Printable View
We didn't ask for this. We ask for pvp, slider to train more troops than 25 and some new adventures.
If BB thinks we are doing too many too fast, than fine introduce 3-5 new adventures (like the FT chain), put new hard hitting and hard to kill units in them and let the players charge them head on, wipe their troops with massive losses. Dumping this burden on all your player base is not fair and not smart. Actually is pretty bad and pretty dumb. And the testers seem to agree on this point.
from BB Kaurkal on testing
Dear ddakka, Right now we don't have any ETA of when we will implement the new combat system, we might even decide not to do it and this is the main reason we have invited everyone to test it in order to provide us with feedback.
Right now this is a very early version of the new system, we know for a fact that we still need to do a lot of changes, but we wanted you all to join us and keep providing us with feedback along the way we are doing all these changes because we know that the combat system is a very important part of the game.
Please do test the new combat system in adventures and if it's possible tell us from your point of view with numbers where did we go wrong and how it can be better.
Very valid points and concerns. From Test forums:
"...So as i can best interpret and see the implementation you want higher level players to use more of the iron/steel type economy as a progression from the copper based battle economy.
Now i have what i will say is a more mature level 50 copper based economy at least for battles.
I see a few issues that inhibits people making the change to the higher iron/steel and even more so to the d-sword, cannon, crossbow.
First the resource materials are exceptionally expensive to get and the improvement based on hit points, damage points is not worth the extra initial resource cost.
Then to make the units in the barracks the time is not any better. It takes approximately 3 times longer to make a soldier than a recruit. And i lose a 1/3 of soldiers compared to recruits if i do a simple swap out in adventures meaning where i use 1 recruit i now use 1 soldier. So there is no gain and so why spend more on the initial resource cost.
Finding resources takes longer per mine to find iron and each iron mine contains less. There are more mines but to find them all still takes longer.
Weapon production time is also a factor longer for the stronger weapons and therefore again not worthwhile to produce.
Lastly this is a global impact meaning that you are affecting every adventure with these changes. Its not like it only affects the adventures that level 50s do but also adventures that level 35s do. A copper economy would seem smart for lower levels an iron/steel economy may not be given the needed resources. This creates an unfair advantage and makes starting this game that much harder. It would seem that some rebalancing that strengthens soldiers more and elites even more and same for ranged units such may make sense. However with the rebalancing you cant diminish the recruit power because there are lower levels. It would seem that perhaps all low level adventures including island of the pirates and others need no change along with no changes in recruits. But perhaps high level adventures such as fairy tale adventures, Secluded experiments could have enemy units rebalanced. This is change and will get pushback but at least that makes more sense.
If an enemy unit on a high adventure gets rebalanced forcing more use of soldiers which were rebalanced makes more sense rather than low level adventures requiring high level rebalanced troops.
People also enjoy playing adventures constantly. If there is a slow down where they can only do 1/3 of the adventures because of rebuild times that makes the game more boring. This would lead people to walk away perhaps find a new game and not spend time or money here. This would seem counter intuitive to the goals of a business.
As to the rebalancing of the master of martial arts general, I have seen enemy units have an increase of 400% for their hit points. I could imagine the MMA general having an increase and a new damage range of 1300 - 1400 to stay somewhat in line with these increases..."
Hey i recognize that post
And this is also excellent point:
"..I can understand how this does need to be changed; however, I am worried about the overall iron production. The current testing has a level 5 iron smelter using 40 iron ore to produce 5 iron bars. I think that is way too much. I did see that the steel consumption for the steel smelter was divided by half, but the chain is only as good as its weakest link. Fueling a level 5 iron smelter would take all iron mines at level 3 considering the travel times, and then one would have to consider the cost of keeping those iron mines up. Something needs to be done about that by increasing the amount that can be mined, making them faster, or decreasing the amount needed for smelters. Also, I think the geologist skills need to include more iron traits like the copper and gold mines have..."
You made excellent points there Big, addressing all of my concerns and questions of many others who were discussing those changes last night in global, thanks for this. I am still kinda shocked BB haven't thought about this. It seems the devs don't know much about their game at all. Takes 5 iron mines (lev3) to feed 1 Iron smelter (lev5). How are we supposed to even make those thousands of Iron swords needed to do adventures when Militia will replace Recruits?
Clearly a sign of complete lack of knowledge about their own game. And there are many more. How can you drop changes like this into test KNOWING that there is no way in hell your design island economy just can support it? I can't take the devs seriously anymore. They're embarrassing themselves in players eyes...