Feedback: Sandbox 24 - Olympus World - Revolt

I cannot remember the announcement of any changes in the game mechanics which would have been necessary to make an Olympus world with revolt system work.

It´s disappointing that the announcement of Sandbox 24 has no link to (and does not even mention) the DevBlog article regarding the Olympus changes for the revolt version. But unfortunately, there are next to none, anyway.


The long awaited missing part from Olympus is here. There isn’t a huge amount to say here, other than to clarify a few points:

  • To ensure a competitive gameplay, when being conquered on a revolt world, temples act like player cities, not like ghost towns.
  • Temples will have a ‘blue’ and a ‘red’ phase for revolt, just like a player city.
  • Any player in the alliance can land a colony ship in the temple during red phase to successfully conquer it, not only the player who initiated the revolt.
  • Active revolts are cancelled if the player who initiated the revolt leaves the alliance, or if the alliance is disbanded.
    • If a revolt is cancelled, either from the player leaving, or from another alliance successfully taking over the temple, all members of the alliance will receive a report.
  • The temple info window will indicate ongoing revolts for your own alliance, as well as the phase the revolt is in.
The other really important point to cover here is that this is our first iteration at tackling Revolt on Olympus, and, your feedback will be paramount in understanding if we missed the mark, and what changes we should make in the future. We wanted to deliver the core elements of Revolt to Olympus, and make it available for players in 2022, but with this, we may have to make more changes, similarly to the rebalancing we’ve done with Conquest. So please play it, try it, and break it, so we can improve it for future iterations. We already expect to have to make changes to Revolt Olympus, so more than ever your feedback is needed.

So, in fact, in the meantime absolutely nothing has been done to make revolt work on Olympus worlds, and no ideas have been developed? And if so, why do you open this world at all? The "missing part" is still missing.
Last edited:
It would be very helpful, if there is a possibility for copy and paste the revolt-dates to Ingame Forum or Ingames Messages, just like the conquer report, but reduced on the dates are used for revolts.

I guess, it will be fine, if you click on the city/temple info, contained a sheet for Revolts and the owner can copy via buttom all needed informations, like City Code, Wall, God and all starting revolt times, desirable end times as well.

Something like:

Wall: x
God: no
Revolt starts at: hh:mm:ss today or tomorrow
next Revolt starts at: hh:mm:ss today or tomorrow

Last edited:
@Arci, InnoGames introduced compact numbers to avoid reading problems and then on temples you can't read how many units are there? I had to inspect the item with the browser tools to find out


  • Schermata 2022-02-18 alle 20.38.18.png
    Schermata 2022-02-18 alle 20.38.18.png
    195.9 KB · Views: 135


Community Manager
Grepolis Team
@Arci, InnoGames introduced compact numbers to avoid reading problems and then on temples you can't read how many units are there? I had to inspect the item with the browser tools to find out
I can confirm there are some parts of the game where the compact system isn't properly applied. I see Olympus is already on the list :)
@Arci about 21 days have passed since the opening of the world and, although the beta world has the participation it has, there are some problems related to the design of the world:

1) the portal temples are all positioned very far from the cross, causing an initial start to be heavily disadvantaged. Given that the extent of the worlds is limited and therefore you can start with your back covered, it would be appropriate to create an advantage in the central area of the world and not far away.

2) the division of the temples makes no sense. You go through the location of random bonuses, but at least the same number of temples per sea would be desirable. At present there are 6 temples in 55, 7 in 45, 7 in 54 and as many as 9 in 44. With the only problem that, as can be seen from the world map, 44 is practically non-existent, creating unnecessary and harmful crowding.

In 12 days we will be able to start attacking the small temples and we will see if the game mechanics work, even if I don't think there is a situation that can test it effectively.


  • Schermata 2022-03-07 alle 22.55.05.png
    Schermata 2022-03-07 alle 22.55.05.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 97
@Arci there is a huge problem with the Olympus revolt. There is no dynamic of revolt, unlike siege. Now on the siege you can see the movements and then you have an idea of where the colonial can be since it is followed by the supports. Upon revolt, once the revolt has taken place, the defenders will have only and only the proposed images available. The times do not appear anywhere, it is practically not possible to know with certainty the activation times of the individual revolts and the players would be forced to do the math manually by adding the timer to the current time. At this point, building a dynamic revolt or inserting the timetable tooltip on the temple screen is extremely necessary.


  • Schermata 2022-03-23 alle 21.35.56.png
    Schermata 2022-03-23 alle 21.35.56.png
    278.5 KB · Views: 112
  • Schermata 2022-03-23 alle 21.35.05.png
    Schermata 2022-03-23 alle 21.35.05.png
    114.7 KB · Views: 100
Last edited:
We suffered our first temple revolt. As you can see from the image, the only information we have about the revolt is a crude countdown. This is a problem since, as a script movement conversion shows, there were two attacks on the way. We do not know, nor can we know in any way whether both attacks revolted, nor the time between the two revolts. This lack of information creates a huge problem making it impossible to know whether the end of a revolt will coincide with the possibility of freeing the defenses.

