Balancing combat - what is the goal devs?

There is a lot of confusion about this but few points are certain:

1. Devs didn't specify what are their goals with a complete overhaul of the entire game. This is where a lot of players get frustrated. We don't understand what are they trying to achieve. Some info would be very welcome.
2. Changing the combat affects the whole game - economy specifically. Making recruits, bowmen and cavalry pretty much obsolete on most of the adventures will send ripple effects throughout all players.
3. Making MA (the most expensive gen in the game) much, much less useful (testers say on most maps he under performs the vets) is a slap in the face to all of us who spend gems on buying 2nd one.
4. Time. We understand the devs spend most of their time on the game. But we players don't. FT adventures are already enough time consuming. With the new changes even the easy ones will take more time.
5. Time again. Using more Militia, Soldiers and Elite Soldiers will quickly run us dry since those units are not that fast to remake. It takes days to refill those.

What are the devs goals? Are we doing too many adventures, too fast according to them? Who is gonna do BK which will cost almost double amount of troops and time? All advance weapons are produced way too slow for us to make enough of them with the new changes. Do you know how long it takes to replace 200 Elite Soldiers? And how long it takes to make 200 D swords (granted you have all the materials for it). Removing weapons from loot drops? Not to mention the ocean of coal they will require. Where are we supposed to put all those coal makers? There is something seriously flawed here and I think it is not the changes but the goals of them. Unless you wanna lose half your subscribers...

You need to sit down and start thinking really hard about this. We asked for a slider to train more than 25 troops, we asked for pvp and we asked for more adventures. We DIDN'T ask for a complete overhaul of the entire game? And you say you listen to feedback? Wonder how many times a month...

O my, someone was trying to do Clever Tailor. It might take 5-8k troops now and all your sac attacks will have to be done with Militia or Soldiers now. Bows are getting wiped same as recruits with little effect. Got stuck in 2nd sector running out of generals/troops to sacrifice :) Cheers.

We were asking for 2 years now to change the slider and be able to q more units faster. Now BB found a solution. You will not be able to do 2 adventures a day - you will do 2-3 a week. Advanced weapons are much slower to make (1hr 12 per damasc sword - hilarious), and you will not be able EVER to remake your troops as fast (long training time and slow production of weapons). Additionally since most adventure will need more or less 2x (yes double!) amount of troops to do them you will end up doing one every 2-4 days. No more wining about the slider.

I think that is the biggest goal of this change. Shut up all the people whining for the slider:) Good job BB. Put your final nail in the coffin you were slowly putting your own game into. I don't think I have enough energy in me to remodel my whole island because of your changes to economy. Might as well look for another game.

The real goal of the new combat system and the entire revamp on the Island production system is to stop the exploit of blocking.

Blocks are exploits? Since when?

And do you understand how much it cost in time/energy/calculations/patience/resources to do entire economy revamp? Have fun playing on empty server in 2 months..

I do not believe that this new system is for TSO. BB has a new game coming out and goes into beta soon. If this combat system is implemented for TSO there will be a mass exodus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinkleet

Blocks are exploits? Since when?

And do you understand how much it cost in time/energy/calculations/patience/resources to do entire economy revamp? Have fun playing on empty server in 2 months..

---

Since they said they don't support blocks and that it's a Exploit. When I was a Community Leader and in Skype chat with them, I even asked if they think Blocking was a Exploit and they said Yes.

Empty Server in 2 months... UM... Dude, You understand that this new combat system will take a few months right? If they rush it (I hope they don't) there might be a lot of people locked out of there islands because of the revamp with the production system and adventures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wimpy

I do not believe that this new system is for TSO. BB has a new game coming out and goes into beta soon. If this combat system is implemented for TSO there will be a mass exodus.

---

No. This new combat system looks to be for TSO. well the new game coming out has it's own. but it will take them some time for them to get a "solid foundation" for this new combat system for TSO.

plumz, u have some very valid points, could u please post them on the test server? the devs dont see whats posted over here.

and i agree...reducing the number of advs we can do in a day will run more players off than the rollback did

theyve seemed to lost the concept that this is supposed to be fun for us!

I agree with psaltery and think plumz has some very valid points that I have also thought about. I don't want to revamp my entire island and I have too much money tied up in the level 4 and level 5 work yards now to redo my island. I will find something else to spend my entertainment budget on if this happens.

