Dear Settlers,
The Dev Notes for the Weekly Challenges was just published and we can't wait to hear your initial impressions and overall feedback.
Thank you,
BB_Odhran
Printable View
Dear Settlers,
The Dev Notes for the Weekly Challenges was just published and we can't wait to hear your initial impressions and overall feedback.
Thank you,
BB_Odhran
I think you hit the mark on the weekly challenges- those goals should cost something to achieve.
the only problem i see with these is the lack of flexibility in the adventures - I think there should be a choice of which adventures a person is able to do and some adventures really need the rewards to be increased, i.e. storm recovery. Having woodcutter available for map fragments is a good change
You want some specifics.
I have been running ali babas for the last 3 or so months. I probably averaged about 5 wc per week over that period of time. This is what I currently have in my inventory for adventures.
https://imgur.com/a/VdaNUWB
Out of all those WCs, I have received only 3 1st thiefs which I will use up in the one challenge I am currently on. I have never done a 1st thief at all in that time. I seem to be getting a fair number of 2nd thiefs though - and although I have never done one of those either, I have traded a few for WC and 3rd thiefs which I do.
The last 5 or so woodcutters (WC) I have done, I haven't received any adventures at all. And all my explorer seems to be bringing back lately is map fragments and whirlwind.
Oh, I forgot to mention - I hope the tokens you put into these building upgrades are refundable if you have to return one of these buildings to the star.
wc for maps is bad move, this doesn't solve the problem at all. not to say people will not do the very long adventure search anymore.
3 tows or 1 bessieged are possible to get in a week only if you are the luckiest person in the world. otherwise it's impossible. you can't make enough troops to play so many wc to get follow up's, to get the tows or besieged. I quit these tasks, new notes doesn't solve a thing.
The overall idea for Weekly Challenges was to create content, which would provide a similar challenge to a crisis quest, but on a more frequent basis. Those challenges should not be something you would click through in a couple of minutes, but should rather create a time challenge, where you have to think about how to approach it carefully to a degree where you maybe have to make a decision to not participate in other parts of the game, but to focus on one challenge for now and than switch back to other tasks. To create a time challenge I decided to focus on tasks, which consume a certain amount of time. Produce resources and buffs, complete specialist tasks, play certain adventures, those kind of tasks. The time challenge itself was set to 4,5 days, while giving you 7 days to complete it. This shows how time consuming such a challenge would be. Weekly Challenges aren't something for everyone, but rather challenging content for people, who are investing quite some time into this game and are looking for more things to do. Such a high time consumption also means, that this content should remain completely optional and never reward something, which is mandatory for the progress in the game, so I decided to go with the increase of the population limit, which would provide additional benefits in the long term.
Move the quests to the ship and make them all visible so we can learn what's next. Like pathfinder's quests. If we don't like them and we want to ignore them then that will make things easier. Since they were launched into the game I got more popups with 'New Quest' and 'Quest completed' then I got in my entire time I've played tso/
Ok, not for everyone, I got that, but why force me/us to keep clicking them if i choose do not complete the lot?
You created a unique item that everyone wants: tokens
Then you created Challenges as the only way to get that unique item.
Then you offer these Challenges every week.
But the Challenges were specifically designed so that they "aren't something for everyone."
The expectation is now EVERYONE should be able to get SOME tokens each WEEK.
Otherwise people will feel cheated by the game.
If the tokens were not unique, it would work.
If the challenge were quarterly or monthly, it would work.
If everyone could get some tokens each week, it would work.
It doesn't work to offer a unique item everyone wants, every week, and then say it's not for everyone.
This creates frustration and resentment.
The measure of success should be: Everyone gets some tokens each week, with some effort.
There are a whole range of possibilities between the current implementation of Weekly Challenges, and something "you would click through in a couple of minutes."
Design the Challenges in stages with increasingly difficult tasks.
Tokens are awarded for each stage.
As the tasks get more difficult, you get more tokens.
But if you only partially complete the Challenge, you at least get some tokens.
The obvious solution is make the final tasks and stages the rare adventures, and time consuming resource and troop production.
