• 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

Random Thoughts on the State of the Game

DeletedUser29726

The purpose is to refute your claim that GvG was responsible for the success of FoE. A feature that came along almost 2 years after a game is available is in no way responsible for the early success of FoE that kept it growing to and through the advent of GvG. And there's nothing rude about correcting misinformation.

They were the early days for him (and me - I was first playing in July of 2014 - so SoKs and HoFs were both new and rare but existent). And certainly count as 'early days' compared to the last 3 years or so - less than half of current worlds were in existence at the time and perhaps GvG's release was leading to an explosion of them (they certainly were opening every month or two at the time). PvP and GvG have both taken a beating in recent years in terms of relevance to the current game - I'm still bitter about when they took PvP out of new alt worlds and moved it to EMA basically (late iron - but most of your hood will be immune still til in an EMA hood) as that killed a lot of the fun of starting a new city ; plunder was most relevant in those early ages.
 

DeletedUser

They were the early days for him (and me - I was first playing in July of 2014
I understand that, but his context was that the early success of FoE was due to GvG and that is not possible. I do not at all dispute that for a relatively large number of long-term players (many of those that started in 2014-15, along with many players still around from before GvG), GvG was what they ended up finding most enjoyable about the game. It never was for me, but that doesn't affect what I know to be true about many other players.
 

DeletedUser18332

Good point freshmeboy. Pretty much appears to be headed in that direction which was my original point. Enough fun for me. I about done with FoE anyway.
 

DeletedUser18332

And as to you Stephen. Looking at your stats not sure how they accepted you as a moderator. 6 cities and very little ranking for the amount of time you have supposedly been active in FoE. Not really seeing your qualifications so don't really need any further commentary from you.

us18
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Holding Pen 21,103,878 11,136
us21
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks The Magnificent Crew 15,386,769 8,844
us24
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Yakety Yak 5,923,122 5,768
us23
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Silverback 2,497,537 4,235
us19
portrait_id_16tn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks 3-in-1 1 85,007 613
us1
portrait_id_3tn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks A is for Apple 22,523 50
 

DeletedUser

And as to you Stephen. Looking at your stats not sure how they accepted you as a moderator. 6 cities and very little ranking for the amount of time you have supposedly been active in FoE. Not really seeing your qualifications so don't really need any further commentary from you.

us18
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Holding Pen 21,103,878 11,136
us21
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks The Magnificent Crew 15,386,769 8,844
us24
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Yakety Yak 5,923,122 5,768
us23
addon_portrait_id_napoleontn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks Silverback 2,497,537 4,235
us19
portrait_id_16tn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks 3-in-1 1 85,007 613
us1
portrait_id_3tn.jpg
Stephen Longshanks A is for Apple 22,523 50
Well, 6 current cities. You only play 2. And I find it interesting that you're supposedly really into GvG, because my top two cities are 1500 ahead and 800 behind your second city in battles, and I rarely do any GvG in either one. Throw in my third city and I have as many battles as your two cities combined, without doing much GvG in any of mine. However, if points, ranking and/or battles have anything to do with it, then you should let @xivarmy do all the talking here because he has more than 3 times the number of points in his top world as you do in yours, not to mention almost 5 times as many battles.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
The difference is that GE doesn't really require coordination. [...]

Inno lost control of this game when they released the Arc. It's likely going to keep devolving into a contest of 'who still gives a crap?'
GvG doesn’t need that much co-ordination either. Ive taken more hexes entirely on my own then I have with others due to time zones, usually on a whim and without any pre-planning with the troops being primarily from GE (I have a below lvl 10 Traz in one world, no traz and used attached troops in another). Co-ordination and support doesn’t come from circumstances it comes from going out of our way to enable those around us to succeed.

Because hexes are restricted to whatever age you have troops for you usually only need goods for current age or below. GE on the other hand you have to co-ordinate goods production with anyone above your age if you want to open the next lvl or be forced to acquire the goods or kick the player.