The tester forum is kinda buzzing right now. Quite few people raised their concerns about the ripple effects of those changes on economy and game play. I can't imagine an average player having more than 2 Damas smiths or 4 SS. The reasources needed to run them are just too great, and you can't run 2-3 Rb's back to back to get tons of titanium ore to make those. Steel swords are entire different matter not sure if those few 500 depos on our islands will even support a steady flow of them. Remember they are planning to remove all weapon drops from adventures. This will run TO dry faster than anyone thinks because people will try to run adventures like they used to - many.

The change to range units obsoletes bowmen and the increased dmg and HP of enemies forces you to actually not only use LB and Xbows but to lose some of them in process of completing adventures. Have you check how slow xbows production is? or LB for that matter?

Not only it will cost us many more expensive units to finish an adventure but the rewards are less (no weapon as loot). And the other loot doesn't seem to be changed in volume either. This is not a change this is a NERF that might really make lots of players under 50 think "screw it". Try doing SA and lose 2x to 3x more units you losing now and most of them advanced (not R). It is just not worth it...

People are also upset about BB dropping something like this on us, unfinished (even for testing) and expecting us to do their job. Giving splash dmg to all units is the dumbest idea ever. Epic and FT advies will bleed your barracks to the bone. Expect FT to truly take 7 days to finish Unless you got 10k troops ready to wipe. Even with that you will not have enough generals to do them in a day. The changes are just way too much in all aspects.

My guess is that their goal is to make expert weapons more expensive. All of the buildings after the Exotic Wood Sawmill are just expensive decorations, and it is uneconomic to produce weapons when you can loot them or buy them in the trade office. I have a level 2 forge, and I figured that it would cost me about 8gc to build a cannon if I buffed it every step of the way. I would think that removing weapons from loot would be enough incentive to give players a reason to turn on all of those buildings that have been sleeping for as long as we can remember. But if they wreck the combat system to give us massive losses, that is just overkill. I won't be running 2-3 adventures a week, or even a month. I will just log in to turn buildings off and on, and buy an occasional loot spot.

Many aspects will need modified to work with the changes. Try it, and suggest intelligent, reason backed changes. That is what I will do before I simply say I will quit if it goes live.

One of the devs driving this change listed their goals on the test server forum. This is my response to their stated goals and in that thread is a link to their original post: http://forum.tsotesting.com/threads/...-No-Confidence

Tanks Milo for posting this. I completely lost confidence in devs of the game. Increasing the need to make more advanced weapons and not even knowing that the iron deposits as they are will not support such efforts is just embarrassing. If we start losing ES and Xbows on daily basis while doing adventure how are we supposed to replace the units? The cycle to make Damasc sw is 1hr 12 min!!! Do they even know this? Mores cost to the adventures? More advanced units needed to finish them? What for? For crappy, lousy loot? Most of the adventures are not worth doing already...

Vote of no confidence from me as well. And I am sure I am not alone.

In my opinion, these changes are not in any way intended to please the player community but instead, to reduce server load issues that they created when they made it just too easy for players to level up quickly and do many more adventures. Years ago I could see what the intended direction of the game was meant to be but they just never got it implemented i.e. forcing us to make our own advanced weapons and taking days to do an adventure instead of hours. Now it appears that they have to come up with a solution to their problem, not ours.

As a guild leader it has already been obvious to me that there is a slow decline in player enthusiasm and many seem to fade away after reaching level 50 because the challenges become too great for the game to be fun and lets face it, this game is becoming less about fun and more about frustration. Can you imagine how long it will take for the guilds to complete the guild quests that require us to experience an adventure with these changes? I have a member in my guild that recently bought all three endless copper mines just to find that now they intend to greatly reduce the need for bronze swords. I mean it has already been hard enough to keep new players interested and active. Do they think this will in any way improve that? Who will want to use premium time now with greatly reduced chance for reward and i don't know about the rest, but I play this game for the rewards... take away that and who will want to continue to play?

Of course they want to stop us from blocking even though it has been part of the game all along, intended or not. It seems to me that it was meant to be a part of the game because why else would it take longer to defeat towers and castles if not an attempt to make blocks possibly fail.

I think if this goes live, developers will sit and cheer when high level players with over developed islands leave the game. Yay, server load reduced! Then a call comes from marketing... "revenue reduced!"... doh!

I for one hope they put this idea on the same shelf where they left the Guild Bank... which I'm still waiting for by the way lol.

I agree with you Vanessa

I think they want to create some output and a solution for the increasing stockpiles of resources people get from adventures. Forcing us to use more advance weapons and using titanium and exotic wood to make them will unload some of that. Unfortunately those changes will hit very hard players under 50.