Thank you for your consideration.
Everyone can get some tokens each week - why can't they. It would be helpful if you indicate why they can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin
Would it be possible to increase the drop rate a bit for the rare ventures and adventures? Ones like heart of wood and grain conflict are nowhere to be found. We are willing to put in the work...sending out explorers and running adventures. But we can't do what's simply not in the game.
My honest opinion would be to provide Ali baba adventures in the purchase store through map fragments. like what was done about a month (ish) ago. I am OK with the resource sink and, I have the option of doing the weekly or not depending on the resources, I have. However the adventures/scenarios/ventures/co-op requirements are bad. Co-op requirements especially but for the scenario of Storm Recovery.....That is just a massive waste. Grout is already absurdly expensive (over 2,000 gold per 100) and while, I ALWAYS stock up during events, I also go through it rather quickly. Dumping 2,200-3,300 grout a month just for tokens that may or may not be enough to upgrade a residence...is absurdly expensive. For the Co-OP, it should NOT be required. Please do not make these dependent on other people. they are supposedly weekly quest for individuals.... As to the Alibaba Adventures. make them available for purchase with map frags and the problem will be solved. It will cause inflation for the associated science items and actual map frags (for lower players) but at least give players the opportunity (without a random factor) to be able to do them. Again, I can suffer through resource sinks a week or three per month, but the adventure requirements are just too much to ask.
Overall, I like the weekly challenge and its new reward token. It becomes a fun decision process to determine the optimal place to spend the tokens.
I like this idea...but I think they would need to do something to preserve the time requirement...an order of operations so you cannot be building troops for the 2nd quest while still working on the 1st quest. I do like the idea of seeing everything together as sometimes it will not be possible to complete for one reason or another, so one would want to look at the XP rewarded for the various stages that could be completed and see if those are worth it if the final reward is out of reach. For now, I have been relying heavily on this wiki's post: http://settlersonlinewiki.eu/en/ques...ly-challenges/Quote:
Originally Posted by ghannima
Respectfully, I disagree. This is a game of strategy. Choices must be made and those choices must have consequences. Why would there be an expectation for "EVERYONE should be able to get SOME tokens each WEEK" - not everything in this game (or life, for that matter) is a participation trophy; sometimes there are Challenges. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin
That said, maybe it wouldn't break the underlying premise of the challenge if it borrowed a behavior from the daily quests, where if the weekly is not completed in the week, then the next weekly spawns into a holding area and is locked until the prior weekly is completed. Premium can have 2 weeklies in holding. If you give up on the current weekly and 'X' it out, the next weekly becomes available. I realize part of the Weekly Challenge concept is to have the Crisis time crunch, so this suggestion might not be feasible if the consequence of not getting the next weekly is an insufficient motivator...but it would be a middle ground that would allow more players to achieve tokens while still requiring effort. Maybe the token reward could be reduced by a third of the original for each extra week: 9 tokens if completed in week 1, 6 tokens if in week 2, 3 tokens if in week 3. At the end of the 3rd week, the quest line fails and a new weekly spawns. The diminishing returns would preserve the value of the tokens and still reward those putting in the effort (and resources) to complete the challenge in the first week. Or maybe a reduction by half each extra week: 9, 4, 2.
The biggest problem is the maps/adventures not easily accessible to the players.
Going back to the idea that this game will NOT dependent on the "luck" factor a treasure drop- map drops from adventure searches are the EXACT same thing as a treasure drop.
Maybe provide the adventures when the challenges are given (like holiday events, we're given the maps). or offer it as map fragments. You're already requiring resources from us. I do not see why providing us the map wouldn't be so bad. Or fix your quest designs so that the first quest - makes us pay X map fragments.
The game is currently unbalanced as is with the player gaps. The time required between the player levels is just staggering.