Unlike siege where the central part of the defense of the temple is to prevent the entry of the colonial, on revolt the crucial part of the defense is to better organize one's supports and troops / ships to optimize the defense. This situation makes it impossible, in fact, any minimum coordination since it is not possible to know if there are further active revolts.


  • Schermata 2022-04-04 alle 22.15.10.png
    Schermata 2022-04-04 alle 22.15.10.png
    449.1 KB · Views: 117
First feedback on the small temples of the live world, the first thought was "What the sh... is this?"

We assume that if a feature arrives on a live world it is expected that it has been tested both programmatically and on beta worlds. Now the beta is not very popular and new worlds are often inadequate to see all the facets of a feature. This, however, should be true for gameplay features and how exploited they are exploited by players, not for which they are "broken" at the programming level.

Under conditions, each player can only see their own movements to a small temple that is not in the possession of their alliance. The only way he has to see if there is a riot is to go to the small temple tooltip. This at least from a computer..
From the app, in fact, things change and this screen magically appears.

The peculiarity is that in addition to seeing the number of revolts of your ally, which is not possible from the browser, you can also see if there are revolts from other alliances.

WTF ?!

But has anyone tried to view the temples app screen and notice this thing? I am only sorry that on the beta I could not verify this, but it seems incredible to me that you did not check the screen before sending it at least in live.
Anyway @Arci here's the first huge feature bug. From the app the small temples are "broken" and allow each user to know if someone is anticipating him or if he is immediately after him. I would say it is something to be resolved as soon as possible.

Primo feedback sui piccoli templi del mondo live, il primo pensiero è stato "come straca... si fa?" Partiamo dal presupposto che se una funzionalità arriva su un mondo live ci si aspetta che sia stata testata sia a livello di programmazione, sia sui mondi in beta. Ora il beta è poco frequentato e mondi nuovi sono spesso inadatti a vedere tutte le sfaccettature di una funzionalità. Questo, però, dovrebbe essere vero per funzionalità di gameplay e come vengano sfruttate dai giocatori, non per dinamiche che risultano "rotte" a livello di programmazione. In condizioni, ogni giocatore può vedere solo i propri movimenti verso un piccolo tempio che non è in possesso della sua alleanza. L'unico modo che ha per vedere se esiste una rivolta è andare sul tooltip del piccolo tempio. Questo almeno da computer.

Da app, infatti, le cose cambiano e magicamente appare questa schermata. La particolarità è che oltre a vedere il numero delle rivolte della propria ally, cosa che da browser non è possibile, si vede anche se ci sono rivolte di altre alleanze. WTF?! Ma nessuno ha provato a visualizzare la schermata app dei templi e notare questa cosa? Mi dispiace solo che sul beta non ho potuto verificare questa cosa, ma mi sembra incredibile che non si sia controllata la schermata prima di mandarlo almeno in live. Ad ogni modo @Arci ecco il primo enorme bug della funzionalità. Da app i piccoli templi sono "rotti" e permettono ad ogni utente di sapere se qualcuno lo sta anticipando o se è subito dopo di lui. Direi che è qualcosa da risolvere il prima possibile.


  • Schermata 2022-04-29 alle 19.01.27.png
    Schermata 2022-04-29 alle 19.01.27.png
    213.2 KB · Views: 90
  • IMG_2216B19A0C76-1.jpeg
    831.6 KB · Views: 88


Divine Envoy
Why on revolt is everyone on a alliance able to cast spells from the temple at attackers once owned when on the conquest temples this was changed so only the person who conquered the temple could do this?
Also when your temple is put into revolt by other alliances all the information you get is a crude there are 1 or 6 revolts being stirred up (depending on how many) but no information on times of red revolts?
If we try to insert more temples of the same type in the simulator (the only tool to understand how situations of this type work) this is not possible, but it is possible to insert the number of temples and, automatically, the system multiplies the percentage of temples by the number of temples owned.

My alliance has two temples that reduce the cost of naval units by 6% each so according to this system I should have a first reduction in the cost of naval units of 10% (mathematical research) and then a second reduction of 12% (effect temples). I attach photos with numerical proof of the accounts. I only evaluated in wood cost of the following units:

Light Ship: in-game value 1034
Fast transport ship: in-game value 637
Transport boat: in-game value 398
Colony Ship: in-game value 7953
Trireme: value in game 1591

The values are not very distant, but it seemed absurd that they all deviate systematically from the theoretical value I have attached.

At this point, then, I tried to reason as if the temples acted separately, thus subtracting first a percentage and then a second as per the attached diagram. I stopped only at the incendiary ship because the accounts immediately received feedback showing that therefore the method to choose is this.
@Arci, the question is: why the simulator and the game act with two different calculation methods? Which of the two is the right one? Is the bug in the simulator or in the temples action? I hope that at least this question is answered.


  • IMG_9842.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 85
  • IMG_9843.jpg
    771.2 KB · Views: 75
The large temples on the beta are out, there are bugs, some of no small importance.