Inno still has as much control of their game now as when they started. Just because the economy changed doesn’t mean they’re not in control. They could change what trades the market allows. They could strip the game of the arc or prevent players from getting advanced GBs or just change where and how it works. They could even never do another event again if they wanted. It’s unlikely those things will happen but they could if they really wanted


You probably need to get back in your sandbox Stephen. Since you were not here at any of those points you referenced I am pretty sure your commentary is not relevant. My comments were based on my experiences within the game not just from reading the coding notes you have accessed or someone from Inno provided you.
Being there and having relevant commentary are not mutually exclusive. What’s true today won’t be true of the game tomorrow

if his commentary is invalid for not being there then how’s yours any different given you weren’t there until well after the game started?


And as to you Stephen. Looking at your stats not sure how they accepted you as a moderator.
Mods have minimum requirements. Irrelevant info isn’t one of them. Points have no bearing on knowledge or game experience
 

DeletedUser29726

GvG doesn’t need that much co-ordination either. Ive taken more hexes entirely on my own then I have with others due to time zones, usually on a whim and without any pre-planning with the troops being primarily from GE (I have a below lvl 10 Traz in one world, no traz and used attached troops in another). Co-ordination and support doesn’t come from circumstances it comes from going out of our way to enable those around us to succeed.

Because hexes are restricted to whatever age you have troops for you usually only need goods for current age or below. GE on the other hand you have to co-ordinate goods production with anyone above your age if you want to open the next lvl or be forced to acquire the goods or kick the player.

You really can't measure your effectiveness by 'hexes taken' - anyone can take hexes loaded with 8 rogue armies. Or even 3 rogues + other stuff. Or with only 1 DA. Those guilds aren't even really trying to stop you from taking their shit. Fighting fully loaded sectors with "real" DAs is another matter - used to be challenging. With 300% boost now, not so much but that's part of the unmitigated power creep. Also 'only GE troops' - you never used to have access to that many unattached troops without a traz. GE basically provides a mid-level traz's worth of troops between the 24 guaranteed unattached in chests and chances for others.

And no you don't have to 'coordinate' goods production on an established world for GE. Everyone's got arcs (or at least enough people have arcs - 1 arc can pay for many people to GE). On a new world it mostly comes down to staying small and kicking people who aren't doing their part week to week, not getting people together.

Inno still has as much control of their game now as when they started. Just because the economy changed doesn’t mean they’re not in control. They could change what trades the market allows. They could strip the game of the arc or prevent players from getting advanced GBs or just change where and how it works. They could even never do another event again if they wanted. It’s unlikely those things will happen but they could if they really wanted

They can't really do those things - they'd lose too many players. Once you give players power it's hard to take it away, you have to control how you give it to them in the first place. Which requires forethought. Which once upon a time they had - and recently they have not. I can't honestly know how instrumental the game dev who died and was credited with the creation of GvG was to controlling the direction of the game but not long after that quality started sliding down and eventually they just caved and gave players everything they wanted in terms of power and it spirals further and further out of control with almost every passing event now 'this isn't good as what you gave us 2 weeks ago! make it better!' 'poof, altars now give up to 3 FP in a 3x2'.
 

DreadfulCadillac

Well-Known Member
I agree that inno lost control of their game economy..it is SO MESSED UP.
the fact that you can attain above age troops and stuff from story quests(not that i dont like it) make historical accuracy irrelavant.
Making the game mobile at all was a mistake from my perspective.
i love my arc, but it destroyed alot.
I have learned alot from my time on the forum, and i am coming to the conclusion that the death of that game dev really affected the gameplay,(escspeccially after reading what someone else said bout this)
The amount of events, and how good the prizes are is rediculous! (not that i dont like it) but what will the game be in 2 years!?
2 fp per square in a event building?! i mean comeone inno!
(ohhhh i just forgot the the lvl 9 ygg is 1 and 1/8 fp per square )
Inno:stop creating new features and making things more complicated.You are making it WORSE.SSSLLLLOOOWWYYY get rid of certain things that are bad for the game.
OHH i forgot !!.i wanted to play the new gmes that inno put out.but GEUSS WHAT!? nowadays the new games that inno makes are mobile only!! and i dont have a mobile device..good going inno:)
and gvg....dont get me started on that..gvg is a mess..i do love doing it tho.and i agree with @Emberguard that gvg doesnt NEED to have to much cordination.
But it still requires a awefull lot of cordination , ecspeccially between leader/commeners/fighters/farmers..honestly if they got rid of gvg i might quit the game.
and to players who want more of a gvg eccsperriance:the newer worlds dont have AS much gvg as the older worlds im geussing..so go to the older worlds.
i have more to rant about if anyone needs?i saw this as a oppurtunity to get everything out...
 

