• 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

News from Beta - May Contain Spoilers!

Pheryll

Well-Known Member
It would be hilarious if Inno changes tournaments to reduce the tedium of fighting or catering 4x, only to replace it with the tedium of visiting every neighbor to have enough coins to cater
I wonder when the cost of coin/supplies for an encounter will go over the MH max capacity. It looks like as the chapters progress, the MH max capacity will be unable to keep up to the exponential increases in difficulty gained from number of researches alone.
 

n00bslayer420

Active Member
I wonder when the cost of coin/supplies for an encounter will go over the MH max capacity. It looks like as the chapters progress, the MH max capacity will be unable to keep up to the exponential increases in difficulty gained from number of researches alone.
I actually hope that happens, which will then force them to readjust the formula.
 

Pheryll

Well-Known Member
Um, the easiest thing to do to address that would be simply to appropriately set up MH capacity in the future chapters.
The thing is, too many things in the game are close to a quadratic scaling, that I think it is more likely that they will change the formula for Tournament and Spire Squad Size, than rebalance later chapters to address the issue.
 

MinMax Gamer

Well-Known Member
The thing is, too many things in the game are close to a quadratic scaling, that I think it is more likely that they will change the formula for Tournament and Spire Squad Size, than rebalance later chapters to address the issue.
Why? Later chapters do not exist yet, while tournaments and Spire do. And it's not that we don't have precedents in sudden jumps in parameters in the new chapters (e.g. workshop supply production in chapter 15 etc).
 

Pheryll

Well-Known Member
Because the Elvenar team is known for readjusting newer formulas to fit the old.

Remember the major culture "nerf" of the past- Elvenar, at that time had older event buildings whose culture/population progression matched the growth featured in its chapter buildings, while the newer event buildings of that time had a much more even increase per chapter. The newer event buildings had all their values changed to fit the older model. So people in orcs chapter and prior suffer large losses in population and culture, while people in woodelves or later saw little change, and may have had gains in certain cases.

I understand that both orcs and workshop production was rebalanced at chapter 15, the orc event buildings retrofitted to have a higher yield for all chapters, while the supply production from the workshop adjusted in only chapter 15 and later. There are many reasons that could be attributed to each. For supplies, the workshop's supply density per square was losing each chapter compared to the max supply capacity which is what the production of wonders was based upon. Chapter 15 workshops were given a ratio of their production per square per main hall capacity to match the Fairy chapter's ratio of workshop production per square per main hall capacity- that is the loss from several chapters was effectively undone to keep workshops relevant. For orcs, the event buildings grounds of the orc strategist had about the same orc unit production as the orc's nest production of orcs that would later be fed through an armory to produce orc units. Placing more orcs in all event buildings made orc production by event buildings a much more enticing option.

The quadratic nature of most of the productions of the game has been a major help to the current tournament squad size calculations, which being a multiple of your own squad size (which also is quadratic) kept things fairly balanced as the chapters progressed. Based on Elvenar's past behavior of making the new match the old, I would say it is fairly likely that they will do the same with the new tournament squad size formula, I am not saying when this will occur, as they may wait for several chapters before synchronizing the tournament/spire formula and the actual production.
 
@Marindor from Beta put this into the tournament changes thread on that forum today:
2020-08-04 07_30_59-Discussion - Tournament Changes (post-release) _ Page 50 _ Elvenar Beta Fo...png


I think these could be interesting. I like the different queues for the different training buildings. Some on Beta said it makes the brown bear less effective - I'm not sure how.

Time instants are just a set amount of time - it doesn't matter which queue you put them in. Other than saying people are putting a troop from one building, then a troop from another, then a troop from the third in the queue and using a time instant and then they get one of each kind with the instant. I think this actually makes the brown bear better - I can get some of all kinds without using instants now if I want - I like it

Edit- also instead of taking 1.5+ days to queue up troops from all three troops buildings and hoping I don't collect them while I wait for the third one to finish before feeding the bear I can have them all going at the same time. Now, I could use my brown bear every day (or every other day) if I can get enough food for it.
 
Last edited:

Pheryll

Well-Known Member
Time instants are just a set amount of time - it doesn't matter which queue you put them in. Other than saying people are putting a troop from one building, then a troop from another, then a troop from the third in the queue and using a time instant and then they get one of each kind with the instant. I think this actually makes the brown bear better - I can get some of all kinds without using instants now if I want - I like it
I think many are regarding this as 3x production calling for 3x requirements, and if the most viable units are needed in more frequency because of higher requirements, then the single queue would work better.

Another way that it could be rendered that the brown bear is less effective is that the percentage increase of troop production that it contributes will decrease.
 
I think many are regarding this as 3x production calling for 3x requirements, and if the most viable units are needed in more frequency because of higher requirements, then the single queue would work better.

Another way that it could be rendered that the brown bear is less effective is that the percentage increase of troop production that it contributes will decrease.
@Pheryll, why is this any different than today? Today you have to choose which troops to train. Even if each building has it's own queue, nothing says you HAVE to train in that building. Or am I missing something? So, if you want only blossom mages, train only blossom mages and then all of your resources go into the merc camp (basically making yourself single queue). Unless I am missing something, this just allows a person to train blossom mages and dogs and archers at the same time for example if they want to. There have been many times where I know I need troops from two buildings at the same time and I have to balance which queue to do first. It just gives us more choice on how we do it. I don't see more choice as a bad thing - but a good one.