I really don't think there is any need to alter the basic design of these. I would like to know why that poster feels people can't complete these. Other than the adventure issue which I think should be addressed, the only people who I know are having problems are some low levels who leveled up almost solely through those loot spot mini-quests from fairy tales and ali babas and as a consequence are short in the general department because they have only been playing a few months and are lvl 50 or so. I am not sure giving lvl 30s the same xp for those quests is intended or not but it appears to be a fairly popular way to lvl up now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevlaar
The only objection I have to these is the adventure & co-op requirements.
If instead of running 3 ToW's or 1 BC I could select from a list of all Ali adventures except YWC, I'd be fine with that, as I almost always have a number of follow ups to choose from. Knowing they'd be required for the quest would mean me having to hang onto them for when they're needed. So a small amount of restraint & planning required on my part to be able to do the quests.
No Co-ops. Please.
Having to make 445 besiegers and then toss them is something most people don't want to do. I understand why you've included those types of things in the challenges and I'd grudgingly do them if I have to. Having said that, I know people who cancel their daily quest that requires delegating 25 knights so they're never, ever going to do this part. However, if they had to run an adventure losing at least 445 Mounted Swordsmen, they'd likely be OK with it because they feel they're getting something for the loss of troops. I say this based on conversations I've had, not because I think I'm some kind of mind reader.
The idea of listing all parts of the quest in advance is a sound one. Maybe it could be done similar to how tasks are listed for events, in the screen that drops down from under our avatars. That way the timing aspect won't be affected, but we'll know if we want to pursue the quest or not.
yes- I agree. Co-op adventures really should be removed from the requirements.
It's not a question of "can't" but more a question of "won't".Quote:
Originally Posted by Narasn
The Challenge was designed purposely to be difficult, time consuming and expensive. They were designed with the idea in mind that not everyone will do them.
For any given weekly, a person could go all out and get it done, spending thousands of gc to buy adventures, using expensive buffs to speed resource and troop creation, and spending time to manage each task efficiently.
But it's not something most people want or can do every week. We don't have to guess about this. I'm sure BB will monitor the challenge participation rate. Perhaps 20%, 30%, or 40% is what they are aiming for. I believe the participation rate should, over the course of a month, be more like 80%.
The reason why everyone should be able to get some tokens is that this game is supposed to be fun, and BB wants people to keep playing it. Getting tokens is cool and should be more accessible to those who have limited time to play, or who have more limited resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevlaar
It's the balance between challenge and frustration. The current incarnation of Weekly Challenge is tipped too far toward frustration.
Offering tokens in stages for the Challenge is an easy way to restore a good balance.
In their current state, weekly challenges for higher level players are completely broken. Hopefully the plan is more than just minor tweaks.
Woodcutter for map fragments is nice, but does not help even a little or show an understanding of the problem. Having enough Woodcutter is not the problem. I have over 100 of them despite running them constantly. I have never run TOK, and don't intend to do so. In order to obtain a Besieged City, which I have never run and don't intend to either, this is what I have to do: run 48 Woodcutters to get 8 First Thieves to run to get 4 TOKs to run, and then I have to go through Besieged City. Every month. While also running 72 Woodcutters to get 12 Second Thieves to run to get 3 TOWs, which actually is not a bad adventure, but I don't have that many of them. The ask is not to run Besieged City. It's to spend all my time hoping to get lucky enough to get it in the first place. Offer Besieged City for map fragments, and I might consider it. The other choices aren't much more appealing. Co-op adventure? No. Not even one. Not even maybe. Storm Recovery? Okay, this one's maybe not that bad. Resource sink but easily obtainable.
I'm fine with a challenge or resource sink. I'm not fine being asked to spend millions of resources or do adventures I cannot obtain or three of something I would not even consider doing once. By my level, I have 37k population, 43% of which are unemployed, and I don't really "need" any more. I like to add more, but I'm not going to sacrifice every other bit of playing time and all my resources for it.
The quest description says complete one adventure from the following list. Then it proceeds to list one. Maybe it would be more feasible if the list were an actual list and players could choose one of a few adventures to do.
In any case, it should be known what all the tasks will be, so people don't throw away resources on the first stages only to be greeted by an impassable brick wall.