DeletedUser40197

@Wolf1955 thank you for explaining your perspective to me, and you as well, @xivarmy. It honestly clears up for me alot of the conversation when it comes to "pre arc" discussion that occurs in the forum from time to time. And I can also understand you referring to Gvg in relation to the early days of the game, as that is not a very long time into it, and I'm not sure how successful FOE was prior to that implementation but it's safe to say it became more successful after the fact, whether as a natural progression or directly related to Gvg/ soks, I have no idea.
I can appreciate that there would be a nostalgic feeling toward how the game was played and I don't think anyone should be beaten down for expressing an opinion or opening a discussion on a forum, which is often the whole point. But rather a productive exchange...
One of the things I like most about FOE is the interactive aspect. I've never cared, prior to this, to play a game where I had to engage with other people, I typically avoid them. But clearly I dove in and find the players and guild members who are willing to help out and offer advice or goods or knowledge is awesome. I enjoy playing GE and do not GVG (my guild does not GVG and I've only been in 1 guild prior to my current one). And yes we are individually rewarded for completing GE, my main goal is always guild power and trying to be the winning guild at the end of the week... and I often find myself frustrated that there isn't more participation from my guild mates (the are no requirements) to the point I've considered leaving my guild for another that does have requirements for their members. What's the point of HOF if not for the guild? Certainly they are of no benefit to the individual. I have 7, I believe, in my city and I'm sure I could find something that would be more personally beneficial for me to fill that space. My OBS, I obtained painstakingly and actually purchased the last BP with diamonds as it was elusive otherwise. IMO that was only for the benefit of the guild. I built a DT thinking eventually I would like to be a reasonable goods dealer, they can be hard to find in P world. Seeing new players grow and come into an understanding of the game is immensely satisfying for me. I think there are all kinds of ways that you have the opportunity to be a supportive team player, if you choose to play your game that way. Or not. That's kind of the beauty of FOE, something for everyone. And it seems they have definitely implemented things over the years that have made the game "easier". But I imagine it's good for their bottom line. And I, personally, have invested more time and energy in this game then any other and in the beginning, money. (Lessons learned the hard way).
Anyway, I guess it's just all in the way you look at it. Find a good guild that is supportive and interactive and conversational (that's a big one). It has a big impact on the game (I'm sure you realize that). But that would be my advise... and on another note, wouldn't it be cool if inno introduced a "throwback" world. Less events, no arcs, whatever was going on back in the day that made it enjoyable for many long time players? ... and no I don't need to hear this is on the DNSL, for any mods that may want to chime in... I think there are alot of people who would appreciate something like that, new players included.
 

