DeletedUser3476
Guest
one or five
DeletedUser3002
Guest
Do you think it's possible to be five cities at the beginning on this world?
DeletedUser
Guest
The world will have Artemis and extended level of buildings etc.
The rebalancing will be applied to all Beta worlds.
DeletedUser2820
Guest
Can I write in italian?? Is too difficult for me explain in english..
I think that this rebalance is a bad idea..
Conquest: Assedio
L'unità più problematica sono le triremi e ora spiego il perchè:
Esempio:
2400 popolazione libera
equivale a 150 triremi, 300 biremi e 240 incendiarie...ok?
bene, ora i valori, le velocità:
biremi 15
incendiarie 13
triremi 15
I valori di attacco / difesa:
biremi --- / 160
incendiarie 200 / 60
triremi 250 / 250
attacco per ogni full:
incendiaria 200*240 = 48.000
triremi 250*150=37.500
difesa per ogni full:
birre: 160*300= 48.000
triremi 250*150= 37.500
La differenza di attacco/difesa fra birre/incendiarie e triremi è del 22,9% (48k :100 = 37k : x)
Ma bisogna tenere in considerazione un particolare essenziale: mentre è impossibile sommare il valore di attacco delle birre a quello delle ince, e quello di difesa delle incendiarie a quello delle birre perchè sono inutili, i valori delle triremi sono totali sia in attacco che in difesa.
Quindi considerando un giocatore che in zona operativa ha 20 navali, 10 full incendirie e 10 full birre si avrà come valore di attacco e difesa:
Attacco: 480k Difesa: 480K
Mentre nel caso uno facesse direttamente 20 triremi avrebbe come valori:
Attacco: 750k Difesa: 750k
in aggiunta essendo la velocità delle incendiarie inferiore a quella delle triremi del 13.4% questo significa che nello stesso raggio di azione non si trovano più 20 navali ma 10 + (10+13,4%), che portano i valori delle triremi a:
Attacco: 750k + 13,4% = 850.500
Difesa: 750k + 13,4% = 850.500
Valore a cui vanno sommate le navali aggiuntive dell'alleanza (+ 13,4% per tutti) che ora arrivano nello stesso tempo sullo stesso obbiettivo.
Risultato: ince e birre diventano inutili, in quanto 10 full ince o 10 full birre non avrebbero un valore di attacco o di difesa sufficiente per sbuncherare o murare un player che truppa 20 full triremi (che possono essere usate tutte in attacco o tutte in difesa essendo bipolari), quindi anch'esso dovrà adeguarsi a truppare triremi per poterlo contrastare. A questo punto però si presenta il problema che se vengono usate tutte e 20 le full navali durante una conquista (per esempio) il player resterà completamente vuoto a mare, mentre prima restava con le 10 full ince o le 10 full birre a seconda se doveva attaccare o supportare una conquista, diventando così vulnerabile.
Conseguenza: non si sbunkereranno più le polis per non restare con tutte le full navali scoperte.. sempre se la coloniale riuscirà ad entrare dato che si potranno ammucchiare in difesa tutte le full navali con la consapevolezza che nessuno lancierà tutte le sue full per il motivo sopra citato. Oltretutto con le triremi si possono fare le ninjate sia in attacco che in difesa, mentre con le birre solo in difesa e le ince solo in attacco.
Presumo che i "calcoli" per il ribilanciamento sia stati fatti sulle singole unità o le singole full e non sul loro vero utilizzo, cioè sul fatto che nel 90% dei casi si usano più full messe insieme acquisendo oltretutto i bonus mare difensivi dati dal numero di truppe ammucchiate dentro una polis.
Facendo un esempio pratico:
A attacca con 10 full ince da 240
B difende con 20 full triremi da 150 + 13.4% (quindi supponiamo altre 5 full per un totale di 25 full triremi)
Risultato: A perde 2400 ince e uccide (secondo il simulatore) 1092 triremi
Non riuscirà mai a sbuncherare con le ince un player che truppa solo triremi, e la stessa cosa vale per triremi contro triremi.. in difesa vinceranno sempre. Per non parlare dei server con rivolta dove non si riuscirà più a far entrare neanche una colo in questo modo.