At level 57, the problem I have is being asked to run adventures such as First or Second Thief. At this level it is really tough to get these adventures on my own, and very hard to run on my own. It reminds me of the guild quests that required cannons when the we couldn't even make cannons. I realize this forces us to depend on our guild and Trade, but I don't feel those actions should be a requirement for completion of the Weekly Challenge.
The other issue I see is the whole "Heart of the Wood" issue. Making a Challenge that requires an Adventure with a 1% drop rate is not sustainable. All the more so if more that one is required.
The Challenge should be do-able with reasonable effort. Some of these requirements are unreasonable in my opinion.
1) By making the weekly so time consuming you acknowledge some may not be able to do. How do people get the tokens to upgrade their housing if they do not do these? How does this idea make it fun for all if they can NOT participate and get some of the same rewards? Why can't you make the challenges so if you complete them in a week you get a bonus and if it takes someone longer they still get tokens just not the bonus.
2) Adventures. Only one choice? Really???? And then make it either an adventure that is rare and hard to acquire or a co op that you have to be lucky to get 3 other people on at the same time, with the same amount of time as you to play, and one where you are always waiting on someone? And then do these same sucky adventures more than once? The thing with co ops is that people have different speeds of playing so if you get in a co op where you play fairly fast to get through asap and you end up with someone else who takes days to complete, this can cause great amounts of frustration and anger not to mention said slower person could cause others to not reach the time limit goals and thus cause others to spend all those expensive resources and get nothing.
I don't think people have a problem with adventures BUT we need to be able to get them AND be able to do them in our own time not 3(x2 or x3) other people's time. Think how fun it is when you want to do something or go somewhere and you have that one friend or family member that takes foooorrrrrever to "get with the program". Once in a while and if you don't have time constraints is still frustrating but people can handle, but when you add time constraints - GGGGRRRRRR!!!!!
3) Constant crisis mode - not fun. Creating opportunity for something more to do for those who have the time - understandable. Not being able to get something, to help improve your island, because you do NOT have time or ability while seeing others get it - not fun. Creating a challenge and something to work for - understandable. I'm not understanding why you want to stress people out 365 days a year.
Ok, I can understand won't. People make decisions to do or not to do things in a game depending on whether they consider it is worth it all the time. I won't do these after a certain point in time because the cost/reward ratio won't be worth it for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin
I am with Kevlaar, there is no need for participation trophies in this. People don't need to get the extra population this way. Those with limited time and unwilling to build up resources or spend them don't need to do this content, it is extra. Not everything in this game has to be adjust so everyone is able to get rewards or enjoys a certain type of content. And in terms of time commitment - other than the adventures these take very little time. You start the buff in the provision house then wait, you send explorers out then wait, you buff any buildings you need to for the resource phase then wait. 10 minutes a day for most of these challenges, other than the adventures which probably take 4 hours a week or so, not excessive at all.
There would be no challenge to offering tokens in stages and I personally don't see how that would even be fun.
If you have the adventures most of these challenges can be done within 2 days. If people are getting stuck on a part that should be an indication to them to build up that part of their island so that next time around things will move faster - that is part of the fun you want to remove.
as i stated in the previous feedback thread, the problem is that it is farmable for many players in the 46-55 range... or at least it will be when the new guild market rolls out with Heart of the Wood for 270 guild coins. If you make it impossible to start a new one right away, and have all weekly challenges starting on the same day every week, then it may still cost a lot more for a high level player to collect tokens, but if he chooses to do so, he can get more per week.
in the long term it may also be smart to vary the specific adventures required a bit as well, just to keep from having a serious market imbalance. It's fine that we high levels need to clear something such as 3 ToWs or a Besieged City, but when those specific adventures are being pushed on all of us over and over, they will become too rare within a month or two. Maybe if epidemic were to complete 3 adventures out of: "ToW and ToK" and perhaps Town Construction were modified to include both Sinbad adventures. Unless I'm mistaken, ToK and Sea Snake currently get played less than ToW and Besieged City, so this would help alleviate some of that long-term shortage as well as getting those adventures some face time too.
it's hard for me to assess exactly how to implement this for lower level brackets because I'm not playing in them, but perhaps the 56-65 players could be given a choice between two different thief advs for the related challenges, or perhaps one of those challenges should be multiple runs at either 2nd or 3rd thief, and the other a single run at something like ToW or ToK. anyway, those are my thoughts.