DreadfulCadillac

Well-Known Member
@Wolf1955 thank you for explaining your perspective to me, and you as well, @xivarmy. It honestly clears up for me alot of the conversation when it comes to "pre arc" discussion that occurs in the forum from time to time. And I can also understand you referring to Gvg in relation to the early days of the game, as that is not a very long time into it, and I'm not sure how successful FOE was prior to that implementation but it's safe to say it became more successful after the fact, whether as a natural progression or directly related to Gvg/ soks, I have no idea.
I can appreciate that there would be a nostalgic feeling toward how the game was played and I don't think anyone should be beaten down for expressing an opinion or opening a discussion on a forum, which is often the whole point. But rather a productive exchange...
One of the things I like most about FOE is the interactive aspect. I've never cared, prior to this, to play a game where I had to engage with other people, I typically avoid them. But clearly I dove in and find the players and guild members who are willing to help out and offer advice or goods or knowledge is awesome. I enjoy playing GE and do not GVG (my guild does not GVG and I've only been in 1 guild prior to my current one). And yes we are individually rewarded for completing GE, my main goal is always guild power and trying to be the winning guild at the end of the week... and I often find myself frustrated that there isn't more participation from my guild mates (the are no requirements) to the point I've considered leaving my guild for another that does have requirements for their members. What's the point of HOF if not for the guild? Certainly they are of no benefit to the individual. I have 7, I believe, in my city and I'm sure I could find something that would be more personally beneficial for me to fill that space. My OBS, I obtained painstakingly and actually purchased the last BP with diamonds as it was elusive otherwise. IMO that was only for the benefit of the guild. I built a DT thinking eventually I would like to be a reasonable goods dealer, they can be hard to find in P world. Seeing new players grow and come into an understanding of the game is immensely satisfying for me. I think there are all kinds of ways that you have the opportunity to be a supportive team player, if you choose to play your game that way. Or not. That's kind of the beauty of FOE, something for everyone. And it seems they have definitely implemented things over the years that have made the game "easier". But I imagine it's good for their bottom line. And I, personally, have invested more time and energy in this game then any other and in the beginning, money. (Lessons learned the hard way).
Anyway, I guess it's just all in the way you look at it. Find a good guild that is supportive and interactive and conversational (that's a big one). It has a big impact on the game (I'm sure you realize that). But that would be my advise... and on another note, wouldn't it be cool if inno introduced a "throwback" world. Less events, no arcs, whatever was going on back in the day that made it enjoyable for many long time players? ... and no I don't need to hear this is on the DNSL, for any mods that may want to chime in... I think there are alot of people who would appreciate something like that, new players included.
if you proposed this i would vote yes
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
You really can't measure your effectiveness by 'hexes taken' - anyone can take hexes loaded with 8 rogue armies. Or even 3 rogues + other stuff. Or with only 1 DA. Those guilds aren't even really trying to stop you from taking their shit. Fighting fully loaded sectors with "real" DAs is another matter - used to be challenging. With 300% boost now, not so much but that's part of the unmitigated power creep. Also 'only GE troops' - you never used to have access to that many unattached troops without a traz. GE basically provides a mid-level traz's worth of troops between the 24 guaranteed unattached in chests and chances for others.

And no you don't have to 'coordinate' goods production on an established world for GE. Everyone's got arcs (or at least enough people have arcs - 1 arc can pay for many people to GE). On a new world it mostly comes down to staying small and kicking people who aren't doing their part week to week, not getting people together.
Haven’t ever taken a rogue filled hex, and wasn’t referring to only 1 DA hexes either. Don’t have 300% boost. Been able to conquer a fully loaded hex both with unattached and also with only attached. It’s not hard nowadays to do so. Sometimes it has to be in one sitting as the opponent will fight back, other times it can even be done over a few days.

And fine with the GE goods once established. Same argument though with GvG once established. Point is GvG doesn’t need co-ordination under current circumstances to win or even defend. You would be more effective sure, doesn’t mean you have to
 

DeletedUser29726

And fine with the GE goods once established. Same argument though with GvG once established. Point is GvG doesn’t need co-ordination under current circumstances to win or even defend. You would be more effective sure, doesn’t mean you have to

You're talking about fighting one sector over multiple days... Real guilds are there at recalc the next day to push you back.

And the most important thing re:goods cost is the more you hold, the more it costs to siege and take it back. It's quite possible to get to the point where you have to release territory to fight even with arcs if you're in a longterm war and trying to hold land (except AA - because AA is another dumb inno mistake :p) and not just beating up dead guilds that may as well be npcs :p
 

DeletedUser18332

If you recall Stephen I did not make anything personal until you and one other decided you know everything. Which you do not and I never claimed to. I was merely expressing my disappointment in the path game play development is going down. As to points I did idle in FoE for a bit back when Inno decided to recalculate how player points were earned and took a lot of our ranking away. I left my Guild and coasted solo ergo no GvG battles or points. By the time I re-engaged in active play the Traz and Arc had taken over many aspects of game play. We had several good months of GvG but were not able to sustain as new GvG players were not really growing as prolifically in the game. The City in A was merely a diamond farm for most of it's existence. Inno in it's infinite wisdom recommended A world to me as a noob at a time I had no clue how advanced that world was and therefore had very few options for real growth nor did I seek any.

