lemur
Well-Known Member
Proposal
Introduce a new setting that provides players with a short list of choices for the mixture of motivation and polishing that the "Aid" algorithm applies to their villages.
Current System
After special buildings have been motivated, the "Aid" algorithm randomly chooses motivation or polishing — with equal probability — regardless of whether that is best for players or the game itself.
Details
The "Aid" button has been an unmitigated disaster for the design aspect of Forge of Empires, ever since it was introduced three years ago (December 3, 2014). The Aid algorithm uselessly polishes small decorations with the same priority that it motivates production buildings. In this way, the Aid algorithm essentially penalizes players for using small decorations. The nearly universal response of players to this penalty has been to purge their villages of small decorations — most often turning the layout into something resembling a retail warehouse, with row upon monotonous row of identical production buildings.
Why bother creating quality artwork if the game process then discourages players from creative design? It is as though the Programming Department at InnoGames does not communicate with the Art Department. We routinely see the absurd spectacle of InnoGames giving small decorations as prizes — such as the Nutcracker that was given to every player in December 2017 as a Christmas present — while still penalizing players for actually placing such decorations in their villages. Surely the artistic designers would rather not see their work languishing in player inventories like piles of junk mail.
The solution I propose is elegant and simple.
Leave the basic operation of the algorithm intact. Do not change the list of buildings that receive special priority. Do not change the age hierarchy that the algorithm uses. Continue the random nature of the algorithm — denying players the ability to target specific buildings for assistance.
But make one small programming change. Allow players to adjust the ratio that the algorithm uses between motivation and polishing. The default setting would be what is currently used for everyone — 50% motivation and 50% polishing. I would suggest adding these options:
100% motivation
67% motivation and 33% polishing
33% motivation and 67% polishing
100% polishing
When items in a particular category are exhausted, the algorithm would operate as it does now — continuing to choose from whatever remains. For example, if a player were to choose 100% motivation, and all production buildings were already motivated, then the algorithm would start choosing items to polish.
Abuse Prevention
I foresee no possibility for abuse.
Visual Aids
Here is an example of what often happens with the current system. The Aid algorithm repeatedly hammered small decorations, while a dozen critical supply production buildings went unmotivated.
Note the striking difference between these sample villages — with plenty of small decorations — that InnoGames uses to market their game ...
... and this typical village with most small decorations removed.
Attention Walmart shoppers! There is a sale on Ziggurats in aisle five.
Conclusion
One of the fundamental strengths of Forge of Empires has always been the diversity of ways that it can be played by players with different intentions. This proposal is about no longer penalizing those of us who value the artwork and value village design.
.
Introduce a new setting that provides players with a short list of choices for the mixture of motivation and polishing that the "Aid" algorithm applies to their villages.
Current System
After special buildings have been motivated, the "Aid" algorithm randomly chooses motivation or polishing — with equal probability — regardless of whether that is best for players or the game itself.
Details
The "Aid" button has been an unmitigated disaster for the design aspect of Forge of Empires, ever since it was introduced three years ago (December 3, 2014). The Aid algorithm uselessly polishes small decorations with the same priority that it motivates production buildings. In this way, the Aid algorithm essentially penalizes players for using small decorations. The nearly universal response of players to this penalty has been to purge their villages of small decorations — most often turning the layout into something resembling a retail warehouse, with row upon monotonous row of identical production buildings.
Why bother creating quality artwork if the game process then discourages players from creative design? It is as though the Programming Department at InnoGames does not communicate with the Art Department. We routinely see the absurd spectacle of InnoGames giving small decorations as prizes — such as the Nutcracker that was given to every player in December 2017 as a Christmas present — while still penalizing players for actually placing such decorations in their villages. Surely the artistic designers would rather not see their work languishing in player inventories like piles of junk mail.
The solution I propose is elegant and simple.
Leave the basic operation of the algorithm intact. Do not change the list of buildings that receive special priority. Do not change the age hierarchy that the algorithm uses. Continue the random nature of the algorithm — denying players the ability to target specific buildings for assistance.
But make one small programming change. Allow players to adjust the ratio that the algorithm uses between motivation and polishing. The default setting would be what is currently used for everyone — 50% motivation and 50% polishing. I would suggest adding these options:
100% motivation
67% motivation and 33% polishing
33% motivation and 67% polishing
100% polishing
When items in a particular category are exhausted, the algorithm would operate as it does now — continuing to choose from whatever remains. For example, if a player were to choose 100% motivation, and all production buildings were already motivated, then the algorithm would start choosing items to polish.
Abuse Prevention
I foresee no possibility for abuse.
Visual Aids
Here is an example of what often happens with the current system. The Aid algorithm repeatedly hammered small decorations, while a dozen critical supply production buildings went unmotivated.
Note the striking difference between these sample villages — with plenty of small decorations — that InnoGames uses to market their game ...
... and this typical village with most small decorations removed.
Attention Walmart shoppers! There is a sale on Ziggurats in aisle five.
Conclusion
One of the fundamental strengths of Forge of Empires has always been the diversity of ways that it can be played by players with different intentions. This proposal is about no longer penalizing those of us who value the artwork and value village design.
.
Last edited: