inofficial Feedbackthread for casual world

Geisti

Griffin
Which is exactly the goal of a Casual world, helping smaller players to better survive :)
sry..Arci..good Joke..
smiley_emoticons_lol.gif


With the dimensions of gold players on new worlds, I want to see that. How to survive as a small player, you can not even now as just 'administrator user'.

One reads again
 

bogdy 95

Poseidon
Guys, I read again almost all your post from this topic. I understand your points of view and some frustration, that doesn't mean one man is responsible for all this stuffs.
Is understandable to have question or frustration about this ''casual'' world. I want also a world with speed at least 10 and all the time peace, but this is only me.
I think what he meant to said about plaing or not plaing on a particular world if you don't like it, it is that instead of attacking a particular person, you chould as well not plaing that type of world and keep giving bad or good feedback for new updates or server setups.
Just keep in mind, raging and slaping someone doesn't help him neither yourself.
 

Geisti

Griffin
This is not about frustration, this is about a game concept of a former game designer who did not know how to conquer correctly.

Now his legacy should be sold to us as the new remedy for Grepolis - once again. The German players have already said in his time that this concept is counterproductive.

And now even more so with this 20% number, because sieges are impossible with smaller members of an alliance. (red status, usw) Or prevent a siege.

regards
Geisti
 
Last edited:

Mimarifap

Hydra
I think the abolition of conquests and making conquering on casual worlds revolt-based is a very good decision. To start, conquest doesn't play very well with morale, but this would be likely very frustrating.

And the morale is not an issue. It just doesn't have an effect on the game, because no attacks weakened by morale can be sent.
 

DeletedUser4186

Guest
Where's the problem with morale being active?

haveing a thing active that calculate for each attack a thing thats 100% useless is just in the best case useless but in a bad case perhaps the reason for lags or even bugs and so on

do you really see no possible Problem with that?

Guys, I read again almost all your post from this topic. I understand your points of view and some frustration, that doesn't mean one man is responsible for all this stuffs.
Is understandable to have question or frustration about this ''casual'' world. I want also a world with speed at least 10 and all the time peace, but this is only me.
I think what he meant to said about plaing or not plaing on a particular world if you don't like it, it is that instead of attacking a particular person, you chould as well not plaing that type of world and keep giving bad or good feedback for new updates or server setups.
Just keep in mind, raging and slaping someone doesn't help him neither yourself.

we never say that only one man is responsible for all of that (i said here that you for example are one of the poorest People because you are only a messenger or not?)
but if a innomember answers and say things that are from not good to bad OR wrong, its a need to correct this or not?

Of course you should not play a world if you don´t like that setting and so on BUT this worlds are for NEW player that don´t even know what they want or not.
And how can it help to learn Grepo on Casual Worlds with Revo to play a normal World an Conquest?

and the Mainquestion is did not do a Peaceworld all jobs a casual world has to do much better?
and the Answer is YES OF COURSE

I think the abolition of conquests and making conquering on casual worlds revolt-based is a very good decision. To start, conquest doesn't play very well with morale, but this would be likely very frustrating.

And the morale is not an issue. It just doesn't have an effect on the game, because no attacks weakened by morale can be sent.

i don´t aggree because the Problem exists on Revo to or not?

you are in Range for a Town you send Revoattack and you ask in Ally for help. That help can only be Attacks from Allymember to clean the Town for you CS or not?`But only a few Player will be able to help you because of the range, but the owner of the target town cann get help from EVERY Player.

So on Conquest the range results in the be near to impossbile to kick a CS and safe a town
and on Revo the range results in the near to impossible to land a CS and conquer a town

so thats not good, it´s just a transfering from one Problem to another

and of course morale COULD be no issue but it could also be a source for errors and bugs so why letting it active and don´t just deactivate it?
for me it shows us that the Innomember don´t really know how her game and game mechanics are works
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Geisti

Griffin
And the morale is not an issue. It just doesn't have an effect on the game, because no attacks weakened by morale can be sent.
And helping in an alliance is then no longer possible. Because when I reach a certain account size, the 20% attack brake is activated.
And the small Alliance members can then watch where you can get troops to fight for the CS on a siege world.
smiley_emoticons_panik4.gif


N8ti
Geisti
 
By the way:
It is not possible in Casualty World, to conquer a city and give it to a smaller player. On the other hand, there is no possibilty with the shifting from cities produce free culture points.

Do it, just by try and errow and we will see what happen. I guess, it needs a periode of time to see, how this world could work or, one of my lovest slogans:
view it as a challenge
 

DeletedUser4186

Guest
And helping in an alliance is then no longer possible. Because when I reach a certain account size, the 20% attack brake is activated.
And the small Alliance members can then watch where you can get troops to fight for the CS on a siege world.
smiley_emoticons_panik4.gif


N8ti
Geisti


casual is now Revo Geisti but as i said above the same problem exists there too.

not even new players don´t learn at casual world anything about conquest they also don´t learn the important things for Revo.
Teamwork and huge Massoffensives are a big Part of Revo and both are cut near to Zero in Casual

20% deletes quite all Teamwork and Massoffensives are impossible if 50% or much more from my ally can´t take part of it because of the 20% Gap
 
casual is now Revo Geisti but as i said above the same problem exists there too.

not even new players don´t learn at casual world anything about conquest they also don´t learn the important things for Revo.
Teamwork and huge Massoffensives are a big Part of Revo and both are cut near to Zero in Casual

20% deletes quite all Teamwork and Massoffensives are impossible if 50% or much more from my ally can´t take part of it because of the 20% Gap
Sure., It need a lot of new strategy ideas.
I guess, it has to be tried out until you love it or hate it.
By the way; ghost cities could be conquered by both small and big players and this, on revo worlds without any delay. It would be nice to see, how it works, because you have to be fast, just like on the Hyperborea Worlds. And after Conquering you are saved because nobody can attack you concerning the attack protection.
@Arci What will happen with all the attacks on a ghost city after conquering with a very small player. It is just in peace time or will the attacks destroy the units, which are in the city? If the attacks destroy the units, it is a good idea to keep the moral, because the small player have a good chance to earn/ receive a lot of attack points.
 

Mimarifap

Hydra
i don´t aggree because the Problem exists on Revo to or not?
[...]
So on Conquest the range results in the be near to impossbile to kick a CS and safe a town
and on Revo the range results in the near to impossible to land a CS and conquer a town

so thats not good, it´s just a transfering from one Problem to another

Of course, the change to revolt did not remove the problem entirely, but hampering conquest is generally preferable to hampering defence. The latter causes frustration when merely trying to keep one's own cities, whereas the former just slows the game down. That's why, regardless of being possibly imperfect, the configuration is significantly better than it used to be when conquest was in place.
 

DeletedUser4186

Guest
@Arci What will happen with all the attacks on a ghost city after conquering with a very small player. It is just in peace time or will the attacks destroy the units, which are in the city? If the attacks destroy the units, it is a good idea to keep the moral, because the small player have a good chance to earn/ receive a lot of attack points.

normally there shouldn´t be that much troops in that Towns because Revo

Of course, the change to revolt did not remove the problem entirely, but hampering conquest is generally preferable to hampering defence. The latter causes frustration when merely trying to keep one's own cities, whereas the former just slows the game down. That's why, regardless of being possibly imperfect, the configuration is significantly better than it used to be when conquest was in place.

ok then we have different opinions to that Theme
^^
 
yes of course, but it would turn morale into a thing that morale was never intended to be, and i donßt know that this is a good thing^^

Well most probably we will have the same scenario as VM and wonders.... as from teh very beggining it was spotted that VM will exploit game experience on wonder islands and after many complaints..... they decided to patch it and exclude those towns from VM.....
Same will happen again... after they get tons of complaints.... they will probably do the obvious....
smiley_emoticons_daumendreh2.gif
 

Mimarifap

Hydra
Well most probably we will have the same scenario as VM and wonders.... as from teh very beggining it was spotted that VM will exploit game experience on wonder islands and after many complaints..... they decided to patch it and exclude those towns from VM.....
Same will happen again... after they get tons of complaints.... they will probably do the obvious....
smiley_emoticons_daumendreh2.gif

:D, I remember that. It was in 2.124. Just for the sake of posterity, let's recall the feedback the change received back then. So, perhaps, it will be better if such situations do not repeat.
 

