously, I do not) in its current form then I am sure Inno can explain theirs for the removal of something that wasn't broke in the first place and was fun for the players. It doesn't take a degree in rocket science.
When I say "cheap ass rewards" I mean just this:
When I hit a player in a neighborhood, if I lose a unit or two, I would see what I can plunder to make up for the cost of losing such in battle. That's my reward. I can do this every 24 hours. I usually hit about 20 to 30 in a day. Some of those (about half of them) have goods to be taken, and some I go for supplies, forge points, or whatever that was being done during the day (yes, I often return a few times just to check if they collected or not). At the end of the week, I often get medals in placing for my efforts. Yeah, total satisfaction there.
Before the modification of adding manual battles to this travesty, I lose anywhere from 1 rogue to about 5 or 6 (I often do the last standing fights) on auto per fight (depending on who I was battling). Luckily, I got the 'traz that gives them (along with a regular unit of choice as I put forth a building as well). At the end of the week, I would be rewarded with 1 measly unit. 1 MEASLY UNIT? For having to lose so many?? No manches, wey!
Oh, if that wasn't insulting enough, then how about just having 6 battles a day sound (at 4 hour intervals)?
When manual was added, I had a sigh of relief because I can get in there and form up a plan to fight. I lose a good size of units, and again, I am thankful for 'traz to give me some so I can keep fighting. There is no satisfaction in getting any rewards other than the measly medal amount (in what universe would someone believe in having an increase of medals from 150 to 192??), a few attempts, some gold, and 1 rogue for the week. "Sixteen pounds of Monterey Jack and the continent of Australia" (Mr. Tinkles, Cats and Dogs) anyone?
Now, I know I am just repeating myself (hence the "redundancy" factor), and I don't like it (being agitated along with others who had voiced the same) so I am sorry if I sounded rude towards Inno and those who got in the way of the firing line. As long as they hide away from answering their public, I will keep firing until they come forth and answer us. Any action towards me will just prove my point even further. They've lit the fuse when they did not value our feedback and cite an imaginary source (we aren't stupid as we know there is only one beta server aside from internal quality assurance and they test with advanced stuff rather than from the ground up as beta has a make up of such). That fuse even got even brighter when they include the EN server in this party.Nope, not this bloke. Ain't sitting down for this.
Calamity Jane
Farmer
along with all the other comments I reviewed (and no not reading 90 pages thanks) I have to say that NOT renewing the towers or resetting to 0 after the week is over is a BAD IDEA - there is no point in keeping the points from week to week. Start over, from scratch, re-think every aspect of the towers, how they DON'T provide anything better for players, just provide meaningless opportunities to lose armies against foes that cannot be overcome by units your Age, how the whole point system in that arena is totally irrelevant to anything going on elsewhere in the game and you have - in my words:
ANOTHER INNO GAMES CHORE!
ANOTHER INNO GAMES CHORE!
It's not the first time that a larger market was needed to further test something. This doesn't mean we did a bad job on Beta and you should not see it as such. It just means they need a larger market.
I know that you want to have more information on the other feedback received but as I've already said several times, this is not something I can share with you. This means I will not confirm or deny any theories you have, even if wildly inaccurate. This does not mean you are being lied to. I know you would like to know the reasons behind decisions made, but again that isn't something that is shared.
The Beta Forum represents only a portion of the Beta Community. Whilst the Forum comments from users are generally in agreement with one another it does not necessarily follow that the opinion on the forum is representative of the whole community. This does not detract from the value of the feedback provided.
I know that you want to have more information on the other feedback received but as I've already said several times, this is not something I can share with you. This means I will not confirm or deny any theories you have, even if wildly inaccurate. This does not mean you are being lied to. I know you would like to know the reasons behind decisions made, but again that isn't something that is shared.
The Beta Forum represents only a portion of the Beta Community. Whilst the Forum comments from users are generally in agreement with one another it does not necessarily follow that the opinion on the forum is representative of the whole community. This does not detract from the value of the feedback provided.
Praeceptor
Marquis
It doesn't matter how many times you say this, the fact is I and others feel like we're being treated with contempt. That will only change when there is some evidence for what you are saying.
jovada
Regent
Are you saying the forum is only for negative feedback, if the rest of the beta community is positive why don't they say it here ?????
Arwaren
Squire
I have the impression that these messages are written by computer. Repeating the same sentences over and over again.
Yes, we won't find out where the positive feedback comes from. But I can just as well say that a pink unicorn is flying in space and I will not prove it. And has anyone believed it? So are people to believe that there are positive opinions somewhere? They don't have to believe it because no evidence was provided to them.
Devilsangel
Baronet
Why not make the arena inside ages?
1) still a battle between more or less equal players on a wider scale than hoods
2) everyone gets realistic opponents
3) everyone has a shot of being #1
Maybe even add a separate tab for #1 of every age or even distribute prizes among them
1) still a battle between more or less equal players on a wider scale than hoods
2) everyone gets realistic opponents
3) everyone has a shot of being #1
Maybe even add a separate tab for #1 of every age or even distribute prizes among them
Praeceptor
Marquis
This reminds me of Russell's Teapot...
"Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others. "
If what Inno claims is true, it is up to them to prove it, not us to disprove it.
jovada
Regent
Old pvp:
1: you could chose in wich era you tried to win the tower.
2: for example when you saw that player xx was going for the marstower you could focus on the SAABtower
3: For beginning players it was fun and try to gather some extra medals for the expantions
4: Viewing the towers you could see who was active in your neighbourhood
5: You had the feeling that you could use some strategy in the towers to counter this or that player.
New pvp:
1: You fight and don't see how many points you received it shows only victory, so i don't know if my fight was only worth 10.000 points of 168.000 points regarding the injuries i had.
2: Due to point 1 i can't correct my army in the best possible way to gain maximum points there is no review of the fight.
3: Ok now you can pay with medals for attempts , but it is still the biggest spender win, no strategy needed.
4: Always the same opponent does'nt increase the fun , au contrary very boring. (last 100 fights i think 70 player xx and 30 player yy)
5: Every week you loose 10% of your total score, if the top10 players continue to play they are guaranteed to hold their places for years
Now can you please explain to us why the new pvp is better than the old one
1: you could chose in wich era you tried to win the tower.
2: for example when you saw that player xx was going for the marstower you could focus on the SAABtower
3: For beginning players it was fun and try to gather some extra medals for the expantions
4: Viewing the towers you could see who was active in your neighbourhood
5: You had the feeling that you could use some strategy in the towers to counter this or that player.
New pvp:
1: You fight and don't see how many points you received it shows only victory, so i don't know if my fight was only worth 10.000 points of 168.000 points regarding the injuries i had.
2: Due to point 1 i can't correct my army in the best possible way to gain maximum points there is no review of the fight.
3: Ok now you can pay with medals for attempts , but it is still the biggest spender win, no strategy needed.
4: Always the same opponent does'nt increase the fun , au contrary very boring. (last 100 fights i think 70 player xx and 30 player yy)
5: Every week you loose 10% of your total score, if the top10 players continue to play they are guaranteed to hold their places for years
Now can you please explain to us why the new pvp is better than the old one
softly explorer
Baronet
I readed throught the 21 pages on the EN server forum and all are experiencing the same matchmaking problems after a battle or 6 done ! So how way MORE better is that larger market ? It is larger, but the matchmaking system is ready for ... the BIN, really, believe me, it IS !! Are the devs blind or something ? Please .... listen to the players, read what they have written so far ....
I don't care about that "positive unknow source of feedback" ... I care about the FUN of Forge of Empires !
A strategy game .. hmmm ... this PvP Arena (in it's current state!) has NOTHING to do with Strategy and for sure nothing with fun ... it's boring, it's annoying and the previous PvP Tournament Towers were at least not annoying (maybe boring for a part of the player community) ....
If this is how beta players are "used" like....... ? (I don't know what kind of word to use, honestly!) ... well, I going to DELETE my whole BETA thing very soon ... that's the ONLY thing that keep rolling in my mind ...."delete beta city, delete beta forum account, delete it all .... it have NO USE anymore ..."
-Alin-
Emperor
The answer is simple, it isn't.
I said at the beggining, it is garbage.
They should just adjusts the old towers, increase and maybe change the rewards, and limit the points and fights you can get it in that tower, as example, fights from GvG(mostly doing ping-pong) just ignored, and the fights you can get in that PvP Tower should be only from GE, neighbors, continent map(mars ore fights, ice fights and sectors if still exists) and maybe GbG fights.
Towers were made as the main idea, back in to 2012-2013 for neighbors, to show who's the best in that neighborhood.
After GvG existence, back in 2015 towers were lost ...
Berenice la Sauvage
Squire
Can you explain how it is possible that noone on the forum has some positive feedback for the Arena? As you say, the forum is a portion of the beta community so, in this portion, we should have the same diversity of opinions on the forum as in the whole community. It is completely unbelievable that not a single player here loves the Arena if the other feedback is so positive. And the feedback is very negative also on the EN forum.
It's not difficult to understand: many players have explained what they dislike in the Arena. It's not some fancy feeling: there are sound arguments against the feature. And nobody has ever explained what is good in the Arena. What is so appreciated according to the other feedback? What did all the forum players miss? Why is noone willing to defend this feature?
The main point is the matching system: Inno knows it's flawed since they've tried to fix it when releasing the feature on the EN servers. But it's not enough because the problem is at the core of the algorithm. As long as the algorithm won't be based on the era of the units and the bonuses of the players, people will face absurd matching. In the Soccer event, we were matched according to the level of our team. In the Arena, we need to be matched according to the level of our army. Anything else dosesn't make sense.
softly explorer
Baronet
Yes, IF I could write something positive about this PvP Arena, I would defenitely DO that, really do that !