I think that this rebalance is a bad idea..
Conquest: Assedio
L'unità più problematica sono le triremi e ora spiego il perchè:
Esempio:
2400 popolazione libera
equivale a 150 triremi, 300 biremi e 240 incendiarie...ok?
bene, ora i valori, le velocità:
biremi 15
incendiarie 13
triremi 15
I valori di attacco / difesa:
biremi --- / 160
incendiarie 200 / 60
triremi 250 / 250
attacco per ogni full:
incendiaria 200*240 = 48.000
triremi 250*150=37.500
difesa per ogni full:
birre: 160*300= 48.000
triremi 250*150= 37.500
La differenza di attacco/difesa fra birre/incendiarie e triremi è del 22,9% (48k :100 = 37k : x)
Ma bisogna tenere in considerazione un particolare essenziale: mentre è impossibile sommare il valore di attacco delle birre a quello delle ince, e quello di difesa delle incendiarie a quello delle birre perchè sono inutili, i valori delle triremi sono totali sia in attacco che in difesa.
Quindi considerando un giocatore che in zona operativa ha 20 navali, 10 full incendirie e 10 full birre si avrà come valore di attacco e difesa:
Attacco: 480k Difesa: 480K
Mentre nel caso uno facesse direttamente 20 triremi avrebbe come valori:
Attacco: 750k Difesa: 750k
in aggiunta essendo la velocità delle incendiarie inferiore a quella delle triremi del 13.4% questo significa che nello stesso raggio di azione non si trovano più 20 navali ma 10 + (10+13,4%), che portano i valori delle triremi a:
Attacco: 750k + 13,4% = 850.500
Difesa: 750k + 13,4% = 850.500
Valore a cui vanno sommate le navali aggiuntive dell'alleanza (+ 13,4% per tutti) che ora arrivano nello stesso tempo sullo stesso obbiettivo.
Risultato: ince e birre diventano inutili, in quanto 10 full ince o 10 full birre non avrebbero un valore di attacco o di difesa sufficiente per sbuncherare o murare un player che truppa 20 full triremi (che possono essere usate tutte in attacco o tutte in difesa essendo bipolari), quindi anch'esso dovrà adeguarsi a truppare triremi per poterlo contrastare. A questo punto però si presenta il problema che se vengono usate tutte e 20 le full navali durante una conquista (per esempio) il player resterà completamente vuoto a mare, mentre prima restava con le 10 full ince o le 10 full birre a seconda se doveva attaccare o supportare una conquista, diventando così vulnerabile.
Conseguenza: non si sbunkereranno più le polis per non restare con tutte le full navali scoperte.. sempre se la coloniale riuscirà ad entrare dato che si potranno ammucchiare in difesa tutte le full navali con la consapevolezza che nessuno lancierà tutte le sue full per il motivo sopra citato. Oltretutto con le triremi si possono fare le ninjate sia in attacco che in difesa, mentre con le birre solo in difesa e le ince solo in attacco.
Presumo che i "calcoli" per il ribilanciamento sia stati fatti sulle singole unità o le singole full e non sul loro vero utilizzo, cioè sul fatto che nel 90% dei casi si usano più full messe insieme acquisendo oltretutto i bonus mare difensivi dati dal numero di truppe ammucchiate dentro una polis.
Facendo un esempio pratico:
A attacca con 10 full ince da 240
B difende con 20 full triremi da 150 + 13.4% (quindi supponiamo altre 5 full per un totale di 25 full triremi)
Risultato: A perde 2400 ince e uccide (secondo il simulatore) 1092 triremi
Non riuscirà mai a sbuncherare con le ince un player che truppa solo triremi, e la stessa cosa vale per triremi contro triremi.. in difesa vinceranno sempre. Per non parlare dei server con rivolta dove non si riuscirà più a far entrare neanche una colo in questo modo.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
Is surely an insult sonderes same..let us start on a world with a city..the just 175 points has..every city I newly reasons has indeed more points ..