Making it harder for everyone to play and less rewarding, but especially for lower level players is a dangerous slope. Besides, I lost confidence in the devs. They clearly don't play their own game and just have no clue about quite few basic things. (How many working Iron smelts can all of your iron deposits sustain for example and how many adventure will you be able to do by your daily IS production). The majority of people actually do adventures on self sustained basis as much as their economy allows them to do with some added a bit of trading. Those will get hit hardest.

Not sure if the devs can see pass this. Consequences of such changes could be devastating to player base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinkleet

I think they want to create some output and a solution for the increasing stockpiles of resources people get from adventures. Forcing us to use more advance weapons and using titanium and exotic wood to make them will unload some of that. Unfortunately those changes will hit very hard players under 50.

Making it harder for everyone to play and less rewarding, but especially for lower level players is a dangerous slope. Besides, I lost confidence in the devs. They clearly don't play their own game and just have no clue about quite few basic things. (How many working Iron smelts can all of your iron deposits sustain for example and how many adventure will you be able to do by your daily IS production). The majority of people actually do adventures on self sustained basis as much as their economy allows them to do with some added a bit of trading. Those will get hit hardest.

Not sure if the devs can see pass this. Consequences of such changes could be devastating to player base.

---

From reading BB_Mara's post, I think that's the intent.

yup... I've tried it...Cavs, recruits and mma are useless in the new system. Elites defeat everything instead of blocking. The training times for an adventure are terribly long considering those training times remain unchanged in light of troops needed and the need for iron has increased considerably as many have mentioned. I've played many games. The amount of resources one holds has not been a problem because like building licenses, there's a limit to how much one can hold. In other words, you can't just add storehouses beyond the "maximum" point to hold more (because there is a limit). But wait...feedback needs to go in the tester forum...Ha!

Thanks for the info Moon. All those concerns are valid and true for lev 50 players. As of now nobody can finish any adventures with tavern generals only (even the lower ones). How are the new players supposed to advance without Vets/ GM ES and Xbows? That is a real question to ask :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinkleet

Thanks for the info Moon. All those concerns are valid and true for lev 50 players. As of now nobody can finish any adventures with tavern generals only (even the lower ones). How are the new players supposed to advance without Vets/ GM ES and Xbows? That is a real question to ask :)

---

How can new players do anything in that case? Systems thinking is required in planning any changes..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonlime

How can new players do anything in that case? Systems thinking is required in planning any changes..

---

"Buy or Die"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troll-Phu

"Buy or Die"

---

Do I hear Taps??

I have a question --what has been the reaction from other servers? We all know North American servers are considered second class citizens. Perhaps they are so developed on the German servers that this is mere blip on the radar to them.

Lol what do you think? If no adventures (so far) can be done without a veteran general what do you think the reaction is on any server? It means once you clear your island the game it's over until you purchase 2.5k gems for a vet. Is there any server in the world that will be happy about this? And the most important question: what, wait let me said it better - WTF are the devs thinking?

I think they are going to have to rebalance the lower advs. Big time. Recruits/bows being 3rd strike is....painful to noobs.

From test server about the iron/steel chain:

"It takes 5 minutes for a geologist to find a copper deposit, 2-1/2 minutes for a jolly geo. It takes 1 hour to find an iron deposit, 1/2 hour with a jolly. That's 12 times longer!

There are 6 copper deposits on island. There are 16 iron deposits on island. All mines for each mineral have to be built to properly support the smelters & swordsmiths.

Most people can find, build & upgrade all their copper mines while drinking their morning coffee, in less time than it takes to even find 1 iron deposit.

This is the root of the "unbalanced problem". Please fix this before you do anything else."

Thanks Ozzy for this excellent post on test forums. It addresses all the dev reasons to implement such drastic changes.

"Firstly, I would like to thank you for taking the time to post here. However, you'll have to forgive me for being blunt, but it is painfully obvious that you just don't understand what is keeping those players that are choosing to stay engaged.

I am currently playing on Northisle as a level 50 player, most of the players on my friend list are level 50 and I am in a guild that is composed almost entirely of players of level 45 and over. From that perspective, what I see that is keeping the vast majority of higher level players that keep playing regularly, particularly level 50s, engaged with the game is doing adventures. The more you reduce the frequency with which they can do adventures, the less engaged they will become. The less engaged they are the less time they will spend logged in and playing. And, from a business perspective, players spending less time playing a game are less inclined to spend money on it. This is not rocket science to figure out. So why on earth would you wish to reduce adventuring capability?

