Feedback Wildlife Event 2024

[Rob Farmer III]

We on beta should have got an extra upgrade because the paws were lowered ! Could have totally got the full event building now, have to wait until next year to finish it if it doesn't be obsolete by then....

Yes, one free Flamingo Habitat Selection Kit or Upgrade would bring me to Max Level 11. We have received an after-Event bonus like this in the past after a major adjustment.

Working hard for 30 days only to end 57 Paw Points short of Max Level 11 (and 117 short of the Golden Sunflower Upgrade) left me disappointed and unwilling to play it on the Live Servers. The change to 25 Paw Prints is more manageable.

 

[doughster]

From now on I will decrease my presence on the game and do only some events, depending on my free time. For advanced players in Titan everything is a fraud or illusion.

If you have 4000/4000 attack/defence for attacking army, you still lose about 1 drone / fight at low attrition(0-20).

If you have 8000/8000 attack/defence for attacking army, you still lose about 1 drone / fight at low attrition(0-20).

And so on. Those high bonuses mean nothing in Titan. It's the worst era ever to fight, period. And nothing that Inno offers in their diamond / money hungry events will ever fix it.

I have colleagues quitting the game, some more will follow unfortunately. The game was somehow good - great until Titan era and golden upgrades were introduced.

And there is one more decisive factor that makes people quitting or just decreasing their presence on the game: the introduction of guild battle grounds mandatory attrition(20%). I am not stating that this change was good or bad, it is hard to judge it. But here is the thing: before I could earn ~3000 fp / day from GBG, now I barely make ~700 fp. But I do get compensation from my city: more and more higher stats buildings were introduced and I do get a lot more fp when collecting comparing to what I used to get few years ago, when a 4x4 building that generated 10 pf was something great. So more and more players are thinking: why should I keep bothering with gbg(extra 700 forge points) when I get over 2000 fp from my city when collecting ?

Some food for thought for Inno and where this game is going to...

I have made exactly the same decision myself. No matter how powerful you get, you cannot do more than one fight without replacing troops except on very rare occasions. Since event bldgs (and boosts!) are not making my troops more powerful, I need not continue to spend dollars on event bldgs, etc.

 

[Kronan]

@Astrid , @doughster - They are NEVER going to let you "best them or their fighting system", ever. Each venue shows a public side, but in the game code, it has lots of provisions for a more personalized experience that's tailored to folks like yourself, at the extreme edges.

Just look at all the different AI's and how they work in GvG, or GE, GBG, continent map, and Arena ...and you get a glimpse of just how intelligent they are and they're designed to understand YOUR particular strengths or even fighting style - and balance them with a defense AND strategy that gives you a good fight.

This is all done quietly in the background.
Ever wonder why things old and code-locked break? They fiddle with stuff all the time, outside of their "updates". So that requires weekly or bi-weekly updates. It sure isn't for new features! It's to fix what they break! LOL

Reminds me of the Wizard of OZ...

pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

This most definitely has a backroom design that personalizes a response to your overt strengths to keep them in check.

Glad someone is finally seeing that.
It can sometimes be as simple as changing the "shape of the design curve" for when you warriors get chipped with injury. with 1 "red block" of injury, let's say it's parameterized that you'll lose 5-8% of your defense and attack.

Do you think they're going to tell you if they quietly make that 6-9%? Of course not.

Or how about this:

IF player-attack% > 2500 and era>Mars, then 1 block of injury will set player attack to = .85 x current player-attack%


You can see where I'm going with this. I can get pretty devious. Wait - it seems that it IS already pretty devious.

Changing design parameters like this reshapes (advances or retards) how long you can keep the same army on the battlefield. They have data mining software that rolls up millions of player battles by venue, or by age, or by.... or by .... and spits out data that has to be within program parameters - not too hot, not too cold, and always just right. If not, it's adjusted.

It's adjusted as well to make sure they keep their financial goals in mind. That's NOT an unfair way to manage a fighting game (oops - city building game with a large fighting component). They are a for-profit company and you're here to get an "experience" from that.

Is it clear they don't want you do 20 autobattles with @ 4000/4000 horsepower without "tire changes".


@ 4000/4000 you should be able to mop the floor with any defense, any age, especially if you have supporting buildings (like an AO) helping you.

Bottom line: As you buy in the foreground (new event purchases, other game-bettering expenditures), they adjust quietly in the background to balance the experience for you.

