• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

An Open Letter to the developers of Elvenar:

Socrates28

Well-Known Member
An Open Letter to the developers of Elvenar:

In considering the changes which have come fast and furious in this game which I have enjoyed playing for over two years, and poured a great amount of money into as well, I find myself at a crossroads of whether to continue playing it or not.

I am what people call an End Game player. I have advanced into chapter 17, raised my Ancient Wonders in aggregate to 210+, played the Spire and tournaments consistently, and helped the Fellowship I belong to grow by helping other players get what they needed to grow as well. I accepted the changes to the tournaments with a grain of salt thinking if it improved Fellowship participation over all that it was a good thing, even though I can no longer sustain the number of provinces I once did easily and forego a good amount of Knowledge Points in the process. Now comes another spate of changes to our Fellowship Adventures and hence my quandary of continuing or not.

In considering these latest changes it has become evident to me that I am being systematically punished for advancing my city. If I complete a research my Spire and Tournaments become more difficult to win and my losses go up significantly, the same thing happens with expansions, research and premium, and upgrading my Ancient Wonders as well. In every area where growth and advancement, which were up until now the aims of the game, one is now punished for actually doing so. Success is punished and mediocracy encouraged by what I see as punitive difficulties for every advancement past a level which you have determined ahead of time. You have done this by taking the positive aspects of game advancement and turned them into a negative, or at least made them very much less than they were before.

I am not a masochist and do not appreciate being systematically beaten up every time I try to get ahead.

While I do not seriously think this will make any difference in your philosophy of life and hence of gaming, I think you should examine what those underlying principles are and to see if they are compatible with the continued changes you are making to this game and the financial success of Inno Games.

Sincerely,

Socrates28
 

ajqtrz

Chef - loquacious Old Dog
"Success," they say, "breeds success." And in the normal way of things that may be true. But success in this game doesn't breed success so much as slowing it down and making it harder. On the other hand, if it were to actually get easier because you achieved all those things, would you still play? Take, for instance, the constantly growing enemy squad sizes and toughness. Why do my enemies keep getting stronger because I'm getting stronger? In real life that probably wouldn't happen or at least one would en up outpacing the other and eventually dominate.

So here's the thing. The devs, no doubt are aiming to make it hard enough to keep the paying customers paying. But who are the paying customers? What if, having achieved all there is to achieve, the average "over-achiever" stops spending? What if, in the end, they want the difficulty to escalate so quickly that in the course of 2-5 chapters all the over-achievers leave? Since, (and here I'm speculating) the real spenders are the middle game players, then that is who they will focus their energy upon and, over the course of all the chapters, make it just difficult enough -- until, as the players quit spending, they make it too tough and those non-spending players move on.

It's just a theory, of course, but if they could achieve that there would be no need to create new chapters at some point. If 99.999% of players quit by chapter ?? and those who get passed chapter ??-3 never spend anything, then ?? would be the last chapter created.

At least that's my theory of the whole thing. The effort to keep the end-game players who are done spending, playing, isn't warranted because they are no longer spending.

AJ
 

Socrates28

Well-Known Member
At least that's my theory of the whole thing. The effort to keep the end-game players who are done spending, playing, isn't warranted because they are no longer spending.
AJ
That is an interesting theory and since I am one of the people you describe, even though I have continued to spend money on different things, it still makes little sense to me. Why would a company purposely hurt the very people who have made it successful? In many other industries loyalty and longevity of a business relationship, which is what we have with Inno, is rewarded and coveted in those industries. Why is that not the case, seemingly, in the recent past with the changes they have made purposely aimed at end game / advanced players?
IMO Inno would turn off people to such an extent that it would get a very bad reputation in the game playing community, which would hurt their other game titles as well. I have walked away from games before and I will do it again I am sure, no matter the amount of money I have spent on it. It is after all a game.
In my real life I know that people will from time to time do things I do not like, and yet if there is a continuing personal concern I get past the error and the relationship continues. If I become convinced that Inno no longer has a concern for me as an end game player I will be gone, no matter how much I like/love the game and the people I have become friends with through it. Loyalty is after all a two way street and I hope Inno recognizes it before it is too late for me and many others.
 

ajqtrz

Chef - loquacious Old Dog
The thing is, Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, got it right for a small company, limited advertising marketplace. He thought that if enough people put down a really bad company it would eventually lose enough customers that folds. But in the current mass-media advertising driven market, telling a million people to play will probably net you more than 20-30 new customers while the disgruntled player may discourage at best, that many from signing up. It's the size of the market and the ability to control the communication to that market by overwhelming the bad press with "good press," that makes the difference. Otherwise all those companies still in business who you, as a long-term gamer have heard about, wouldn't still be in business.

