Pheryll
Set Designer
I can see a large number of Valorian Guard and Orc Strategist buildings. It does not look like it is purely catering.
-
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
Tournament Changes
- Thread starter helya
- Start date
I can see a large number of Valorian Guard and Orc Strategist buildings. It does not look like it is purely catering.
Deleted User - 1178646
Guest
There is a workaround that makes you able to be competitive with a negotiation build, but it's so extreme as you need to have zero!!! bonus relics, as in absolutly none at all as this dramatically lowers the costs. (and then you still need some crazy town build)
negotiation is fine for lets say 8 provinces 6 rounds, and not far beyond that.
It cannot be compared to fighting in any way.
Deleted User - 1178646
Guest
That town would be much more efficient if he/she had not placed those buildings (and the required expansions for it)
Clusseau
Active Member
Sorry... im not understanding at all how this is Rude?
As you Say, it looks like everything is done... it just sits there... no action, no movement, no ambition....
.....seems the Dictionary definition of Lame.
It isnt BAD... certainly not for those that seek this, in a game.... but it is definitely Lame.
Ashrem
Oh Wise One
Sorry, you have derived a non-existent assumption. I never used, crazy, lots, or too many. All I said was "as many as you did in the past." Whether that is 5, 10, or 50 is not addressed in any way, was not assumed, and was not implied.
DeletedUser19418
Guest
clusseau has good instincts...
Okay, I want to clarify, the city in question is in 1st place currently and was in 2nd last week. This player has gone from 16k to 17k (in under a day) tourney score. I don't want to post stats of the player (you're not supposed to I think), but anyone can look this up for themselves on clusseau, Maggi, Mykan, and myself's world Arendyll. For this reason, I kept my message short. I'm not trying to criticize this player, as they are in fact doing us a great service to show INNO messed up (purposefully or accidentally either of which is a bad sign) and traded one group of players for another. They didn't make 17k + scores or 600+ KPs impossible, they shafted players that spend a lot of time and money on their cities.
The player in question here has military AW's (MAWs) that are high especially in troop production, the chapter is about high enough for all mostly 3-star troops, and it's low in total AW levels and expansions. This means as clusseau stated, it is lame. This basically means it is stagnant as a city where too much of any more improvement will make the city less effective. There will be very little for the player to do toward progress; instead, the huge cities as seen by players like Maggi, Dashell, or CrazyWizard will be nothing more than baubles now or in the near future. Not really something to aspire toward for many including myself (my city is very well advanced too).
To make this clear for the reading impaired, this is not about not getting big scores or KPs, it's about being shafted (reread the beginning if this is not sinking in). Plus, those crowing about how great it is they are benefiting from this change because they are in early chapter are acting very shortsighted and selfishly as they will one day be in our position assuming they don't bail long before reaching our level of advancement.
How do you like them apples!
Iyapo1
Well-Known Member
This was done using mechanics that existed prior to the update. Why include this data point?
Prior to the update players were exceeding 17k.
This has not impacted my score. Prior to the update I could not clear 10 provinces to six stars....I still cant. Because of the update I will never score 20k. I am strangely okay with this. That does not make me shortsighted or in any way selfish.
Iyapo1
Well-Known Member
I apologize, I did not realize you ment lame literally.
Last edited:
StarLoad
Well-Known Member
While this is true in Provinces below 5-8 and in rounds 1-3 AND in cities below Orc's it is my experience that outside that the costs increase well beyond what it was before (including the sum of 4) and where it used to ask for 20 - 80 orcs it now asks for 1200 - 2700 and for normal goods Province 7 and round 3 wants 20K T1 and 5K of T3 Yeah sure its reduced...
samidodamage
Buddy Fan Club member
Here's my take on the changes to the tournament structure.:
I have a playstyle where I don't care about speeding through chapters & rank is not important to me either in the game or in the tourneys.
There are players to whom one or both of those things are important and I don't think their playstyle should be any less important to the company than mine. They're competitive and they enjoy competing. Some of them spend real money to achieve their goals, especially if both of those things are important to them. That means more expansions, AW's leveled higher (and more of them) and probably some other things I'm not thinking of right now. With the changes, a player who has never been in the top competitors for tournament rank can walk away with the #1 spot and it's because they haven't put in that kind of time and money to get there. Some of the things the older cities have done cannot be reversed (can't sell off an expansion or undo chapter research techs) and other things they could do would reduce their rank in the overall game (selling off high level AW's, substituting event bldgs (that give no ranking points) for high level factories (that give lots of hard earned ranking points). I can understand the recent changes creating feelings of frustration and betrayal along with feeling they are no longer valued customers.
