And you missed the most important one: "might"
We added this paragraph just to say, that things don't always go according to plan.
-
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 Space Age Titan
- Thread starter crabbyoldman
- Start date
We added this paragraph just to say, that things don't always go according to plan.
Lindsay
Merchant
and? literally don't see a single word about new settlement or plans to do so or just simply a hint.
it's just your imagination and weird interpritation. the only obvious thing that we probably won't get the Space Age Titan this Spring.
Markus Stormrider
Regent
well, i guess the constant bleating and whining here about "meeeeh nooooo not another space age mars part X please, i'm gonna (rage)quit now!!!!!1111oneoneeleven" has scared the development team so much (hopefully), that they sent the space age titan plans back to the drawing table with the request "something new and interesting please, so that we can please the community" attached to it... 
-Alin-
Emperor
or...
the 256 and counting pages about GBG rebalancing and plans is so flummoxing to aggregate any salient points, they're considering giving the CHATGPT AI a crack at it to make some sense of it - and reduce it to 1 page of suggestions.
Remove GbG, much more simple.
Even if it means giving us a new age without great innovation, I would prefer that Inno look into the renovation of certain parts of the game that exist but have become obsolete.
We currently have a new age per year but with one every two years, it would give them more time to think about the pending suggestions.
It started with Guild Expeditions which are going to see a fifth tier. When will the antique shop, messaging system, tavern bonuses, market, etc. be overhauled?
We feel that the imagination of the developers needs a break, we have been living it for 4 years with the space ages. Instead of wanting to reinvent the wheel, I would appreciate Inno upgrading old stuff before anyone else cares.
We currently have a new age per year but with one every two years, it would give them more time to think about the pending suggestions.
It started with Guild Expeditions which are going to see a fifth tier. When will the antique shop, messaging system, tavern bonuses, market, etc. be overhauled?
We feel that the imagination of the developers needs a break, we have been living it for 4 years with the space ages. Instead of wanting to reinvent the wheel, I would appreciate Inno upgrading old stuff before anyone else cares.
mcbluefire
Baronet
Can't agree that the AD needs an overhaul yet, but get the hint that old systems should be revisited regularly to keep them fresh, incorporate new ideas, and bring the systems together.
MJ Artisan of War
Baronet
While they are INNOvating... Update Guild Levels from 100 to 150 to give level 100 guilds something more to strive towards.
CrashBoom
Legend
or unlimited levels (like GB)
with exponential needed power (like GB)
Kronan
Viceroy
That's the theme of WHY scalability is so important. This game wasn't designed from day 1 for where we are now.
So all we do is keep pushing the limit of current buildings, trying for higher dimensions that don' make sense - because there literally is nothing else to do.
I can see taking an ARC to 180, and many people are doing it now because it has investment value to 180. ARCs @ 180 allow you to develop a new game design and a game thesis going forward - and it's almost a badge of honor to have one.
Costly? Sure. Way out of balance, Sure. Yet, it's a great goal for all the FP you're making now.
But consider having a city with 1000/1000 war A/D and lifting a Zeus or CdM or CoA up over 100 or higher, and having to go 2 levels to get...
1% more A/D. Like huh?
These type of non-scalable issues exist all over this game and players have hit everyone of them. New one are found each day.
Where are all the GBs we've asked for or suggested they consider? I think they've run out of idea - and it kinda feels like that.
Plain and simple - this game works best in the younger eras for new people wanting to start and build a city. It starts to fail, as you've all mentioned, waiting for a new era that's just a clone of the now 20 previous ones.
SO you're ALL RIGHT... THIS game absolutely needs some deep thinking FoE strategy team to design workable higher dimensions to the game as a way seasoned veterans can continue to be here, work on their cities, and feel that things they do or money they spend has VALUE.
So all we do is keep pushing the limit of current buildings, trying for higher dimensions that don' make sense - because there literally is nothing else to do.
I can see taking an ARC to 180, and many people are doing it now because it has investment value to 180. ARCs @ 180 allow you to develop a new game design and a game thesis going forward - and it's almost a badge of honor to have one.
Costly? Sure. Way out of balance, Sure. Yet, it's a great goal for all the FP you're making now.
But consider having a city with 1000/1000 war A/D and lifting a Zeus or CdM or CoA up over 100 or higher, and having to go 2 levels to get...