Over all, I like the weekly challenge. I DO see some serious issues that could be tweeked or modified to make it more successful, reasonable.
Co Ops requiring 4 people are can be very problematic. Finding people who are available/willing when you are can be a problem. More so this time of year during the holidays.
AN adventures. AGAIN BB has made requirements of AN adventures of people who, at their level, can not honestly do the adventures on their own. Their level does not allow them to make all the different Elite troops... which requires them to depend on someone else for a LS. Which in turn opens them up to exploitation. BB first Did this with Ventures such as The Compass and A New Threat. I had hoped I wouldnt see this happen again.. but here we are. You honestly, IMO, shouldnt make AN aventures a requirement for players under level 57. Ive seen a lot of high level people Charge insane amounts of money for a LS to these players because they know they cant legitimately do the adv on their own (without unrealistic expenses of time/resources)
I have a guild member at lvl 55 that needs to do 3 AN First Thief Adv. How do you expect him to be able to do that... much less within a week? SERIOUSLY? Its a single player Adv. He cant even pay for a LS to achieve this!
I hate saying this, but...I do not think people should be handed out tokens....Not counting the adventure requirements of the weekly, if anyone is having issues with the resource aspect, that means they leveled up too fast due to free hand outs. Just like handing them free tokens. I agree this weekly quest has some.....issues and, I think a few tweaks would really make it great but, I do not expect to do it weekly and why should anyone unless they are willing to actually pay for it? It is a reward system in the game (flawed at the moment) but people should not just be handed out free tokens. They are hard to get...for a reason...for those that use that extra population because their islands are already jammed packed and this offers a bonus...at a price. I am OKAY with that aspect. Frodo wouldn't be a hero if he only went halfway to Mordor and turned around. You don't win a marathon for stopping half way... you don't conquer an objective by only doing it halfassed. This is...end game content. For those that can get SOME population boost at lower, levels then that is good for them. they put forth the effort and they should have "bragging rights", but someone getting the same thing (albeit a slower pace) just for logging in daily or semi daily and doing NO work, should not be rewarded. Normal people wont be able to do this every week. that's fine. Skip a week or three, but when a person DOES decide to do it, then let them get rewarded. Heck, I have seen people complaining about water production and they are OVER level 56. If someone is having issues at that level in the game then adding population is the least of their concerns. Too many people want to build TALL buildings without a good foundation. Leveling up too fast is not always good. Same thing with just being handed "free stuff". This game already does that a lot. No real PvP so for the most part, this game is at your own pace. If you can't keep up in the race then you probably got into that bracket via artificial. I am not trying to sound like a ****, but really. people should not be handed stuff for free when others are sacrificing time and resources to get the same thing (tokens). I am a level 63, never had Gem Pits, and ALWAYS built for the long term. I have fairly good production yet, I know, I wont be able to do this every week. Maybe only 1-2 times a month, but despite some of the flaws, the mechanic of the weekly quest, isn't all that bad. As long as they change the adventure/venture/co-op deal, it will be something a person can do on an individual basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin
These things are always harder at the lower end of the range. What is wrong with just concentrating on other things for the time being, i.e. gaining a few more levels and then doing them. I am lvl 61 and I am betting a lot of lvl 57s have higher population than me and I actually do just fine and rarely run into problems because of population - I just hit 17k population with these challenges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Springer_Prime
What troops can't lvl 57s make ? According to this they can make them all - http://settlersonlinewiki.eu/en/mili...lite-barracks/
At level 56 they can make all except one and what adventure in that group can't be done without them ?
1-Increase drop rate for Heart of the Wood, its only 1% on medium search right now. Takes several weeks to get one.
2-Selling Woodcutters is a start, however Treasure of Wisdom is the quest, and it rarely drops from 2nd and 3rd thief, which are both followups from woodcutter.