As for the other games, you may be right about the need to protect the cross-over. I'm always surprised at the number of players here who also play FOE (Forge of Empires? -- whatever the Inno game is called). But, in thinking about it, I wonder if players actually think about "that other game" when they are hacked off about this game. Do they drop both games at once? In my, admittedly uninformed, opinion I suspect they may get hacked off here (or there) but just keep on playing the other one because it has'n't been ruined, "yet."

AJ
 

hvariidh gwendrot

Well-Known Member
when i first started on ceravyn i bought a good chunk of the premium expansions and have made diamonds to get the rest and the game was a breeze .. the game is getting much harder there when it should be getting much easier due to what at the time was advancement that is now counted against players.. what are called end game players did tend to stick and help smaller players grow, i have seen several quit now, it is bizarre that my 60-70k small cities can outscore my 975k+ city but we keep repeating ourselves in asking inno to reconsider and they keep ignoring posts from beta and live worlds .. sales are down for inno and the only way they will even consider changing course is if more players stop spending .. it reminds me of a fast food franchise that paints the inside a really ugly color so people will get in and out fast, this is the new business model for inno to get new players, shake loose some change before they catch on that advancing in the game will create play problems and quit
 

Henroo

Oh Wise One
I just wonder who will buy their expansions at 10k+ :diamond: if they get rid of the long-time players.
10K+ diamonds? I think the problem is bigger than you realize. I could buy my next premium expansion for only 2000 diamonds, in 3 different worlds. I will never do so as long as premium expansions count against me in both Spire and Tournament. Of my 3 cities, 1 is just crossing into Sorcerers and Dragons, the other 2 are still in Woodelves. Yet I am already freezing premium expansions on all of them. And before the tournament change, getting expansions was my main use for diamonds. Inno needs to rethink their policy on including premium expansion in the Spire and Tournament squad size formulas. If they really want to stimulate diamond usage, exempt premium expansions entirely from it.
 

Deborah M

Oh Wise One
@Socrates28 I would feel uncomfortable saying much but a little birdie told me that they are still looking at some of this because the results were not as anticipated. I haven't even looked at the new FA yet so it has nothing to do with that.

@PaNonymeB Try 16,000 :diamond: and 16,000+ :diamond: for the 2 new premium expansions.

@hvariidh gwendrot Tell me about it! At 1.9M ranking points and all AW I am embarrassed that my smaller Fellowship that I moved to has players with 30K - 100K ranking points who are having a better time of it in the tournament than I am. How does that make sense? It doesn't! What it tells these newer players is that this game will only be fair to them for a while especially if they plow even a portion of the $$ I have spent. There has already been talk about AW not being worth it so I'm confident some would also equate my blue city and premium culture to something not wise to do in this game. I really want to encourage their growth so it is now a real catch 22 for me.
 

Iyapo1

Well-Known Member
Inno needs to rethink their policy on including premium expansion in the Spire and Tournament squad size formulas. If they really want to stimulate diamond usage, exempt premium expansions entirely from it.
If I buy premium expansions and leave my province and KP tree expansions in inventory the tournaments and the spire will cost me less than they cost someone who does not buy premium expansions.
 

BrinDarby

Well-Known Member
@Socrates28 ,
You'd think rather than middle players only the new players are also prime
examples of a group ripe to spend $$$$$, yet Inno isn't doing them any favors
either. Manual fighting isnow key and Mobile doesn't include that UI. Bigger
than that is the woefull trade system, that punishes players the newer ya are.
( so much for hooking new players to stay ).....

