Feedback: Update to version 2.124
- Thread starter Arci
- Start date
DeletedUser2458
Guest
- Cities on World Wonder islands aren't affected by owner's vacation mode.
DeletedUser2458
Guest
And what about ally meetings in real life?
And... Did somebody count with cases where on WWs islands are moved only chosen ones, so it means during vacation to move the most of their cities? It is complicated, especially in summer time when many players activate their vacation. Just because of vacation destroy army in cities which must be overtaken by co-players?
And... Did somebody count with cases where on WWs islands are moved only chosen ones, so it means during vacation to move the most of their cities? It is complicated, especially in summer time when many players activate their vacation. Just because of vacation destroy army in cities which must be overtaken by co-players?
Ally meetings in real life are ways less frequent than players abusing of this exploit.
It's something like shared connection restrictions, probably it's too much for players that wants to respect the rules, but in order to discourage (and avoid) some unfair behaviors, we can get into limitations like that.
It's just about get used to it in my opinion, if you are on a WW and plan to go on holiday, just let someone trusted take your WW cities.
Anyways, thanks for your feedbacks, feel free to explain any doubt you may have on that, everything will be forwarded to game design ^^
It's something like shared connection restrictions, probably it's too much for players that wants to respect the rules, but in order to discourage (and avoid) some unfair behaviors, we can get into limitations like that.
It's just about get used to it in my opinion, if you are on a WW and plan to go on holiday, just let someone trusted take your WW cities.
Anyways, thanks for your feedbacks, feel free to explain any doubt you may have on that, everything will be forwarded to game design ^^
Draba Aspera
Zeus
This is pure nonsense, and our game designers should think again - or just play a world to its end before implementing changes like this. And they should revise this fast - this "new feature" must not go live, under no circumstances, and it must disappear at once from Betas as well.
Quite obviously the game designers are not aware of the consequences of this impromptu change. We are human, we have lives, family and friends; we may have accidents, fall ill, may lose beloved ones unexpectedly (as it happened to me - you cannot always plan vacation mode, sometimes live forces you into it), and that´s what vacation mode is for - to grant your players a break for the pleasures, duties and sad episodes of their real lives - or even just breaks. And that´s what they deserve to have, even if they own WW cities in Grepolis.
No, we have no world wonders endangered by this unbelievable decision, but nobody with a rest of common sense can welcome this change.
---
Yes, there might have been abuse, and certain rules may be established (vacation mode no longer than 2 weeks, or other appropiate limitations) to prevent abuse. But this change is not only ridiculous, it is inhuman.
DeletedUser
Guest
"but in order to discourage (and avoid) some unfair behaviors, we can get into limitations like that."
- just to comment this: I'd rather wait 42 days + 14 bought holiday days + 42 days, if the date of registration would extend the vacation mode, than playing one single day more if this change would really take place. As if these days/months would be decisive... They have never been.
You can never switch on Vacation Mode spontaneously, you always have to think about this and that, you have to destroy soldiers, you have to build them new. Do you really want us to rotate World Wonder Cities? That's the only reason I can see behind this.
For the rest I can just agress with Draba, you just wrote down what I was thinking, even if I seem to be a bit more angry...
It's just unbelievable...
(I'm a player from .de, that's why there might be some mistakes...
)
- just to comment this: I'd rather wait 42 days + 14 bought holiday days + 42 days, if the date of registration would extend the vacation mode, than playing one single day more if this change would really take place. As if these days/months would be decisive... They have never been.
You can never switch on Vacation Mode spontaneously, you always have to think about this and that, you have to destroy soldiers, you have to build them new. Do you really want us to rotate World Wonder Cities? That's the only reason I can see behind this.
For the rest I can just agress with Draba, you just wrote down what I was thinking, even if I seem to be a bit more angry...
It's just unbelievable...
(I'm a player from .de, that's why there might be some mistakes...
DeletedUser4183
Guest
This change is the most nonsense you guys are trying to bring into the game for a long time now.
This will kill all good Alliances with their ww plans only to punish one or two players.
This "solution" is even more nonsense and shows that you/and the developer have no knowledge at how the worldwonders are played ingame.
We play with 2 Players on each worldwonder island, each with 10 cities. theses players also have around 10-20 cities around the worldwonder (colonies and so on) Do you want to let all this cities helpless??? Deff all this cities for weeks??? conquer them all? He was choosen to protect the worldwonder and the area around it and this stupid change destroys it all. If this change comes no alliance at all can safely build worldwonder and you take another step to destroy this game, which was great in the past.