Sure, they could nerf the percentage of troops the brown bear provides - but they could do that without this change as well. I'm trying to stay positive which is sometimes hard for me with change :)
 

Pheryll

Well-Known Member
Sure, they could nerf the percentage of troops the brown bear provides - but they could do that without this change as well. I'm trying to stay positive which is sometimes hard for me with change :)
I am not saying that they would nerf the percentage, the percentage would decrease because time instants would affect one of the three queues each while all three queues would be busy training. So you would have to devote three times the time instants to get the same percentage increase out of the brown bear as you would currently. This means that a city with a brown bear has reduced superiority over a city without one.

Where I was suggesting a nerf might take place is in troop requirement quests and spire/tournament costs. The more troops being produced means the more can be required out of players.
 
Last edited:

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
It nerfes the brown bear / timeboosters because they can atm increase your total output by a massive amount of percent combared to your base output, since each timebooster can only be used once it's effectiveness is only 1/3rd.

Also I can now setup 4-5 days of production in my barracks before I need to use activate the brown bears. this makes all my production be affected by the bear. with 3 independend productions I can no longer sustain such a profile as all barracks will be ready to soon.
 
None of these arguments make sense to me - and we'll probably have to agree to disagree - but let's do an example from my city
SS 2592

Barracks queue 5 slots takes 10.5 hours to produce 30,190 units (11.6 squads)
Merc camp 5 slots takes 11.66 hours to produce 30,190 units (11.6 squads)
Training grounds 5 slots takes 12:5 hours to produce 30,190 units (11.6 squads)

With single queue it will take me a total of 34.6 hours to pre-queue those troops. I will set them up one at a time to be ready to collect when I feed my brown bear.

The only difference to me, with the queues being separate, is that instead of queuing them all up to wait to collect taking 34.6 hours it will only take as long as my longest queue which is 12.5 hours - so I get the same 34.8 squads in only 12.5 hours. It doesn't prevent me from using the bear after all of them are finished.

I agree that it requires the supplies all at the same time - but then people can still choose to behave as if it is single queue if that is a problem. Nothing would prevent me from doing the barracks, and then the merc camp and then the training grounds and taking the 34.6 hours - but I can now choose - how is that bad?

In both cases, I can wait for all three queues to finish and then use the pet food on the brown bear - the only difference is the amount of time I have to wait for them to finish to collect. To me I have far more risk of "accidentally" collecting the troops early having to have one of them wait for over 20 hours (or doing things like disconnecting roads, etc).

So, we won't agree but that is fine. We don't all have to like everything and I respect your right to not like the proposed change. For me it will be good and I think for some others. Some (maybe many) won't like it. I fear that will always be the case as I'm not sure they could do anything that would make all of us happy - we have too many differing styles of play to make that possible.
 

MinMax Gamer

Well-Known Member
The only difference to me, with the queues being separate, is that instead of queuing them all up to wait to collect taking 34.6 hours it will only take as long as my longest queue which is 12.5 hours - so I get the same 34.8 squads in only 12.5 hours. It doesn't prevent me from using the bear after all of them are finished.
It's relative reduction of power. Let's simplify, and assume that each building can run the queue for 1 day, and produce 10K units. Right now, you'd run all 3 in 3 days to produce 30K of units. With 2x bears for 100% increase you would get 60K of units on a single feed in the same 3 days.

With simultaneous queues you'd produce 90K of units in 3 days without bears (assuming you can sustain supplies). Using same single feed 2x bears would only increase it to 30K+30K+60K = 120K. So relative improvement with the bears over 3 days went from +100% to only +33%.

It is similar if you're using timeboosters - today your timeboosters work 1:1 to realtime as there is only one queue. With those changes, it would only work to 1:3 realtime (e.g. 3 hours of timeboosts needed for boosting 1 hour of total production).

You may think that who cares about relative differences, bears still improve things and it's an overall improvement for everyone. Well, thinking that base troop production increased by up to 3 times (!) for everyone in one fell swoop won't trigger some other adjustments - e.g. lower production in each building, higher requirements for troops etc - is a bit naive. Well, new tournaments already have higher troop requirements, so there is that. Not to mention 3x times supply requirements. And not to mention that now you basically are expected to utilize all 3 building units in 1:1:1 ratio. I don't know about other people, but as an elf there is only one unit that I produce in the Barracks (golems), and you only need so many of those. And not to mention that extra troop production won't help you to win unwinnable fights due to ramp up in enemy size. At all.

So as usual, something that looks appealing on the surface (moar troops!), but not exactly an amazing change so far. Not sure what this was supposed to solve. I mean, with no other adjustments (questionable) it will probably help the same early/mid players that do just a bit of tournament to recoup their losses. If and only if they can afford the supplies, which is questionable. It doesn't move the unwinnable wall at all.
 
Last edited:

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
So as usual, something that looks appealing on the surface (moar troops!), but not exactly an amazing change so far. Not sure what this was supposed to solve. I mean, with no other adjustments (questionable) it will probably help the same early/mid players that do just a bit of tournament to recoup their losses. If and only if they can afford the supplies, which is questionable. It doesn't move the unwinnable wall at all.
Swarming this update with "positivity" to get rid of the almost pure negativity it created, as this has been asked by "noobs" more than once not knowing the implications.
So to many this will start with a big Yay moment. not knowing there drowning themselves later on.
 

mikeledo

Well-Known Member
If INNO must change something that means they got it wrong the first time. I know in the US if you mess up this much you lose your job.