 

[ironsage]

With the balancing that you need 10 blocks to get a level 5 chests, you can now have both a 8 block or a 9 block chest givving it 4 star making it easier to get the quests faster finished, also the fact that we will get buildings for rivals makes me verry happy

 

[Hiep Lin]

• "The stats for some buildings have been improved. They received the following changes:
  • Raccoon Hideout:
    • 10-14 (was 5-7)
    • 2% (new)
    • 2% (new)
  • Giant Kapok:
    • 3% (was 2%)
    • 3% (was 2%)
  • Blood Lilies:
    • 2 (was 1)
    • 2% (was 1%)
    • 2% (was 1%)
  • Serene Animal Crossing:
    • 23-43% (was 23-33%)
    • 24-44% (was 24-34%)
    • 32-52% (was 29-49%)"

What do you think of all these different military bonuses with very similar icons?
*attack attack everywhere
* attack in attack only in CBG, only in expedition, only in raid,
*......
* and the worst attack and defense in defense which are used to attack and defend in attack!!!!!

It has become incomprehensible, and even more so if you talk about it using icons!

 

[Astrid]

@Xiphos I don't think it's really like that. I have guild mates in Asteroid Belt, they got plenty of goods to build and level the Titan gbs and they are close to my attack and defence for attacking army. And they are killing it, they reach 150-170 attrition levels without too much of a fuss. I barely reach 130 with huge losses. Maybe I could go a bit more if I pick the fights wisely but it's not efficient at all, it's just a waste of time.

Long story short, I am punished for being in Titan where the units were extremely badly designed. Drones don't have enough range to reach all the enemy units on the first try and any other non flying unit suffers massively from the artillery combined with the absurd keen eye value. Simply as that, players in Titan are intentionally punished by Inno's units' design.

I feel entitled to reach 170-200 attrition levels considering how much money combined with invested time in secondary diamond cities I invested in this game. In most, if not all the past events I reached the golden league, my city generates all kinds of high stats buildings and for nothing. And my Arctic Orangery is at 140, also for nothing. That's why I decided to stop spending so much time and energy on this game anymore.

Now back to this event, the latest updates are welcome, but the main build is still lacklustre in my opinion. I kind of liked to have the Serene Animal Crossing on my secondary cities for its defending army bonuses, but most likely I will skip the event there and wait for a better one, probably the Anniversary.

 

[drakenridder]

@Xiphos I don't think it's really like that. I have guild mates in Asteroid Belt, they got plenty of goods to build and level the Titan gbs and they are close to my attack and defence for attacking army. And they are killing it, they reach 150-170 attrition levels without too much of a fuss. I barely reach 130 with huge losses. Maybe I could go a bit more if I pick the fights wisely but it's not efficient at all, it's just a waste of time.

Long story short, I am punished for being in Titan where the units were extremely badly designed. Drones don't have enough range to reach all the enemy units on the first try and any other non flying unit suffers massively from the artillery combined with the absurd keen eye value. Simply as that, players in Titan are intentionally punished by Inno's units' design.

I feel entitled to reach 170-200 attrition levels considering how much money combined with invested time in secondary diamond cities I invested in this game. In most, if not all the past events I reached the golden league, my city generates all kinds of high stats buildings and for nothing. And my Arctic Orangery is at 140, also for nothing. That's why I decided to stop spending so much time and energy on this game anymore.

Now back to this event, the latest updates are welcome, but the main build is still lacklustre in my opinion. I kind of liked to have the Serene Animal Crossing on my secondary cities for its defending army bonuses, but most likely I will skip the event there and wait for a better one, probably the Anniversary.

I've noticed the same thing, or at least similar things. Advancing to Mars for example is an penalty. While sticking more favourable ages (FE for example) is rewarding. Even staying in OF is rewarding compared to advancing to Mars. This has also lead me to wonder what age the best is for GbG w/o the cheesy strategy of getting units from many ages ahead.
Comparing ages with attrition tolerance, it's quite interesting. In OF it's possible to beat consistently armies that are 2x up 2,2x stronger. W/O knowing your % I'll make an assumption of around 3.500%. At 130 attrition means armies around 1,2x stronger than the player (130 attrition). Assuming your SAAB peers have also a buff around 3.500% it boils down to armies that are around 2,3x stronger than the player (170 attrition). Pls correct me if my estimates of personal buffs are wrong. However if my estimates are correct, even OF is better for GbG with beatable armies that are 2x stronger than the player vs 1,2x stronger than the player in Titan. While SAAB could push through armies 2,3x stronger than their own armies.

As for this event, in relation to attrition in various ages. Like any event bonuses obviously contribute to better attrition tolerance. However with some ages the performance greatly varies. This is why I'm wondering which age yields the best meta and overall attrition tolerance. As briefly mentioned above. With OF (and an AO90+) it's possible to beat armies roughly 2x stronger than yours. While other ages might succeed this ratio and other ages don't hit that ratio.
Although in some cases the specific bonuses, for GbG/GE5 are great. Overall I prefer with lower buffs the universal buffs. So, my armies are buffed regardless of in which part of the game I'm fighting. It's still nice to see the devs experimenting with the specific buffs though.

 

[Kronan]

@Astrid - I'm not surprised that you jumped right to GBG as your test model. It's sounding like your top "evaluation" tool for your analysis.
However, there are multiple war venues (as I mentioned), and each has a much different AI. It's very clear how some are crafted.

There's going to be similar sections of code in all of them on how they react, but let me put it another way (without being too specific):

The AI's are adaptive to your army warrior choices, the health of those choices, your movement design.... and I can go ON and ON and ON about things it measures and then decides on what to do in reaction to you.

The "smartness list" has only grown since we both started playing. The code has been fine sanded, and smoothed - and even parameterized so changes can be directly made to the overall experience from data mining feedback on how the fighting population is doing, or has done.

Gosh - it wasn that long ago that 1+7 configurations killed everything.

That now gets killed and wiped out more than 80% of the time, especially if you pick the wrong "1" warrior (ie, a warrior that singlely advances out into the battlefield first...

That's a huge change we've all "learned"... and there are dozens and dozens more ADAPTIVE changes to the way we used to fight, and how we now fight.

I would bet that a lot of engineering and design investment was made over the years on the "war backend" to get to where we are now in the game. You are not going to be able to exceed, with any amount of boost, allowable edge boundaries.

12,000/12,000 will be better if you can achieve it (somehow), but what that should do in theory, won't deliver in practice.

Yes, that includes design of new era warriors and their relative worth (or lack of worth) on the battlefield.

I have studied this in both live and beta, but using more of the war venues to get a better and broader analysis.

So you can take my word for it as a software architect/professional who HAS been in this industry for quite a while and build systems much like this (for other companies).

Or you can continue to use a very "singular" view (GbG using an attrition metric, probably via autobattle) to know the outcome but not understand the fine details of why that happens.
I don't want to get more specific in this forum. I can casually tell you how to study it and find out more (be a student of the war machine), but if you think a little "outside the box" on how to get more revelation "ah ha!" data points, they will be enlightening.

Hint: you study it like a scientist would, and that's NOT on autobattle.

 

[Charles el Britannia]

I feel entitled to reach 170-200 attrition levels considering how much money combined with invested time in secondary diamond cities I invested in this game. In most, if not all the past events I reached the golden league, my city generates all kinds of high stats buildings and for nothing. And my Arctic Orangery is at 140, also for nothing. That's why I decided to stop spending so much time and energy on this game anymore.

SAAB is a special era in the sense that 3 of its units are melee, which gives the Nail Storm a huge advantage. No other era has so many units that are handicapped. In SAV, SAJM and SAT things are more balanced, with SAT being the 'best' balanced (in favor of the AI). You can comfort yourself with the thought that when Space Hub is released you get more landmass, access to more overpowered GB's and higher stats for your event buildings. The gap with SAAB players will widen, albeit slowly.

 

[xivarmy]

I've noticed the same thing, or at least similar things. Advancing to Mars for example is an penalty. While sticking more favourable ages (FE for example) is rewarding. Even staying in OF is rewarding compared to advancing to Mars. This has also lead me to wonder what age the best is for GbG w/o the cheesy strategy of getting units from many ages ahead.
Comparing ages with attrition tolerance, it's quite interesting. In OF it's possible to beat consistently armies that are 2x up 2,2x stronger. W/O knowing your % I'll make an assumption of around 3.500%. At 130 attrition means armies around 1,2x stronger than the player (130 attrition). Assuming your SAAB peers have also a buff around 3.500% it boils down to armies that are around 2,3x stronger than the player (170 attrition). Pls correct me if my estimates of personal buffs are wrong. However if my estimates are correct, even OF is better for GbG with beatable armies that are 2x stronger than the player vs 1,2x stronger than the player in Titan. While SAAB could push through armies 2,3x stronger than their own armies.

As for this event, in relation to attrition in various ages. Like any event bonuses obviously contribute to better attrition tolerance. However with some ages the performance greatly varies. This is why I'm wondering which age yields the best meta and overall attrition tolerance. As briefly mentioned above. With OF (and an AO90+) it's possible to beat armies roughly 2x stronger than yours. While other ages might succeed this ratio and other ages don't hit that ratio.
Although in some cases the specific bonuses, for GbG/GE5 are great. Overall I prefer with lower buffs the universal buffs. So, my armies are buffed regardless of in which part of the game I'm fighting. It's still nice to see the devs experimenting with the specific buffs though.