I've tried a few times to come with suggestions (also read other nice suggestions on the beta forum!!) ... please developers, SHOW us that you have plans in mind to "use" some of the suggestions by let 1 developer write here their brainstorm ideas so we feel we're being respected for our time doing beta testing & writing on this forum !
And what I'm also wondering is this :
Dudettas said many times they (the forum Moderators) give our suggestions (feedback) to the devs, .... but do they also let the devs know about ALL those UNHAPPY players, all the complains about this PvP Arena, all those who find this PvP Arena totally NOT an improvement for FoE ... Do they ?
I don't care that I do not know what the source is that give positive feedback, because I KNOW what I've tested for weeks (from week 1 on), I know the current state of the PvP Arena is :
not working, annoying and boring a LOT at the same time .... no strategy .... no feel of a competition at all, no fun, no special things to go for (no unique reward or special Arena units to fight with!) .... a total ZERO it is now !!
I've tried a few times to come with suggestions (also read other nice suggestions on the beta forum!!) ... please developers, SHOW us that you have plans in mind to "use" some of the suggestions by let 1 developer write here their brainstorm ideas so we feel we're being respected for our time doing beta testing & writing on this forum !
And what I'm also wondering is this :
Dudettas said many times they (the forum Moderators) give our suggestions (feedback) to the devs, .... but do they also let the devs know about ALL those UNHAPPY players, all the complains about this PvP Arena, all those who find this PvP Arena totally NOT an improvement for FoE ... Do they ?
I don't care that I do not know what the source is that give positive feedback, because I KNOW what I've tested for weeks (from week 1 on), I know the current state of the PvP Arena is :
not working, annoying and boring a LOT at the same time .... no strategy .... no feel of a competition at all, no fun, no special things to go for (no unique reward or special Arena units to fight with!) .... a total ZERO it is now !!
Last edited:
Nessie
Baronet
Last edited:
D-Best
Squire
Interesting. Something between PVP Arena and PVP Tournaments.
LATER EDIT:
Also... don't forget about the differences between the costs for one attempt for an Iron Age player and for a SAAB player. There are players who have an Arc at level 80 since Iron Age and they remain there. It's very unfair to compare two players who benefit from the same facilities but bear different costs (I took the case where both players have an Arc at level 80). Yep, it's a strategy game and your strategy can be 'I remain in Iron Age forever', but INNO should encourage players to move forward...
Last edited:
Yekk
Viceroy
D-Best costs for an iron age player do not play in in any way.
If they waste medals they will still reach a point very quickly where they can not move up. Prize difference for being 501 or 2999 is only a couple medals to them....
On the other end of the ages players that use up all their medals will be booted from the better guilds. Medals play an important role in AA.
Nice to see some of the higher ranked players here stating what we have is rubbish. As it sits First losing 10% still will remains first.
If they waste medals they will still reach a point very quickly where they can not move up. Prize difference for being 501 or 2999 is only a couple medals to them....
On the other end of the ages players that use up all their medals will be booted from the better guilds. Medals play an important role in AA.
Nice to see some of the higher ranked players here stating what we have is rubbish. As it sits First losing 10% still will remains first.
Thunderdome
Emperor
When you start by saying that the feedback on this forum contradicts the feedback from this mysterious source, it pretty much translates that we didn't do a good job.
Doesn't anyone these days? More information is always good, especially when it comes to removing something that totally changed the game and putting something that isn't up to par. I mean, we are trying this out. There wasn't a decent owner's manual on how we're supposed to do this. We didn't get a reply to the multiple instances of getting the same opponent until much later when you decide to come out into the open. We're not mind readers, so please do not expect us to be.
The forum is the only place where YOU had asked for the feedback of this travesty. If you say "in game", I would ask "where's that mail message that would otherwise prompt me to the forum to voice my feedback?" (I do sleep, and the game has a strange way of not letting a person stay AFK for many hours without it cutting that person off due to inactivity).
IF there was some "value" to the feedback (minus the two noticeables for I will not even consider the increase of skimped rewards or the increasing of diamond or addition of medal attempts as such for we didn't ask of it), Inno would have gotten back with us with an update on how they are going to address and fix this, fix this already, and re-release it for a retest to see if it's within our satisfaction.
It's a relative simple question and task, don't you think?
6zeva9
Baronet
You need to be in Early Middle Ages to unlock the Technology to access the PvP Arena. PvP Tower in Bronze Age only works with Map battles as GE and Plunder needed Iron Age Technology to be unlocked to access them. The anti-plunder at BA was brought in to stop new players from being attacked by campers in Iron & Bronze which was good in one way but made the BA Tower meaningless.
So making an Arena for each Age as suggested by Devilsangel could open the tower system back up for ALL ages.
Some players still have Unattached Units from Earlier Ages in their Army if they do not clear down regularly.
If the Arenas were age specific, you could always allow some one from a higher age to only use Units of an Arenas age to battle with and reduce their Unit boosts by a percentage based on how many Ages below their current level they are fighting at.