Geisti
Draba Aspera
Zeus
Yes, Susi17, we had made up that same calculation regarding triremes in the German forum when this rebalancing concept was first presented in the devblog, and we have criticized it ever since. Our concerns have been ignored completely, the only adjustment made to the triremes compared to the "rebalancing" status of November 2013 is an increase of their silver costs from 1200 to 1300 - and that is nothing but a bad joke.
DeletedUser2820
Guest
Is possible reported this feedback directly to the programmers of Innogames??
..or there is a direct email where I can send it??
..or there is a direct email where I can send it??
Draba Aspera
Zeus
Geode will forward the feedback to the game designers/devs. If there are any problems regarding the Italian language, I could sum it up in English. But as I already told you: They should have been aware of these concerns for almost a year, but they decided to ignore them.
And there is still another issue regarding triremes vs. light ships: You can refill a trireme city much faster than you can refill a light ship city. A member of the German community told us in the forum that he can rebuild a full trireme nuke in only 209 hours, while it would take him 335 hours to rebuild a full light ship nuke (values for a speed 2 world and harbour level 20).
And there is still another issue regarding triremes vs. light ships: You can refill a trireme city much faster than you can refill a light ship city. A member of the German community told us in the forum that he can rebuild a full trireme nuke in only 209 hours, while it would take him 335 hours to rebuild a full light ship nuke (values for a speed 2 world and harbour level 20).
DeletedUser2820
Guest
I can write it in German, any problem..
Yes I saw that light ships and trireme have the same time of recruitment, but a full trireme have less units than a full light ship.. also is faster.
If I'm not mistaken, before (in the first rebalancing) the speed of the trireme was 22 and now have it down to 15 .. luckily !!
DeletedUser
Guest
Just got a fit of laughter..
I received after my first attack in the world Sandbox3..who is to come up with this idea..the switch as early free..
Geisti
I received after my first attack in the world Sandbox3..who is to come up with this idea..the switch as early free..
Geisti
Last edited by a moderator:
Scoot ER
Cyclop
While we are on the topic of rebalancing, I have an idea. My idea is to adjust the farming villages trade ratio to better reflect their invested level. As the farming village increases in level, their trade ratio goes up. The farming village's trade volume and regeneration rate would still remain the same. The only change would be the initial trade offer. I would suggest something like this:
Level 1: 0 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.00 : 1
Level 2: 1,200 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.10 : 1
Level 3: 4,800 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.15 : 1
Level 4: 19,200 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.25 : 1
Level 5: 72,000 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.50 : 1
Level 6: 150,000 resources invested = Trade ratio: 2.00 : 1
So with my idea, the players get a much better trade ratio as a benefit of investing into the farming villages. It also is reprehensive to NOT invest into the farming villages. If will force the players to invest a small amount into the villages to get them up to the existing 1.25 : 1 ratio that is the standard in the game. As you can see, the lower levels do not require that much investment to get them up to a normal trade value, but there is a significant benefit to maximize the farming villages on the islands.
The trade degradation rate is 0.03 / 100 resources traded. That is a total of 0.60 if trading the max amount of 2000 resources. With the standard regeneration rate of 0.02 / hour, it will still take 30 hours to fully regenerate (yes, I know world speed effects this rate). If you notice, the only level that will have a +1.0 ratio is only the maxed out level 6 farm. This is the second major benefit of maximizing the investment into the farming villages. It would allow the player to trade repeatedly with the same village, and get a positive trade ratio. If the player wants to keep the very high trade ratio, they will need to not trade rapidly due to the very long regeneration time.