This will kill all good Alliances with their ww plans only to punish one or two players.
This "solution" is even more nonsense and shows that you/and the developer have no knowledge at how the worldwonders are played ingame.
We play with 2 Players on each worldwonder island, each with 10 cities. theses players also have around 10-20 cities around the worldwonder (colonies and so on) Do you want to let all this cities helpless??? Deff all this cities for weeks??? conquer them all? He was choosen to protect the worldwonder and the area around it and this stupid change destroys it all. If this change comes no alliance at all can safely build worldwonder and you take another step to destroy this game, which was great in the past.
Chose only one or two players to take every world wonder is not a rule, it's just a tactic chosen by your alliance, someone else, maybe on another markets, can adopt a different tactic.
I don't see anything wrong if after a game mechanic gets changed players have to rewrite their strtegy.
Some other games changes what player calls "meta" (or game strategy) every moth and there's nothing wrong on that, this just means that the game keeps evlolving.
Anyways, I'll let game design know about your opinions.
I don't see anything wrong if after a game mechanic gets changed players have to rewrite their strtegy.
Some other games changes what player calls "meta" (or game strategy) every moth and there's nothing wrong on that, this just means that the game keeps evlolving.
Anyways, I'll let game design know about your opinions.
DeletedUser4184
Guest
As I may notice all those recent and future changes regarding WW age are made to make WW building a bit slower.
Can't agree that "forbidding" WW site player to go to VM will solve the main problem which is building WW's by 2, 3, 4 and even more alliances and shuffling players among them.
The solution can be in disallowing players to send resources outside alliance they are in (just like when you don't have Market on appropriate level), together with already implemented 72h donation cooldown for new alliance members.
Can't agree that "forbidding" WW site player to go to VM will solve the main problem which is building WW's by 2, 3, 4 and even more alliances and shuffling players among them.
The solution can be in disallowing players to send resources outside alliance they are in (just like when you don't have Market on appropriate level), together with already implemented 72h donation cooldown for new alliance members.
DeletedUser4183
Guest
Of couse its a tactic. But liek we know inno you will implement it on all worlds except what. Exactly like u did it with 2.123 which hit a german world mid WorldWonder time.
Changing Game Mechans and destroying essential part of the game like vacation equally for all players and all cities is a completely different pair of shoes.
You have time enough in a world to wait til the vacation is over if there are allys which use this tactical.
But if players on worldwonder islands want to go on vacation its a huge thing now and you cant "just swap the cities" like you prefered before. Thats nonsense. That doesnt work at all.
DeletedUser4183
Guest
Well, we can ask to implement this feature only on words that aren't in WW era yet
And to be clear, players can still go on vacation mode, only those few towns on WW will be attackable, other ones are regularly affected by VM.
Yeah exactly like you listend to that feedback on all the previous updates whoch affected worlds which are older heavily and you still force the updates on them.
This also doesnt help against the from the ground on wrong and stupid idea behind this change.
Last edited by a moderator:
Draba Aspera
Zeus
No, I won´t discuss any changes to that feature - it is nonsense in itself, no matter whether old or new worlds are concerned.
---
You plan to punish normal players who did nothing wrong (besides taking a break the game officially grants them) like (attackable) banned players - and punishing their alliances with them.
There is no sense and no justification at all in and for this change, and obviously the ones implementing it have completely forgotten that they are not only dealing with functions of the game but with real human beings.
When now the first of our members is thinking of postponing a (necessary) surgery and another thinking about how the hell she can avoid vacation mode for her honeymoon, and all because of the uncertainty and bewilderment caused by this stunning announcement, you can rest assured that I will not quieten down before that nonsense is cancelled for good..
---
You plan to punish normal players who did nothing wrong (besides taking a break the game officially grants them) like (attackable) banned players - and punishing their alliances with them.
There is no sense and no justification at all in and for this change, and obviously the ones implementing it have completely forgotten that they are not only dealing with functions of the game but with real human beings.
When now the first of our members is thinking of postponing a (necessary) surgery and another thinking about how the hell she can avoid vacation mode for her honeymoon, and all because of the uncertainty and bewilderment caused by this stunning announcement, you can rest assured that I will not quieten down before that nonsense is cancelled for good..
Last edited:
Please, note that if a player must suddenly go on vacation mode you actually have 48h to cover his towns before it gets activated.