I value those players highly. They've made it possible for me to play a game I really enjoy for a number of years at a significantly reduced cost! I think what they're saying is that the path for newer players to reach that competitive level could have (and some have outright said it should have) been made easier without penalizing the ones who've worked long and hard to get there. I can understand that point even if, in their frustration and anger, they haven't always been great at how they are expressing their position.
I have a playstyle where I don't care about speeding through chapters & rank is not important to me either in the game or in the tourneys.
There are players to whom one or both of those things are important and I don't think their playstyle should be any less important to the company than mine. They're competitive and they enjoy competing. Some of them spend real money to achieve their goals, especially if both of those things are important to them. That means more expansions, AW's leveled higher (and more of them) and probably some other things I'm not thinking of right now. With the changes, a player who has never been in the top competitors for tournament rank can walk away with the #1 spot and it's because they haven't put in that kind of time and money to get there. Some of the things the older cities have done cannot be reversed (can't sell off an expansion or undo chapter research techs) and other things they could do would reduce their rank in the overall game (selling off high level AW's, substituting event bldgs (that give no ranking points) for high level factories (that give lots of hard earned ranking points). I can understand the recent changes creating feelings of frustration and betrayal along with feeling they are no longer valued customers.
I value those players highly. They've made it possible for me to play a game I really enjoy for a number of years at a significantly reduced cost! I think what they're saying is that the path for newer players to reach that competitive level could have (and some have outright said it should have) been made easier without penalizing the ones who've worked long and hard to get there. I can understand that point even if, in their frustration and anger, they haven't always been great at how they are expressing their position.
Enevhar Aldarion
Oh Wise One
Here is another note to throw into the mix. This is the 3rd week of the new format on Live and it will be the 3rd straight week I will get 5250 points. I 100% auto-fight, and because of the split in the troop training queues, I have not had to feed my brown bear even once in the last few weeks. I also only fight in the Spire and finish at least the 1st and 2nd floor every week. I do not discriminate and use all my troops, not just a specific few, the way others talk about, so being able to have all three queues going non-stop made a big difference.
Now, on another note, when I did province 10 - star 4 tonight, the enemy troops were still only 2 stars. I could swear in the past couple of weeks that I fought 3-star enemies sooner than that. Am I just remembering wrong or did we get a stealth adjustment to some of the enemy troop star ratings?
Now, on another note, when I did province 10 - star 4 tonight, the enemy troops were still only 2 stars. I could swear in the past couple of weeks that I fought 3-star enemies sooner than that. Am I just remembering wrong or did we get a stealth adjustment to some of the enemy troop star ratings?
Meggi
Active Member
Hi guys,
Can I please ask you not to attack each other, simply because that's not productive.I most certainly don't have nothing against smaller players have easier times with tourneys, more power to them.Lets be gracious, if at all possible with how we talk to each other.The questions should be aimed at INNO, and no, this will not go away, its here to stay to either getting everyone to stay at small chapters and not advancing, or making people have a lots of push accounts and not play with big city from what I see from all the comments.Lets concentrate on the productivity and ask the game makers what they want us to do.
Hence, we can make educated decision as what to do with the game.Please be kind to each other, we are all here to relax, and have fun, if the devs let us...
Thank you all.
Can I please ask you not to attack each other, simply because that's not productive.I most certainly don't have nothing against smaller players have easier times with tourneys, more power to them.Lets be gracious, if at all possible with how we talk to each other.The questions should be aimed at INNO, and no, this will not go away, its here to stay to either getting everyone to stay at small chapters and not advancing, or making people have a lots of push accounts and not play with big city from what I see from all the comments.Lets concentrate on the productivity and ask the game makers what they want us to do.
Hence, we can make educated decision as what to do with the game.Please be kind to each other, we are all here to relax, and have fun, if the devs let us...
Thank you all.
Pheryll
Set Designer
The issue is allowing the small players to have an easier time relative to the bigger players. When the new spire calculation system (City Advancement Level) was introduced, the developers made the incorrect point that it would encourage players to progress through the chapters as merely sitting there leveling up wonders would give them a penalty. What was incorrect about their assessment is that progressing through the chapters gave an even greater penalty than just sitting and leveling up wonders. The City Advancement Level calculation has been used for quite some time now, and the issues with it still have not been resolved. Now that it is in the tournament, and not just the spire, it controls the vast majority of troop and/or goods expenditure.
Last edited:
StarLoad
Well-Known Member
no Problem with the lower level cities getting a break, however as they become mid-level and then advanced.... then what. This is the problem as INNO has made the game work only to a certain level and then its curves downhill. Not sure where the exact peak is O&G to Halflings area?
sam767
Well-Known Member
Because I'm an AM, I'm happy that the new tournament has made it easier for my FS to hit 10 chests (it wasn't hard before the change). We are running 12+ but the FS goal is 10.