Level 1: 0 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.00 : 1
Level 2: 1,200 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.10 : 1
Level 3: 4,800 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.15 : 1
Level 4: 19,200 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.25 : 1
Level 5: 72,000 resources invested = Trade ratio: 1.50 : 1
Level 6: 150,000 resources invested = Trade ratio: 2.00 : 1
So with my idea, the players get a much better trade ratio as a benefit of investing into the farming villages. It also is reprehensive to NOT invest into the farming villages. If will force the players to invest a small amount into the villages to get them up to the existing 1.25 : 1 ratio that is the standard in the game. As you can see, the lower levels do not require that much investment to get them up to a normal trade value, but there is a significant benefit to maximize the farming villages on the islands.
The trade degradation rate is 0.03 / 100 resources traded. That is a total of 0.60 if trading the max amount of 2000 resources. With the standard regeneration rate of 0.02 / hour, it will still take 30 hours to fully regenerate (yes, I know world speed effects this rate). If you notice, the only level that will have a +1.0 ratio is only the maxed out level 6 farm. This is the second major benefit of maximizing the investment into the farming villages. It would allow the player to trade repeatedly with the same village, and get a positive trade ratio. If the player wants to keep the very high trade ratio, they will need to not trade rapidly due to the very long regeneration time.
DeletedUser
Guest
When will this gold trade disappears..
This is no longer so bearable ..
Geisti
This is no longer so bearable ..
Geisti
DeletedUser
Guest
The ressources that people can ask for needs to be limited ^^
Otherwise... the level of farming villages is not based on personal investment but on the total investment of everyone who has ever owned that village. Therefore if I capture a village that is already level 6, not only do I get the bonus for asking for units (6 instead of 4 for 12h), but I also get better rates?
Too easy...
Otherwise... the level of farming villages is not based on personal investment but on the total investment of everyone who has ever owned that village. Therefore if I capture a village that is already level 6, not only do I get the bonus for asking for units (6 instead of 4 for 12h), but I also get better rates?
Too easy...
DeletedUser3554
Guest
A quick feedback on research changes:
City Guard move to column 1: OK makes some sense, depending on beginner protection length and is useful for quests. Indifferent on this generally.
Diplomacy: Genius. Must have research and great for starting out. (before anyone laughs at me check what it does now
)
Meteorology: Good to have moved it to column 2, but resource costs should be lowered - imbalanced given its position.
Espionage: Great idea - has made it worth considering in some cities. Thumbs up
Architecture / Crane: Benefit boost to 15% welcomed.
Cryptography : Easier to understand tooltip, but not as useful as it was. A likely 'not have' now.
Hope I haven't missed anything - overall though some interesting and welcome changes that make the overall choices less obvious. Great job.
PS: And yes this belongs in ideas, but idea not yet fully developed: More depth to the academy could be added by allowing researches to be upgraded, i.e. Ram level 1 +10%, Ram level 2 +20%. Just an idea
City Guard move to column 1: OK makes some sense, depending on beginner protection length and is useful for quests. Indifferent on this generally.
Diplomacy: Genius. Must have research and great for starting out. (before anyone laughs at me check what it does now
)Meteorology: Good to have moved it to column 2, but resource costs should be lowered - imbalanced given its position.
Espionage: Great idea - has made it worth considering in some cities. Thumbs up
Architecture / Crane: Benefit boost to 15% welcomed.
Cryptography : Easier to understand tooltip, but not as useful as it was. A likely 'not have' now.
Hope I haven't missed anything - overall though some interesting and welcome changes that make the overall choices less obvious. Great job.
PS: And yes this belongs in ideas, but idea not yet fully developed: More depth to the academy could be added by allowing researches to be upgraded, i.e. Ram level 1 +10%, Ram level 2 +20%. Just an idea
DeletedUser
Guest
With an extra research point cost, naturally?
DeletedUser3554
Guest
Research points and resources yes - would allow players to say, double up on Ram in a LS city, which they might not then have Phalanx in, thereby making them more vulnerable to attack, which brings intel even more into the game when deciding on Op targets.
Not sure whether a few more research points would have to be available, like I say just an idea at the moment.
DeletedUser
Guest
No extra RP, just allows a new way of spending them, and yet more reason to be careful what we spend on.
DeletedUser
Guest
Thank you very much for the feedback 
It is very valuable for us.
It is very valuable for us.