All the points expressed about the condition of GvG expressed here are valid in today's gaming environment. It is not as much a Team Experience as it was (maybe not at all). Now many guilds simply use it as a players point farm. You didn't have enough troops on hand (especially Rogues) to just dump them as fill in sectors and then go back kill them off to improve your stats. We used to build 20+ barracks per player (fighters) to even have a chance to conquer and hold a tile so it took a lot of coordination. As referenced on another post now a siege can be placed and then defenses nibbled at over several hours or even days in some instances. At the height of GvG the entire Team had to attack the sector and normally re-siege numerous times before the Guild you were attacking could break your siege and replace their defensive units. At the same time other Team Members were aggressively defending your sectors. Kind of like Pavlov's experiment: 8pm (EST) the bell rings and all the dogs are off their leash.



“There comes a time in your life when you have to choose to turn the page, write another book or simply close it.”
― Shannon L. Alder

Guess that says it best.
 

DeletedUser40495

The game must change. Inno is a company trying to make money right? If the game did not evolve than it would soon cease to exist. To players who whine about how they hate game’s changes I say this: The game does not exist to serve you. If you don’t like what the game has become than you DON’T HAVE TO PLAY!!! Inno certainly does not care about old players who are resistant to change. They care about the thousands of new players the game will continue to attract as it changes to fit more modern devices. THE FUTURE OF THE GAME IS ON MOBILE!!! Inno recognizes this and has made changes to benefit the players who play on mobile and the many more that will continue to. Like it or not FoE’s “good old days” are over. The game has changed for the better (at least most players feel that way) and will continue to change. The future of FoE looks very exciting, and it is a shame that so many old players are so resistant to change that they cannot see this. For FoE it is all about the bottom line. They will make the game more suitable for the majority. Old players can either evolve with the game or stop playing. They can learn new play styles, or cease to dominate the rankings. They can accept the game’s changes, or hand off the baton to the new generation of FoE players.

In my opinion the game is as good as it has ever been and will continue to get better.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
All the points expressed about the condition of GvG expressed here are valid in today's gaming environment. It is not as much a Team Experience as it was (maybe not at all). Now many guilds simply use it as a players point farm. You didn't have enough troops on hand (especially Rogues) to just dump them as fill in sectors and then go back kill them off to improve your stats. We used to build 20+ barracks per player (fighters) to even have a chance to conquer and hold a tile so it took a lot of coordination. As referenced on another post now a siege can be placed and then defenses nibbled at over several hours or even days in some instances. At the height of GvG the entire Team had to attack the sector and normally re-siege numerous times before the Guild you were attacking could break your siege and replace their defensive units. At the same time other Team Members were aggressively defending your sectors. Kind of like Pavlov's experiment: 8pm (EST) the bell rings and all the dogs are off their leash.

“There comes a time in your life when you have to choose to turn the page, write another book or simply close it.”
― Shannon L. Alder

Guess that says it best.
While I can sympathize, again, you're longingly remembering a time when FoE had just several hundred thousand players on the US server so things like 8pm EST maybe worked for the majority of players on the servers at the time. Now, even without mobile, players on the US servers come from around the world. 8pm EST doesn't work for most these days. Being on the West Coast, 8pm EST is 5pm for me, which doesn't work, despite being on PC.

All the problems in GvG now, are because of the flawed architecture of GvG. Once the game grew to millions of users and the maps locked up with large guilds in alliance with other large guilds, the future of GvG as a dead end was sealed. GvG's fate was sealed long before the mobile app was released. The underlying architecture was never designed to support a game that grew beyond anyone's widest expectations and has outlasted 90% of it's competition.