Geisti

Griffin
Have the discussions in the German forum about it in mind. Who wants to conquer his honestly won cities on vacation (illness, etc) without a fight? Only because He wanted to help his alliance in the construction of the wonders of the world, He now has the disadvantage. Well, if I read then that you can not attack there because the account is too big (20% hurdle).
smiley_emoticons_panik4.gif
Can I join some players in the German forum only, whenever IG tries to help the beginners here, this shot goes back enormously. Before asking the 'old players' what you could improve in this regard, you prefer to retire to your quiet office. It is better to reinvent the wheel there and then wonder why this is rejected by the players. You want to help the beginners - Okay.

"We have a concept how we can help the beginners.
We imagined it that way.
What do you think as a player, where do you see room for improvement?"

regards
Geisti
 

morg

Manticore
I'm absolute fan of the city transfer element of casual worlds, it kills two birds with one stone:
- newbs won't be necessarily segregated to a training world, but can transfer there without rebuilding if they feel like
- it is not a problem that newly registered players are thrown to the latest world this way + they leave a good big city behind if they joined the casual world

question: will the newly transferred players get beginner protection to be able to recruit units?
suggestion: start with a long beginner protection and renew it max 2 times for shorter periods, this would further help players who learn the hard way

suggestion: allow players to also transfer the tokens, boost from their extended inventory (only the things they bought, packages)
new players often buy starter packages too before even having tried the game, if this transfer feature is optional they need to be informed what happens with these purchased items - I think more of them will not opt in to casual world if they can only use the packages on their first world (where they were forced to start btw), so they may decide to stay and won't be successful and eventually leave with a bad taste in the mouth

Protected city idea is the 2nd best feature.
First I thought it meant the city would be not attackable, I would not see a problem in that either - it could lead to interesting strategies on alliance level. On regular worlds the castle system is not widely used anymore because alarm changed the way we play, that is one of the reasons why casual players can not survive / lose more units. If they learned safe city strategies on casual worlds (hide units in a non-attackable city) and adapted it on regular worlds they could be more successful.

Attack prevention
this one feature has many problems

suggestion:
it should be changed to farming prevention and the whole thing could work on conquest system as well
players +/- 20% of the size should not loot resources or favor from the other

attacking players +/-20% of the size should get decreased ABP in battles (like the 20% between friendly alliance members)
this way the interaction between players wouldn't be limited but the root problem (loss of resources) could be handled

the WIKI says players cannot attack other players when there is more than 20% difference in points between them - oki dokie

but the example suggest that bigger players get advantage over smaller players (lets assume all cities are 10K points)

If player has 100 cities, he cannot attack a player who has less than 80 cities. He also cannot attack a player who has more than 120 cities.
using same logic
If player has 80 cities, he cannot attack a player who has less than 64 cities. He also cannot attack a player who has more than 96 cities.

so a 100 city player can attack a 80 city player, but the 80 city player cannot attack the 100 city player if the WIKI example is correct.

If a player can attack me I should be able to counter attack else it would be so unfair...

Conquest adaptation

sieges should not benefit from morale period
instead of attack prevention use reduced BP and farming prevention
reduced ABP during siegebreaks:
it would punish big players who intervene in the battles of small players but not alter the unit strength like morale (supporters couldn't exploit it)
small players who attack a big player's siege would learn a lesson to fight only against players of their own size
 
Last edited:

Arci

Community Manager
Grepolis Team
Thank you for the well detailed feedback :)

Just one important clarification, 20% difference means on both ways as already said on this thread.

If A has 20% difference from B, also B has 20% difference from A, so the rule applies :)
 

morg

Manticore
@Arci please explain this then:

Bullspirit Dancer (838 points) is not able to attack me.
838 * 1.2 = 1005.6 points < my points (1047 points)

I am able to attack players above 1047 * 0.8 = 837.6 points, just like Bullspirit Dancer (838 points) who as you see is smaller than me. We tested, I was able to start the attack:
unknown.png



Some big players can attack some small players, that can't attack back because the formula is favoring the big players.
-20% and +25% would be fair for everyone, then all players could attack the same players who can attack them

1000 point player should be able to attack 800 - 1250 point players (now only 800 - 1200 points)
800 point player should be able to attack 640 - 1000 point players (now only 640 - 960 points)
 
Last edited:
Top