So.. let me take the above points in order:

* Increase the value of late game units (especially soldiers)
If you want to increase the value of soldiers, then you simply need to make their use more viable. Recruits are not the most effective unit in the game, like you say. They are cannon fodder used to keep the effective units alive. The reasons why this is the case is because they are cheap and quick to make and rely on a resource (copper) that is quick and easy to produce, especially if Endless Copper Mines have been procured. Militia are used in this role only when Recruits will not suffice and Soldiers are not generally used because they take a great deal of time to produce and, in my opinion most importantly, because enemy units that attack weakest targets first will go for Cannoneers before they hit Soldiers.

* Increase overall unit losses to make weapon productions necessary
If you want to make weapon productions necessary, then only one simple step is required. Remove weapons from loot and replace them with raw materials required to make them. I can pretty much guarantee that, had you done this a year or two ago, then the vast majority of players who never bothered to build high-end weapon buildings such as the crossbowsmith and cannon forge would have done so long ago, and that the players that do have them (such as myself) would be running them a lot more frequently than they do at present.

* Increase weapon value
I must confess that I am not at all sure what you mean by this. Would you care to elaborate further?

* Increasing the difficulty to play multiple adventures in a short time...
See my above point about keeping high level players engaged with the game. Further to that point, I would suggest that could be better done by providing new content such as more challenging adventures that require the use of the higher tier troops you talk about in the first point I quoted. Perhaps these adventures could be purchased with beans? That would give new meaning to doing the 'Tailor' adventures rather than the role they now play for most players that have bought everything they wish to purchase using beans and stalks.

In short, tearing up the rules of weapon economy and forcing players, many of whom already have one foot out of the door, to redesign their whole islands just to be able to effectively adventure again at a reduced rate compared to what they are capable of doing now is a sure fire way of alienating a significant chunk of your customer base. It is my opinion that the game is already too established for such radical changes to production chains, as you are proposing with what has been introduced on this server. Your customers have invested a great deal of money developing their islands with such items as Endless Copper Mines, Epic Yards, Improved Silos, etc., some of which they may find they no longer have need and/or space for when it comes to redesigning their economies and will, no doubt, feel a little cheated out of the investment they made to get them.... that is, of course, assuming they bother to redesign and don't just give up in disgust.

I urge you to carefully consider the ramifications of going live with any deep-rooted changes and, should you choose to go ahead with this 're-balance' in whatever form it may take, that you figure out a way to ease existing players into it, rather than 'dumping' it on them in one go, else they end up logging in one day to find their island's economy spiraling out of control."

It is becoming clear to more and more players that the devs of this game have no idea about what keeps players playing, what appears to most of the player base as valuable or attractive, how much time players are comfortable spending on "chores" parts of the game.

Imagine the "new" TSO when everyday you have to find 16 iron mines, build them and upgrade them to lev 3 or higher, buff your whole iron/steel chain (not only weapon smiths but also smelters) just so you can effectively complete 1 RB...Fun right? Lost respect for the devs. I make a rule of not wasting my time on clueless people.

It is your game, your bread and butter, your job. If you don't know things like that... perhaps you shouldn't be designing games.

http://forum.tsotesting.com/threads/...nfidence/page2

Very intelligent and eloquent post. The changes now boil down to 2 important factors:
1. How badly the new combat system will affect new players. Not only their ability to do adventures to progress in game but also their economy. It is incredibly hard for players under 30 to make Iron/steel chain and produce weapons. At lev 1-2 those chains take days to make the amounts of weapons needed to complete a low level adventure (with proposed changes). And once the adventure is completed (granted they would be able - so far no tester could finish the lower adventures with tavern generals) the resources it will give as reward in no way compensate the expenses put into doing it. Which means in order to gain xp players would have to operate greatly in the red. There are some fragile margins to which a player can adapt or simply decide that the whole progression is just not worth the effort.

2. What is the point for players lev 50 of even playing the game? With the ratio of reward vs cost to do adventures going much deeper into cost, with extension of time needed to get resources, create weapons and finally waste them by doing adventure for a marginal loot...Will the ratio be even worth it to players lev 50? How long does it take to find 16 iron deposits, build the mines, upgrade them and buff the whole iron/steel chain? According to the proposed changes this will have to be done on a daily basis in order to do epic adventures. Not to mention the terrible choke point of making xbows, canons and Damasc swords - there is no way to do them efficiently with current cycles. Are all the "chore" parts of the game worth doing (from a lev 50 perspective) in order to do an adventure every 1-3 days?