Without age-ahead units, my current opinion is if I had to sit in 1 age permanently just to push GBG as hard as possible, I'd choose VF.

I've been through SAAB twice now and am nowhere near as enamored with its capabilities as some people seem to be. My first time through I felt it was worse than Mars. The second time about the same as Mars, which was notably worse than VF. SAV & SAJM I now believe to be an upgrade over the prior two space ages, but still worse than VF. And SAT, while it is my preference to advance to for general play, is probably the roughest fighting age since AF - I just don't mind because clicking autobattle in GBG endlessly isn't my idea of a good time.

 

[Emberguard]

I've been through SAAB twice now and am nowhere near as enamored with its capabilities as some people seem to be. My first time through I felt it was worse than Mars. The second time about the same as Mars, which was notably worse than VF. SAV & SAJM I now believe to be an upgrade over the prior two space ages, but still worse than VF. And SAT, while it is my preference to advance to for general play, is probably the roughest fighting age since AF - I just don't mind because clicking autobattle in GBG endlessly isn't my idea of a good time.

Maybe part of the skew in perspective is you have more space available with each Age to put down more army boosts

is probably the roughest fighting age since AF

A lot of people seem to have that opinion and just opt for Hovers, but I really liked Arctic Future for fighting with current age troops with a Arctic Orangery in play.

 

[ironsage]

i hope the last reward for each of the rivals will be a buildings that gives 10 fragments of the silver animal selection kit much like the calander reward of the winter event now that they added buildings as a reward

 

[xivarmy]

A lot of people seem to have that opinion and just opt for Hovers, but I really liked Arctic Future for fighting with current age troops with a Arctic Orangery in play.

AF isn't bad for attrition ceiling because of battle fortresses + orangery, but it has a lot of unit losses - even at low to mid attrition.

Which is a lot like the situation SAT is in. I fight fine in it. My attrition ceiling isn't much different from SAJM - maybe even a little higher. But I do go through a lot more units when fighting in bulk.

At least SAT has the rationale of being able to build up the new GBs though

I don't mind it that much, but if all I wanted to do was fight without OP above age units, they're not the ages I'd pick - VF is - I think I hit at least 20 to 30 attrition higher there comfortably than any other age.

 

[drakenridder]

I'd pick - VF is - I think I hit at least 20 to 30 attrition higher there comfortably than any other age.

With which units in VF? Cause VF lacks flying units to carry battles with more artil. at higher attrition levels

 

[Sinitar]

With which units in VF? Cause VF lacks flying units to carry battles with more artil. at higher attrition levels

Rocket troops only.
Maybe 6 rocket and 2 rogues

 

[The Lady Ann]

Rocket troops only.
Maybe 6 rocket and 2 rogues

2 rockets 2 ninjas 4 rogues

 

[Sinitar]

2 rockets 2 ninjas 4 rogues

Never used ninjas
If necessary ronin where no rocket troops appears

 

[xivarmy]

With which units in VF? Cause VF lacks flying units to carry battles with more artil. at higher attrition levels

Rockets mostly (something like the 6 rocket 2 rogue suggested at low-medium attrition to absorb hits from ninjas; but 8 rocket is often better) - precisely because there is no flyer. The only troop that poses any danger to the rockets is the ninja, which is where it gets complicated:

- at low attrition the rockets can still hit ninjas unlike flyers - the stealth is only a minor nuisance (rockets even have decent movement to chase them down unlike turturrets vs eels), so you're fine to just keep hitting them. at medium-high attrition though you may want/need to adapt. 1 Ninja is still generally not a dealbreaker unlike 1 flyer - might cost you an extra troop loss.
- if the enemy has no artillery, Ronin + 7 Rogues is a pretty solid answer to lots of Ninjas - though it might not work quite as high as the rockets do
- 8 Ninjas works against everything, on auto to a point (because it hits first), but generally loses more units than rockets. At medium attrition you can sub it in on fights you know are messy for rockets.
- Rocket-Ninja hybrids on manual become often the ideal answer at very high attrition. Rockets for power. Ninjas to take out problem units first. Too many rogues are risky because you don't know if they'll flip the way you want them to.
- If all that fails (or you don't want to do the manual fight that would work) you can always fall back to the old FE high-attrition answer "No fair, you're using the wrong units, I'll hit something else and come back". But I didn't really count this into the range it can "handle" - technically with cherrypicking it should be able to reach max attrition penalty with a decent selection of acceptable defending armies because of the power of mortar and so many units that are vulnerable to it.

 

[Old Blue Eyes]

Someone please remind me which days of the event Rival appeared.

 

[Una Queen]

Someone please remind me which days of the event Rival appeared.

every tuesday starting on the second week of the event.