As a CH16 player who has bought all of my allowed expansions, I join those who whine that continuing to advance in the game now penalizes my tournament performance. @Nightguest assures us this was not a design goal and has apparently given the devs enough counter examples that they will revisit the algorithm with those of us who bought a lot of diamonds in mind.
Clearly, if Inno wants me to buy some more diamonds when CH17 comes out with a couple of new premium expansions, I have to be convinced that it is worth it. Apparently it is not.
Where is the optimum city described? I have a couple of early chapter cities (you know - those CH4 wonders) that might be candidates.
As a CH16 player who has bought all of my allowed expansions, I join those who whine that continuing to advance in the game now penalizes my tournament performance. @Nightguest assures us this was not a design goal and has apparently given the devs enough counter examples that they will revisit the algorithm with those of us who bought a lot of diamonds in mind.
Clearly, if Inno wants me to buy some more diamonds when CH17 comes out with a couple of new premium expansions, I have to be convinced that it is worth it. Apparently it is not.
Where is the optimum city described? I have a couple of early chapter cities (you know - those CH4 wonders) that might be candidates.
Deleted User - 1178646
Guest
Where isn't an optimal city described.
Since the values are multiplied with eachother they depend on eachother a lot.
Therefore there is not 1 answer.
the general consensus is keep wonders to only the few best, keep expansions as low as you can get away with, limit research not beyond the frog prince.
But there are also example of orc cities, with 0 relic bonus and other extreme models.
A * B * C * D
Since each of them is multiplied with eachother keeping 1 value extremely low can have huge difference in outcome.
Use MinMax spreadsheet en mess with the numbers untill you get something statisfactory and then built towards that "paper town"
edeba
Well-Known Member
Yes, I really noticed chapter 16 was costly, hence, I have no plans to do chapter 17, except the first tech so I get chapter 17 event pieces.
I don't think anyone is complaining about it being made more difficult, but the extreme level of increased difficulty and the degree to which the playing field has become punitive for advancing in the game.
I made this difficulty chart and it is simply outrageous. Province 50 level 6 at 200% and then building backwards and forwards from that would have made more sense and been more fair to everyone rather then totally tossing the top players under the bus.
Attachments
edeba
Well-Known Member
Part 2
So, I came up with a proposal for a more reasonable difficulty increase. I started it a little bit more difficult, but level 6 is about the same for the first province. But most people were only playing most of their tournament to level 5, except the early provinces which had much smaller losses even if the percent loss was higher. So 145% difficulty is showing up at province 17 level 6 in my proposal compared to province 13 level 6. We were able to play even 100 provinces (if we had them open) to level 5 and not exceed this difficulty. And then I put in a more gradual difficulty increase. 3% is a fast increase in difficulty when you are in the range where losses are increasing. I went to 2% at difficult 155%, 1.5% at 175% difficulty and 1% above 190% difficulty. It is just way more reasonable and not such a swindle against players who have spent hard earned dollars on the game.
So, I came up with a proposal for a more reasonable difficulty increase. I started it a little bit more difficult, but level 6 is about the same for the first province. But most people were only playing most of their tournament to level 5, except the early provinces which had much smaller losses even if the percent loss was higher. So 145% difficulty is showing up at province 17 level 6 in my proposal compared to province 13 level 6. We were able to play even 100 provinces (if we had them open) to level 5 and not exceed this difficulty. And then I put in a more gradual difficulty increase. 3% is a fast increase in difficulty when you are in the range where losses are increasing. I went to 2% at difficult 155%, 1.5% at 175% difficulty and 1% above 190% difficulty. It is just way more reasonable and not such a swindle against players who have spent hard earned dollars on the game.
StarLoad
Well-Known Member
@Nightguest @helya @everyone else
Don't take this the wrong way, because what I say is what I hear in my FS chats, but when I see Massive charts like this and ultra-long and complex formula and discussions my brain seizes for a moment just like in a cartoon until I remember THIS IS A GAME. It should not require any of this and both the players and INNO need to realize this. GAME = Fun, relaxation, challenge, and distractions but not what we are seeing now.
Don't take this the wrong way, because what I say is what I hear in my FS chats, but when I see Massive charts like this and ultra-long and complex formula and discussions my brain seizes for a moment just like in a cartoon until I remember THIS IS A GAME. It should not require any of this and both the players and INNO need to realize this. GAME = Fun, relaxation, challenge, and distractions but not what we are seeing now.