The proposed combat changes have such great consequences to the economy, play style and effective play time they will change the entire game FUNDAMENTALLY. The question is, how many players will continue to play this game after the change. Judging by the number of concerns on test forums, the picture looks pretty grim...

Testers are already trying to find positive, constructive ways to "mold" the changes a bit and fit it into the game. But what it needs to be done is much larger then combat changes. The proposed changes to weapons are not enough, a complete redesign of the current iron/steel production cycles will be needed. Time of production of advance weapons would need to be cut in more than half, time for training advanced units greatly increased and loot (in raw resources like deposits) also increased. We are not talking a drop in a bucket or a minor tweek. Can you stomach 4k Elite Soldier losses on Heroic Tailor? How long will it take to replace them? The magnitude of those changes are just beyond the grasp...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RomanGodCamper

Since they said they don't support blocks and that it's a Exploit. When I was a Community Leader and in Skype chat with them, I even asked if they think Blocking was a Exploit and they said Yes.

Empty Server in 2 months... UM... Dude, You understand that this new combat system will take a few months right? If they rush it (I hope they don't) there might be a lot of people locked out of there islands because of the revamp with the production system and adventures.

---

Back in the spring when I told the BBs that support was telling people that blocking was an exploit that was being removed, those BBs were not aware of this and were a more than a little surprised given the fact that there were guides for blocking in the official game guides section of the forum. The fact that the guides were allowed on the forums seemed to imply approval and yet someone somewhere (Devs?) decided this was an exploit that needed to be fixed. We all know what happened next -- map features started changing in some Fairy Tale adventures so that we couldn't place camps for necessary blocks, and some camps in SE, SA, Outlaws, and Horseback started intercepting even though they were engaged in a fight. Don't get me wrong -- I think Blue Byte/UBI decided blocks were bad, but I don't think the BBs knew until we did. Maybe we talked to different BBs, but I've got the logs in Skype. When I asked what was going on and quoted a mail from a player on Ares, the BBs reacted as if they had no clue what was going on. That is one of the main reasons that my "project" (which never happened because I eventually resigned) included revamping the guide forums because BB can't allow blocking to be in guides on the forums if blocking is an exploit -- it's a really bad double message that confuses players.

That said ....

BB is sending a really confused message again. The game has adventures with time limits upwards of a week, and yet it sometimes requires those adventures for daily quests and guild quests. Of course we're going to figure out how to get those done for as few resources as possible. If BB doesn't want us completing adventures well before the time limit expires then they should have implemented some sort of gate function to allow one per day (for example), or stop giving us SE, VTV, and other time and resource consuming adventures as DAILY quests. Daily means daily -- sure, it might be difficult but giving us things for daily quests that they don't want us to be able to complete in a day is misleading and just stupid.

These changes are really going to hurt the players like me, who don't spend all day every day in game. I log in for a couple hours in the evening (if I'm lucky) and spend a lot of that time searching for deposits and trying to buy loot spots (oh no, another exploit!) for quests, in between doing dishes and packing lunches for the next day. If BB prefers to market this game to the insane people who are on 24/7 (since they are the ones will have the time and resources to queue up thousands if militia, soldiers, etc to replace the recruits), then do us a favor and tell us that the part-timers aren't wanted.

I have really enjoyed this game despite some of the changes, but as a level 50 who doesn't have a whole lot of neat new content to tackle I may just leave (when my fricking gem pits run out *sigh*) and spend more time on Anno which (for the most part) isn't ruining the player experience.

(For those who I know will ask -- If I rage quit, I promise Global-1 will be the first to know, lol.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spikescopilot

Back in the spring when I told the BBs that support was telling people that blocking was an exploit that was being removed, those BBs were not aware of this and were a more than a little surprised given the fact that there were guides for blocking in the official game guides section of the forum. The fact that the guides were allowed on the forums seemed to imply approval and yet someone somewhere (Devs?) decided this was an exploit that needed to be fixed. We all know what happened next -- map features started changing in some Fairy Tale adventures so that we couldn't place camps for necessary blocks, and some camps in SE, SA, Outlaws, and Horseback started intercepting even though they were engaged in a fight. Don't get me wrong -- I think Blue Byte/UBI decided blocks were bad, but I don't think the BBs knew until we did. Maybe we talked to different BBs, but I've got the logs in Skype. When I asked what was going on and quoted a mail from a player on Ares, the BBs reacted as if they had no clue what was going on. That is one of the main reasons that my "project" (which never happened because I eventually resigned) included revamping the guide forums because BB can't allow blocking to be in guides on the forums if blocking is an exploit -- it's a really bad double message that confuses players.