1% more A/D. Like huh?
These type of non-scalable issues exist all over this game and players have hit everyone of them. New one are found each day.
Where are all the GBs we've asked for or suggested they consider? I think they've run out of idea - and it kinda feels like that.
Plain and simple - this game works best in the younger eras for new people wanting to start and build a city. It starts to fail, as you've all mentioned, waiting for a new era that's just a clone of the now 20 previous ones.
SO you're ALL RIGHT... THIS game absolutely needs some deep thinking FoE strategy team to design workable higher dimensions to the game as a way seasoned veterans can continue to be here, work on their cities, and feel that things they do or money they spend has VALUE.
Last edited:
Dessire
Regent
There are a lot of ideas to make FoE better and great but FoE team do not want to implement those ideas.
-Alin-
Emperor
Everything is around revenue, if it doesn't bring revenue, doesn't worth implementing for them.
Dessire
Regent
Some of the most successful online games get revenues by adding and creating content desired by their communities and some of those contents do not bring any direct revenue at all. . .
-Alin-
Emperor
Now try to tell the same to InnoGames and MTG and see if that works for them, it took only 7 years for AID all, and several years for other things to get added to the game that were requested by many.
At least they did that thing 2 years ago, when we could write our ideas and only few were merged to developement, the most voted ones.
Last edited:
Kronan
Viceroy
Well - let's start here with us, the player community:
We're paralyzed as a total community (almost as bad as the US Congress is with Democrats and Republicans fighting about everything...)
Yes - People suggest new GBs, yes - new features for new eras, and yes - new event buildings or game concepts.
Big Yes - but for most everything - the eventual outcome is: it's easier to clone something old that works, vs add strategic horsepower and possibly a big expense to design, code and test something new that will be a hit with players. It very risky, too. Hopefully GE 5 is an exception, but we just don't know.
As far as GbG is concerned, few like what we have (and the participation numbers bear that out...) and we can't seem to get consensus on a path forward for just about any strategic things in this game.
No wonder. Inno's strategy, therefore, seems to be:
Whiz-bang attract newbies and KEEP the early game for new players thrilling and very exciting. Secure revenue from this infatuation because people will pay for accelerating their progress and carving out their distinction, and finally -
See how long they stay excited and keep spending before or until they get bored and find the forum and start to whine.
Last edited:
Grzechu Junior
Baronet
No, there is one simply wya to cure GB.
Give real rewards for winning. Nothing more, nothing less.
Low guild will alwyas say - they are eaten by top guilds.
Top guild - there is not need to fight, winning gives as nothing just pride.
Give real rewards for every spot, so even the lower guild will fight for 7th place and will be happy with that.
Top ofc will fight for top than, cuz the rewards will be meaningfull. not like it is nowadays - meaningless.
Pericles the Lion
Emperor
This solves none of the current problems while creating more problems.
Emberguard
Emperor
Lack of rewards isn't the issue. No amount of rewards will change a Guilds capabilities to fight. You can get them to put their all in, they're either able to compete or they can't. If you don't have any way of finding opponents capable of matching the absolute top, then you either need a equalizer to cap the difference in strength, or some sort of enabler to help the weakest Guilds, or a combination of both.
People don't fight because they either don't want to expend the resources, don't have the resources to spend, or are completely locked out (or a combination of all three). Not because of lack of rewards
The rewards are already more than any other part of the game except perhaps extreme sniping. If they're not meaningful now you're not going to make them meaningful by providing more.
The rewards being given on a per-advancement basis does lend itself to certain behaviours. If it were changed to first-capture-only then the behaviour would change accordingly, and likely make it even harder to get on the board due to increasing the intensity of competition without changing the capabilities of anyone even if you had exactly the same amount of rewards overall as you currently have now.
Placement of where you get the rewards is going to do far more on changing behaviour of Guilds than the amount of rewards ever will.
Grzechu Junior
Baronet
whay? joke ammount of honor statue? Some potential?
You are saying about rewards for fighting. Get them away, we dont need them, we are not playing for them. I am talking about rewards at the end for taking place in GB tournament.... Jesus Christ, basic reading skill....
Grzechu Junior
Baronet
No, the only problem with GB are exchanges. This is the only problem. becausue guilds are not fighting.
The problem that small guilds cant compete is not a problem. it Is just the big difference in skill and members potential.