I'm a newer player ~5months now, I'm begrugingly into CH4 and I'm about
done with bldgs I can't place, and ppl I can't trade with fairly.... Being a player
that did come to the forum, This is the 2nd time I have now stopped progressing.
I have no AWs and could place another 5 earned expansions, if I closed all
incomplete (7/8) provinces. All I can do is thro away my KP to others and
troop levels are enough now that I don't lose any week-week anymore....

To me, this has become dumb, tons of stuff I'll never be able to use/place and
any progress just makes everything more difficult. I consistently finish the Spire
and get @least 1600 pts for the tournaments each week. Just trying to increase
# of trading partners ( no fee ) is progress that hurts me and earned expansions,
if placed, also hurt me.... so whats left to do really ???

If the F2P player cannot advance @ a certain point without spending $$$$, then
its better to just stop now..... Also seems yet another online game, that doesn't
embrace its playerbase, rather its a confrontational relationship... thats runs counter
to the end result of maximum revenue/player... So if you think the slide around here
only hurts end game players, I disagree.... it hurts all of us.
BrinD
 

WizardKrieg

Active Member
That is an interesting theory and since I am one of the people you describe, even though I have continued to spend money on different things, it still makes little sense to me. Why would a company purposely hurt the very people who have made it successful? In many other industries loyalty and longevity of a business relationship, which is what we have with Inno, is rewarded and coveted in those industries. Why is that not the case, seemingly, in the recent past with the changes they have made purposely aimed at end game / advanced players?
IMO Inno would turn off people to such an extent that it would get a very bad reputation in the game playing community, which would hurt their other game titles as well. I have walked away from games before and I will do it again I am sure, no matter the amount of money I have spent on it. It is after all a game.
In my real life I know that people will from time to time do things I do not like, and yet if there is a continuing personal concern I get past the error and the relationship continues. If I become convinced that Inno no longer has a concern for me as an end game player I will be gone, no matter how much I like/love the game and the people I have become friends with through it. Loyalty is after all a two way street and I hope Inno recognizes it before it is too late for me and many others.
Like so many of these games we have played over the years, the developers "improve" the game only to improve their cash flow. TRUTH
 

Deborah M

Oh Wise One
Like so many of these games we have played over the years, the developers "improve" the game only to improve their cash flow. TRUTH

Nothing personal but I always take exception to comments like this. Inno nor any of the other online games are charities. They are like any other company who has to make a profit. If they no longer make a profit they will fail as a company or at least as a business segment. First and foremost, I really want Inno to hire and retain skilled and creative employees. That drives up payroll at the very least. So, no cash flow = no game. I honestly do not see Elvenar as excessive. They need PtP players to support the game but I've known plenty of players who are/were FtP and did just fine. Of course they did not seem to have the expectation to do every aspect of the game at the same levels as the PtP players. Patience is a huge necessity if you want to be FtP. I have a smaller Fellowship now ranking wise and really enjoy seeing how much they are achieving as they grow their cities whether or not they spend $.

OK. I have to amend to say I do find it excessive to need $100 in :diamond: to get 1 expansion on sale :(
 

Kekune

Well-Known Member
I'm a newer player ~5months now, I'm begrugingly into CH4
If the F2P player cannot advance @ a certain point without spending $$$$, then
its better to just stop now.....
That point is a long way off for you. You could still get many months of enjoyment from the game, especially moving slowly as you are. My main city is F2P in ch17 and I haven't yet hit the "wall" that some of the biggest players or biggest spenders have hit, so by the time you're here they could totally overhaul the whole thing again.
 

hvariidh gwendrot

Well-Known Member
i'm retooling my ceravyn city for better supply output and less drag against me in tournament and spire play .. a pain in the ass but it's doable and other cities are doing fine with the new system and it has boosted scores from all the small and middle players we have .. but inno has said goodbye to any p2p from me, and a lot of the player base till expansions and wonder upgrades are remathed to not count against players .. dumbest programming i have ever seen :cool:
 

SoulsSilhouette

Buddy Fan Club member
As one person, I don't matter to INNO.

My paltry, sporadic purchases don't matter to INNO.

As a player, I don't matter to INNO.

My voice is silent to INNO.
 
Top