• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

50% less GE Diamonds? More Like 75-90% (3yr Data Sheet)

Did the loss of diamond rewards in GE this week cause the game to lose sparkle for you?

  • Sadly, Yes

    Votes: 60 52.2%

  • Angrily, Yes

    Votes: 41 35.7%

  • Happily, Yes

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • I'm Confused

    Votes: 5 4.3%

  • No Comment

    Votes: 5 4.3%

  • Unprintable Comment!

    Votes: 17 14.8%
  • Total voters
    115
  • This poll will close: .

tuck everlasting

New Member
Sadly I will be leaving this game after this event due to the changes made...its sad because I enjoy the game and made a lot of friends...I understand this is all about money.but they seem to be ramping up the profits..icall a boycott of all spending..I hope that this may bring a reversal to the changes but it probably won't so in 8 days I will delete the game from my phone and pc sianara
 
Johnny B. Goode

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
Pericles the Lion said:
You painstakingly maintained a log of all the diamonds you collected in all of your cities over a three-year period. Previously, I applauded this effort. However, so far, you only have 6 data points (one GE season, 6 cities) to compare with your tabulated data. INNO never said that they nerfed the diamonds by 50%, players said that. The players based the statement on two facts. First, the average number of diamonds collected during a GE season was 162 (you can confirm the veracity of this by analyzing your own data set). Second, each diamond-bearing chest in L4 states that players have a 30% chance of winning 90 diamonds (which makes the average expected collection 81 diamonds per season. So, 162 before, 81 after. A reduction of exactly 50%. Now, you can argue that INNO can be lying about the 30% chance but, they didn't lie about the chances to earn GE diamonds before. You can insult players that disagree with you (calling them "brown nosers") but the fact remains that you are wrong. Diamonds were nerfed for sure, by 50%, and your venting won't change that fact. If you think otherwise, share some analysis that supports your conclusions - not just data.
Click to expand...
You (and everyone else clinging to the 50% like it's a lifeline) always completely ignore the fact that before the nerf you could get Diamonds starting with the 4th encounter of the first level. Now you don't have any possibility of Diamonds until the fourth level. So all the players who do 3 or less levels per week went from some chance of Diamonds to no chance of Diamonds. So, while your probabilities may say it's only 50%, reality says it is way, way less.
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
Johnny B. Goode said:
You (and everyone else clinging to the 50% like it's a lifeline) always completely ignore the fact that before the nerf you could get Diamonds starting with the 4th encounter of the first level. Now you don't have any possibility of Diamonds until the fourth level. So all the players who do 3 or less levels per week went from some chance of Diamonds to no chance of Diamonds. So, while your probabilities may say it's only 50%, reality says it is way, way less.
Click to expand...
How about this....the opportunity to win diamonds in GE was reduced 50%. Satisfied?
 
Last edited:

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
Sharmon the Impaler said:
His point was that it is not 50% for everyone. If they can't do Level 4 then they get no diamonds now from GE which is the majority of newer players.
Click to expand...
I get it. At a micro level, the impact ranges from 0% nerf (players that don't do GE) to 100% nerf (players that can't do Level 4). But, let's be honest, Level 4 is not that difficult except for very young cities and, even in these cities, it doesn't take much time to get them to where Level 4 is possible through a mix of fighting and negotiating.
 

Jalkian Valour

New Member
My only complaint about GE5 is that the GBs that are specifically designed for defensive armies are not worth building. If you get SBC to level 80, you get a 65% bonus. If you line up the same area with ritual flames level 2, you get 150%. What would be more fun? Dusting off a previously useless GB? Or lining up a boring number of ritual flames? Inno needs to revisit their GBs and find ways to make the useless ones make sense. Serious gameplay opportunity is wasted without that
 