That said ....

BB is sending a really confused message again. The game has adventures with time limits upwards of a week, and yet it sometimes requires those adventures for daily quests and guild quests. Of course we're going to figure out how to get those done for as few resources as possible. If BB doesn't want us completing adventures well before the time limit expires then they should have implemented some sort of gate function to allow one per day (for example), or stop giving us SE, VTV, and other time and resource consuming adventures as DAILY quests. Daily means daily -- sure, it might be difficult but giving us things for daily quests that they don't want us to be able to complete in a day is misleading and just stupid.

These changes are really going to hurt the players like me, who don't spend all day every day in game. I log in for a couple hours in the evening (if I'm lucky) and spend a lot of that time searching for deposits and trying to buy loot spots (oh no, another exploit!) for quests, in between doing dishes and packing lunches for the next day. If BB prefers to market this game to the insane people who are on 24/7 (since they are the ones will have the time and resources to queue up thousands if militia, soldiers, etc to replace the recruits), then do us a favor and tell us that the part-timers aren't wanted.

I have really enjoyed this game despite some of the changes, but as a level 50 who doesn't have a whole lot of neat new content to tackle I may just leave (when my fricking gem pits run out *sigh*) and spend more time on Anno which (for the most part) isn't ruining the player experience.

(For those who I know will ask -- If I rage quit, I promise Global-1 will be the first to know, lol.)

---

Agreed. They also don't run adventures themselves. so they have no idea how hard the FT Adventures are.

I think the steady flow of recent gem sales went into their heads and erased last pieces of common sense. There is no common sense in the changes, there is not even common sense in the devs goals for the changes and it seems none of them have a clue about the importance of doing adventures at a decent rate for players. They keep contradicting themselves on goals of the game and how are we supposed to play it (according to them). Spikes argument about doing adventures as a daily quest (design by devs) is pretty spot on. If were are supposed to do a daily adventure than why the devs want us to slow down the speed in which we are doing it?

Is it me? Or someone is just dumb here...

I can run a SE for a daily, but please realize it's not everyone, devs... and very likely not after those changes so the impact of the new system calls for an update on the gq and daily quests. remember systems thinking, not tunnel vision :)

Blocking as an exploit? Anyone who's ever played a board wargame (e.g. old Avalon Hill games like Blietzkrieg, Waterloo, Anzio) knows that blocking attacks (or sluffing in those games) are crucial for making a winning attack. A good commander engages the enemy with forces to tie them up so the main threat can be attacked. Did they really want every single camp eliminated. No strategy there. No concept of manuever even as ruidmentary as we can do with the forced pathing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RomanGodCamper

Agreed. They also don't run adventures themselves. so they have no idea how hard the FT Adventures are.

---

A very good question for BB...
What do they expect from the game? Do they indeed expect FT to finish in a day, a week or a month? if one plays 24x7 or 2x7?
I always found, with even current mechanics, toooooo slow to do adventures.. spending several hours on this game was becoming a drag, because like you all said.. even beyond adventures, there as so many drags..
Most I hated was general travel time... Like it didn't take time to build all those resources and troops, they have to have long travel times...
I would be fine if I could do one adv in 2-5 days.. may be couple over weekend.. but once I spend all the time prepping troops, adventures should be quicker than today... Complete productivity killer waiting for general to move between zones and on maps.. made me feel guilty of wasting time every time...
Drove me insane.. so I already quit :D

there's no goal... just go with the flow, focus on exploiting whatever short-term opportunities they introduce with every change they make and run your island as a hobby, fully knowing it does not make any economical sense.

I would hope that sometime they address our generals walking so freaking slow on the battlefield. Seriously, sometimes you are waiting like 5 minutes just seeing a tiny icon slowly meander to the next battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koshko

I would hope that sometime they address our generals walking so freaking slow on the battlefield. Seriously, sometimes you are waiting like 5 minutes just seeing a tiny icon slowly meander to the next battle.

---

I feel like repeating it, so don't mind if I do...
I HATED THAT.. didn't feel like I was playing a game but wasting my time..