Willy.
Farmer
I acknowledge that the donations bar will reset each cycle, but that doesn't mean that activated perks disappear. The perks have several levels, which can't be activated in one cycle.
I acknowledge that the donations bar will reset each cycle, but that doesn't mean that activated perks disappear. The perks have several levels, which can't be activated in one cycle.
In our time, it is fashionable to recycle!Pulled backgrounds from other parts of the game.
why not ?he perks have several levels, which can't be activated in one cycle.
But after all, maybe I didn't understand the hidden purpose of Innogames in this novelty:
- strengthen ties between members?
- earn more spending on diamonds?
- promote the disappearance of solo-guilds?
As I already wrote, this time we want to improve on this and really take your feedback into account and improve/implement what you think!
I agreed but personally I disagreed to overstep the boundary to buffing something that is already subjectYes, the bonuses that I offer are enormous but to motivate a whole guild (including the smallest who will not have the same facilities as the big ones) to mobilize to level up, you need good bonuses, useful bonuses for different parts of the game.
As I already wrote, this time we want to improve on this and really take your feedback into account and improve/implement what you think!
No, you read it wrong. I said, that we want to improve on how we handle feedback. For other features we mainly did smaller adjustments to the features (best to be seen for events, for example we changed some numbers around for the Winter Event, but the main feature stayed the same). For the guild perks it is different: It is on a very early development stage. Currently only the basic functions and some prepared perks are included. There will probably be some major changes/improvements, before it will be released on the live servers.This time ??? Is that a confirmation that all our previous feedback on the past new futures and addons was completly ignored ????
Yes, but you have to give me time to forward the feedback and the developers to evaluate and develop things. This takes some time.Reminder :
Sounds positively promising, not intended to bind you to this, just saying it's positively to know that the devs are openNo, you read it wrong. I said, that we want to improve on how we handle feedback. For other features we mainly did smaller adjustments to the features (best to be seen for events, for example we changed some numbers around, but the main feature stayed the same). For the guild perks it is different: It is on a very early development stage. Currently only the basic functions and some prepared perks are included. There will probably some major changes/improvements, before it will be released on the live servers.
Reading this part, I came up with an idea to change the feature, so I took some inspiration from the feedback already provided. Also the % are made up.I think personally perks could be better branded as: Guild Specialisations, founding members can choose 1-3
specialisations as for the guild. Weekly the progress degeriates with X% of the current progress to the next
lvl. Making guilds specialise in different more advanced branching off tactics/strategies in GvG, GbG and GE
would make imo the most sense but they must be powerful. Drawbacks make sense as usually specialising in
something and growing much stronger 1 department means compromising another department. I think if an
balance can be found we'll see more specially designed guilds. More detailed examples I've already given through
brainstorm ideas but good examples are offensive benefits but drawbacks in the defence, peaceful benefits
but drawbacks for the offensive capabilities, etc. So, likely guilds that love GbG will develop an strategy that
works best for them and either using military capabilities or economic ones (negotiations). In the other hand having
guilds designed to aid newer players to preparing them for the mother guild, or just guilds specialising in personal
growth, etc.
Personally, I haven't seen any interesting bonuses for the guild or the player. A player who has friends with his guilds is not currently optimizing his game because he loses dozens of PO / MO. => the bonus would have been on the po / mo of another guild-brother there it would have been good But on the tavern visit of another guild-brother hum how to say ... no ... The advantage over the GE and BG nego ... at low level (5 nego ress) it has no effect ... and if I lower my resources to distribute them to my guilds instead of unlocking the advantage guild that makes them make hundreds of nego. So direct donation to the luffers or activation bonus nego? ... how to say ... no ... City defense bonus? Serious ? It would have added attrition on the CBG provinces ... yes ... It would have added 500% of cited def or% of triggering on galata ... at a pinch ... but there ... how to say. .. no... A guild if it is to maximize its benefits must have an identical player profile ... basically players of the same era and who don't care about gold and merchandise or small non-assiduous noob guilds. Instead of being inclusive, participatory and united, it will further increase the gap between big elitist guilds and the rest ... not to mention the big boost to mono-guilds (I activate the bonuses adapted to my game at a lower cost and without fretting with anyone by being in a mono-guild) |
In that implementation what bothers me is the way of presenting things, innogames does not accept its choices to implement new functionalities which are made to empty stocks. They started with the BGs which were thought to empty the guild treasury (more or less towards personal enrichment), there we are in the opposite effect a so-called emptying of personal "stocks" (to the advantage of guild) In itself the concept does not shock me, but why hide it. Where they go wrong (still from my personal point of view) is that they only thought about the overall concept without fine-tuning the details. The "bonuses" given are well below the cost necessary to unlock them (as said above contributing players have every interest in "giving" resources to other needy guilds rather than activating guild bonuses) It is not possible for the "administrators" to prohibit the laying of resources on unwanted bonuses, it is not possible to see who gives, who does not give and who benefits or not from the bonuses. We are in a game of management, not just a click-to-kill game. Give us levers to manage things. The "bonuses" given do not benefit the guild (in the broad sense) but will help some players and disadvantage others. However, there was a way to give real bonuses / penalties affecting the guild (cost of unlocking GE levels, attrition, period of blocking provinces in BG, cost of buildings in BG, modulation of guild level bonuses, earnings (gold, ress, plans ...) on the Po / Mo guild) And the trick of doing a linear thing on the cost according to the size of the guild is absurd, it favors mono-guilds (being able to invest in the bonuses that benefit me, unlock the bonuses I want, do what I want) it is necessary to privilege the guilds which have as many active members as possible. What keeps players in the game for the long haul are mainly social interactions, encouraging players to "actively play together" should be a priority for developers. |
Reading this part, I came up with an idea to change the feature, so I took some inspiration from the feedback already provided. Also the % are made up.
Instead of resetting all the perks to 0, they could loose some progress every week. You could completely remove the 3 week cycle. I think the idea can be best explained by an example:
Let's say initially there are 10 perks to choose from. You can contribute to any perk you want and a maximum of 3 perks can be activated. So far it is the same. Instead of separating the 3 levels into separate bars, have one bar with 3 milestones: One for level 1, one for level 2 and one for level 3. This might sound minor, but is important for this one: After the first week your guild looses 10% of progress for every perk, with always a minimum of 100k points. After that calculation, every perk with 0 progress will be exchanged with another, new one. After the second week all perks, that stayed will loose 20% of their progress and the others only 10%. So after each week every perk that stayed will loose 10% more progress. This is important, because guilds should change their perks around a bit and not have the same 3 perks every week. How much progress a perk will loose could be shown, when you click on the perk to see the details.
If you want to change it to happen every 3rd week (to stay at the initial 3 week cycle, so that you don't get too many new perks in a short amount of time), you can just increase the percentages, to like 20% (which would mean a guild would have a perk for max 5 cycles, but to keep it, it will be very expansive).
To avoid being stuck with a perk you leveled and don't want the huge drawback next cycle, you could maybe have an option to mark a perk as 'exchange', so it will be removed in the next cycle. This one could be bound to guild leaders.
To expand on the 'specialization' part: It would be a good idea to show the current active perks in the guild profile. If you click on it you get information on what level this perk currently is and what the benefits are.