First bug: not all temples are present in the scroll list (already reported).

Second bug (?): Temples are not in the order presented by the devblog. According to the devblog, in fact, the order should have been: Zeus -> Athena -> Poseidon -> Hera -> Hades -> Artemis -> Ares -> Aphrodite.The temples instead came out as: Zeus -> Athena -> Poseidon -> Hera -> Ares -> Aphrodite

It had been suggested by the devblog that the order was to maintain balanced access to the large temples, but if two random temples are eliminated this effect is canceled. Finally, a final evaluation: the beta worlds and also the live world in Italy did not offer much competitiveness, the first because beta and the second because heavily influenced by the start. By virtue of this, the players are already organizing themselves for the great temples, but under normal conditions no one would give up making transportable land units off cities for the mythical ones, given the presence of the walls. For this reason, the absence of Artemis, the only great temple that enhances the attack of non-mythic land units, leaves me perplexed.
Evaluations on the curse of Olympus in revolt.

The beta is a server with few players and this makes it easier, but after 3 days of Olympus some considerations arise:

- Avoiding revolts on Olympus is impossible because in case of compact attacks of mythic, the absence of walls is too penalizing to be rebalanced by spells
- In case of revoltes, the curse is too heavy to be sustained, the annex highlights this very well. The first number are the biremes left after 24 hours with 10,000 biremes in defense, the second what would happen to a full biremes of 400. The third is the remaining percentage of 100% of the defenses. The fact that the curse now always works makes it impossible to reduce losses.
- With the losses highlighted an alliance finds itself having huge losses only and only for the revolt on Olympus, not for having defended it in a fight, which means that the opponent still has all the ships and only has to prolong the revolt and wait.

The problems highlighted could be overcome by the following solutions:
- Insertion of the walls only on Olympus
- Interruption of the Olympus curse during a revolt

In case it's not too much to ask, could you know the opinions of the developers regarding the feedback and the proposed solutions, @Arci?


  • Schermata 2022-07-16 alle 15.13.38.png
    Schermata 2022-07-16 alle 15.13.38.png
    74.2 KB · Views: 60
Last edited:
I share, here, my impressions on Olympus generated by the latest events on the beta and on the Italian live world.

The difference I witnessed made it clear that in a competitive world the Olympus mode, by revolt, represents a unicum to be absolutely preserved as it requires strategy and ability as well as organization, it also enhances the reactivity and activity of the players as well as than their capacity for initiative.

However, some critical issues must be encountered due to the enormous difficulty of conquering Olympus itself in the case of coalitions. The problem of the revolt and the waiting time, as well as being able to know exactly the time of the opposing revolt undoubtedly affects the natural unfolding of events. I think the feared risk of impossibility of conquest has diminished, at least in my opinion, given the enormous effect of the curse on the defenses placed on Olympus. On the other hand, he wonders how he can be defended since he would have the same problem. Probably in this world we may not see this possibility, but something remains to be tested or, at least, simulated.

Also a mention regarding the logic of the windows. Olympus is not present in the alliance overview and this makes it more difficult for the leaders of the alliance that owns it to be able to make an assessment on it. It should be included, in my opinion.
Furthermore, the method of reporting revolts should be reviewed, not so much those in attack, but those in defense, browsers and apps are the polar opposite. If the computer provides extremely limited information that makes it difficult to make the necessary assessments, on the contrary the app provides a set of perhaps excessive information that penalizes the game.

Overall, I hope a similar mode world will be released live as soon as possible. The absence of walls is certainly a huge deficit capable of sending even very strong alliances into crisis, but despite everything it manifests a difference from wonders and domination that makes this mode the most fascinating. Especially in revolt, the large number of offensive temples makes it very interesting and fun to attack even at the end of the server as it rebalances the huge accumulation bonus def otherwise insurmountable in the last period.
I remain, however, convinced that the modality is however a bit distorted and penalized. The walls on the temples or at least on the Olympus continue to consider them a necessity.

To summarize, there are some critical issues to review:
- Olympus in the covenant temples overview
- An overview that improves the information on the revolts taking place on temples (small, large and Olympus)
- Walls on Olympus
- Effect of the Olympus curse when defending a revolt

Overall, however, it is certainly the most intriguing and most interesting mode, despite everything.

PS:I'm curious about the opinions of other players, honestly
@Arci now that the beta server starts closing in its peacetime and also the Italian server seems to be destined for a quick closure, can we know, as players, what will be the destiny of olimpo revolt? It is clear that the idea of announcing new live worlds in May has faded. Will Olympus revolt be settled until a later date? Or will its development go hand in hand with that of the siege? Will there be a chance to review this mode in live worlds soon?


Community Manager
Grepolis Team
We're collecting all the precious feedback and we confirmed that the community indeed wants Olympus with revolt.

The development will continue to iron out the details based on the feedback and new worlds will start :)


So does that mean it will reset Sandbox 24? Or that it will continue to be open? I thought I saw somewhere that Olympus had been conquered.