Battlegrounds is the guild fighting option moving forward. Like it or not, it's being built to support the game as it exists today and in a way that can support unlimited growth. Face it, GvG hasn't been what you longingly remember for a long long time. It's not been that way since before the tavern, before GE, before AF, and certainly long before Settlements.

So hang around long enough to see BG come into fruition, or don't. 95% of the players who don't GvG are looking forward to finally having something to do as a guild beyond GE. The game will never be what it once was and as I said, it's a tired refrain. Every few weeks someone else is here posting about the same old, same old. GvG this, Arc that, GBs out of age, etc.

I, like most, am a newer player. Tough. I, like most, have no attachment to your romantic thoughts of yesteryear. Tough. I, like most, play the game as it exists today. Tough. I, like most, take advantage of all the new additions, GE IV, The Arc, Tavern Boosts, and Settlements to help me grow stronger, faster. Tough. I, like most, don't do GvG. Tough. I, like most, am looking forward to Guild Battlegrounds. Tough.

The game is evolving and growing in popularity as a result. Tough. Evolve with it, or don't, keep playing, or don't.

"There I go,
There I go,
Turn the page" - Bob Seger
 

DeletedUser

and on another note, wouldn't it be cool if inno introduced a "throwback" world. Less events, no arcs, whatever was going on back in the day that made it enjoyable for many long time players? ... and no I don't need to hear this is on the DNSL, for any mods that may want to chime in... I think there are alot of people who would appreciate something like that, new players included.
I would appreciate something like that, for sure. (And no mod would chime in about the DNSL unless you made it a proposal. Other "helpful" posters might, but a mod wouldn't.)
If you recall Stephen I did not make anything personal
Actually, you did. I merely posted a correction of your erroneous statements about the historical development of the game and you immediately got personal with your very next post.
You probably need to get back in your sandbox Stephen. Since you were not here at any of those points you referenced I am pretty sure your commentary is not relevant. My comments were based on my experiences within the game not just from reading the coding notes you have accessed or someone from Inno provided you.
This is where you tried to make it personal, rather than admit that your statements about the game were inaccurate and merely reflected your personal experience and not the actual game evolution.
The only post of mine that could remotely be considered personal is the one where I responded to you questioning my fitness to be a moderator, and even then I merely compared your game progress to mine.
 

DeletedUser18332

I would appreciate something like that, for sure. (And no mod would chime in about the DNSL unless you made it a proposal. Other "helpful" posters might, but a mod wouldn't.)

Actually, you did. I merely posted a correction of your erroneous statements about the historical development of the game and you immediately got personal with your very next post.

This is where you tried to make it personal, rather than admit that your statements about the game were inaccurate and merely reflected your personal experience and not the actual game evolution.
The only post of mine that could remotely be considered personal is the one where I responded to you questioning my fitness to be a moderator, and even then I merely compared your game progress to mine.


As usual you are incorrect. I did not post any inaccurate information about my views of game play as to when and why so many of us did start playing FoE. Had it only been just PvP many of would not have have joined and stayed. As I stated earlier it was always the carrot of allowing the huge influx of mobile players to access GvG which somewhat placated us for awhile. Now they have pretty much fessed up this was BS all along. It would be greatly appreciated if you keep your opinions to yourself and take your angtagonistic comments to another moderation. If not the next post I will report you to Inno. So you better report me now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser18332

I would appreciate something like that, for sure. (And no mod would chime in about the DNSL unless you made it a proposal. Other "helpful" posters might, but a mod wouldn't.)

Actually, you did. I merely posted a correction of your erroneous statements about the historical development of the game and you immediately got personal with your very next post.

This is where you tried to make it personal, rather than admit that your statements about the game were inaccurate and merely reflected your personal experience and not the actual game evolution.
The only post of mine that could remotely be considered personal is the one where I responded to you questioning my fitness to be a moderator, and even then I merely compared your game progress to mine.


I decided I have had enough of you and reported you anyway.
 
Top