With this update you still have those 48h in order to conquest those cities, it not a big difference after getting used to do it.
If you're mate's surgery is already planned you can take his cities on WW, where's the problem?
You wanted more fights, more wars and less "sending resources" and a mere defensive playstyle, now that keeping up your WW is getting harder you want the old defensive playstayle back... I can agree on some of your points, but I really don't get this one.
With this update you still have those 48h in order to conquest those cities, it not a big difference after getting used to do it.
If you're mate's surgery is already planned you can take his cities on WW, where's the problem?
You wanted more fights, more wars and less "sending resources" and a mere defensive playstyle, now that keeping up your WW is getting harder you want the old defensive playstayle back... I can agree on some of your points, but I really don't get this one.
DeletedUser4183
Guest
As an alliance leader you dont want someone to be on or near the worldwonders. You select the players which will sit on world wonder island and on the islands around it very carefully .You cant just take his cities. Not only cause someone else ist then on the world wonder island or near them, what is with all the troops? On worldwonder islands you build normally myths and attack land units.
All are dead just to secure someone can on vacation == stupid.
That doesnt make keeping the ww harder. its just makes it useless to try to protect a ww with good players.
It doesnt bring new exiting fights, not at all.
You cant get our points?
we cant get 1 single positive argument for this change.
DeletedUser2458
Guest
Then no feedback is needed as you can say this everytime imho.
Do you wonder that ally defend their wonders in this way? Really? You wait half year and more before world gets closed. Can you imagine how difficult (respectively impossible) is organize quick overtaking in that game stage when you only wait on closing? Players log in once per day(two days) for several minutes.
And I am sure that we talk about this game stage. What active player goes on the vacation just because of defending WWs during active WWs era stage? Active player is needed for participating in building them. It could be crazy to get on WWs island a less active player because when the vacation mode ends... you must take his cities fast. Quite short-term solution.
So, if the strategy is used, it is only due to long waiting on closing of the world.
Do you know, what is the hot issue? Postponing of WWs era by leaving from alliance before midnight and then join back. This is annoying when enemy wants to have more time for his preparations.
Draba Aspera
Zeus
@* Arci *: Sorry, I don´t get your point here. Not at all.
Lately I went for a 5-day trip to Prague, and I really wanted to enjoy my stay there and have a break from Grepolis. From now on, for such a short trip I would have to find alliance members with free slots and willing to take the responsibility, and - on German Dyme alone - pass six cities on two islands to them - and lose all the troops those cities are stuffed with.
And guess what? With this change active you won´t even find anyone stupid enough to take over your cities on WW islands and being punished for it when they want to take a long weekend without the game.
This is not about "more fights". This is about victimizing players for taking some days off in a legal way - and you will succeed in nothing than generating more rule violations by players not accepting this ludicrous change. And those rule-breakers would have my profound sympathy, since the new rule is stupid, unfair and inhuman.
Lately I went for a 5-day trip to Prague, and I really wanted to enjoy my stay there and have a break from Grepolis. From now on, for such a short trip I would have to find alliance members with free slots and willing to take the responsibility, and - on German Dyme alone - pass six cities on two islands to them - and lose all the troops those cities are stuffed with.
And guess what? With this change active you won´t even find anyone stupid enough to take over your cities on WW islands and being punished for it when they want to take a long weekend without the game.
This is not about "more fights". This is about victimizing players for taking some days off in a legal way - and you will succeed in nothing than generating more rule violations by players not accepting this ludicrous change. And those rule-breakers would have my profound sympathy, since the new rule is stupid, unfair and inhuman.
Last edited:
You keep telling us that we don't know the game, and complain that by switching town owner you lose the troops you've build in.
Well, I don't think a WW town is covered with just the ~3000 troops that a level 45 farm can provide. Local troops should be just a little percent of the whole wall (not more than 5% even if your alleance is pretty small), am I wrong on that too?
Well, I don't think a WW town is covered with just the ~3000 troops that a level 45 farm can provide. Local troops should be just a little percent of the whole wall (not more than 5% even if your alleance is pretty small), am I wrong on that too?
Draba Aspera
Zeus
Yes, you are wrong. In newer times on conquest worlds there are even WW cities without walls and permanent defense, "defended" only by offensive troops in the hand of (and surrounded by) very active players - one of the consequences of the "fowl plague" the events and other changes have brought upon us.