Jalkian Valour

New Member
It would also be great to have the choice over which era goods you wanted to negotiate. I mean maybe there could be multiples assigned to those eras? But I'm tired of scrounging and trading for goods one era behind mine when I have a pile of goods from 3 eras back. There's no room in a guy's city to ramp up reasonable production of previous era goods. Can't even do it on any of the colonies. It's a bit frustrating, really
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
Jalkian Valour said:
It would also be great to have the choice over which era goods you wanted to negotiate. I mean maybe there could be multiples assigned to those eras? But I'm tired of scrounging and trading for goods one era behind mine when I have a pile of goods from 3 eras back. There's no room in a guy's city to ramp up reasonable production of previous era goods. Can't even do it on any of the colonies. It's a bit frustrating, really
Click to expand...
I really don't think that INNO expected many players to complete Level 5 this season. Probably not next season or the one after that. I think that their intent is to provide a new experience for players. One that they will have to develop a strategy in order to be successful repeatedly. I expect that future Great Buildings, Event buildings, and the like will be configured to help players navigate Level 5. The phrase "FOE is a marathon, not a sprint" is cliche, yet a large number of players seem to have forgotten this simple fact and expect instant gratification. I intend to be patient and gradually work my way into a sustainable strategy to defeat level 5. It will take some time.
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
Sharmon the Impaler said:
It's not the original Inno management , it was sold and the new owners seem to be using the standard tactics of replacing the idea people with their own pundits that have no gaming experience. I have been in 2 such takeovers. One by a German company Versata that screwed up a multimillion by month contract with NBC Networks worldwide. The pundits outsourced our whole team of very experienced level 3 engineers with outsourced phone support from India on day 7 of the take over and NBC sued and won for breach of contract and nullified the deal and Versata lost $28 Million on the deal because the company they took over was now worthless. This may be the same idea by the looks of it.
Click to expand...
Where is your info on INNO coming from? Iirc, MTG bought a minority share of INNO in 2017 and then increased it to 51% in 2020. Klindworth and Zillmer (co-founders of INNO) remain as co-CEOs. Sorry about your experiences with corporate acquisitions but not all of them are doomed to failure.

Edit: After more research I found that MTG purchased 21% of InnoGames in October 2016. The increased their ownership to 51% in May 2017. They added to their position in December 2020 bringing their ownership to 68%.
 
Last edited:
La Marchessa

La Marchessa

Active Member
Sharmon the Impaler said:
It's not the original Inno management , it was sold and the new owners seem to be using the standard tactics of replacing the idea people with their own pundits that have no gaming experience. I have been in 2 such takeovers. One by a German company Versata that screwed up a multimillion by month contract with NBC Networks worldwide. The pundits outsourced our whole team of very experienced level 3 engineers with outsourced phone support from India on day 7 of the take over and NBC sued and won for breach of contract and nullified the deal and Versata lost $28 Million on the deal because the company they took over was now worthless. This may be the same idea by the looks of it.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this information, it explains so much. It also explains why whoever is running Inno now couldn't care less about what the players would like to see happen, or about this forum. I appreciate you weighing in with useful information.
 
Portia the Benevolent

Portia the Benevolent

Active Member
Hazel the Pirate Queen said:
I am a founder of a guild and most of my members are discouraged by this change in GE rewards. Now my guild members have no real incentive to compete in GE. Personally, I made it thru GE level 5 by negotiating but it wasn’t fun. The rewards being frags! There was no real reward for completing GE 5! when I first heard that a level 5 was coming out, I was excited about it. I thought it would give people something new to challenge and in turn receive some new, great rewards! I thought that would give our guild some new to talk about and share experiences. Instead, all I’m hearing is disappointment, discouragement and people talking about leaving the game.I am not sure why INNO did not make additional changes and keep GE5 in Beta a little longer and make GE 5 something people were happy about and could get excited about playing. I don’t understand this business model of yours, INNO! I would think that you would want to retain your customers not send them running. Please make some adjustments to the prizes that make people want to play GE. We want level 5 to be challenging but we also want a reward worthy of the cost to play.
Click to expand...
You sound very level-headed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top