Having to do 3 advs that are third in line of followups is not happening in the one week time frame. Same for Besieged City.
Weekly Challenge is fine except for the following glaring issues, in my humble opinion.
1.) Forced co-op map requirements is totally erroneous, as you have effectively removed the decision making of continuance, completely, from the owner of the challenge, and placed it in the hands of others.
2.) Availability of mandatory adventures seems erroneous. This needs to be revamped as well. Not only is this a completely random drop from searches, with unbalanced odds, but it effectively again, removes the option to complete the challenge, from the owner if they cannot beg, borrow, buy, or get lucky enough to find them. Allow for some other manor of acquirement of necessary maps. Consider providing them in the challenge for free ( NON - Tradable ) ( i.e ,you click it to start it, no pixelated ownership of anything needed), or with a mini task (s), or consider purchasing them with map frags and/or resources. You have imposed a higher demand, but it appears the supply has not been adjusted with it.
Again,the adventure maps availability, or should I say lack there of have totally impacted the current game economy in what I would consider a negative manner, due to the current structuring of the challenges.
As a side note, if you want to encourage players to use forced co-op adventures more often, then perhaps you should consider addressing that issue as/in a separate manner entirely, instead of placing them in the weekly challenge, and fostering even more frustration with them, then already exists.
In short, let the player/owner of the challenge have total control over the choice to proceed or quit, and remove the need for the "random adventure find" and "forced co-op" from it.
Sincerely,
An old returning player,
Teatime
I love the idea of tokens for population. But why can't I earn the tokens in stages?
A Proposal for Weekly Challenges that would be more fun, but still require considerable effort and resources to reap full rewards.
I like the way experience is available for each task.
I want to earn tokens in stages for progressively more difficult tasks.
But every player can earn a couple of tokens each week with some resources and effort.
For example:
Town Construction at level 57 has 2 branches with 3 tasks each.
Each task rewards for 17K – 29K experience
Completing the Challenge rewards 66K experience and 21 tokens.
CURRENT MECHANICS
Branch 1
Task1: Defeat Foreign ship with 150 Normal provisions
Task2: Defeat Foreign ship with 215 Normal provisions
Task3: Defeat Foreign ship with 29 Large provisions
Branch 2
Task1
Gather and Produce 1450 gold coin. Pay 1450 gold coin
4 very long adventure searches
Complete 2 Ali Baba and Second Thief
Task 2
Train 270 Bowmen. Delegate 270 Bowmen
Train 125 Soldier. Delegate 125 Soldier
Train 350 Knight. Delegate 350 Knight
Task 3
Produce 8700 Marble. Pay 8700 Marble
Produce 7550 Hardwood planks. Pay 7500 hardwood planks
Produce 2700 Exotic planks. Pay 2700 Exotic planks
Produce 750 Mahogany planks. Pay 750 Mahogany planks
NEW MECHANICS WITH PROGRESSIVE AWARDING OF TOKENS
Branch 1
Task 1: Defeat Foreign ship with 150 Normal provisions
Task 2: Defeat Foreign ship with 215 Normal provisions
Task 3: Defeat Foreign ship with 29 Large provisions
Reward: XP only
Branch 2
Task 1
Gather and Produce 1450 gold coin. Pay 1450 gold coin
4 very long adventure searches
Reward: 2 tokens + XP
Task 2
Produce 8700 Marble. Pay 8700 Marble
Produce 7550 Hardwood planks. Pay 7500 hardwood planks
Produce 2700 Exotic planks. Pay 2700 Exotic planks
Produce 750 Mahogany planks. Pay 750 Mahogany planks
Reward: 4 tokens + XP
Task 3
Train 270 Bowmen. Delegate 270 Bowmen
Train 125 Soldier. Delegate 125 Soldier
Train 350 Knight. Delegate 350 Knight
Reward: 6 tokens + XP
Task 4
Complete 2 Ali Baba and Second Thief
Reward: 9 tokens + XP
TOTAL = 21 tokens + XP
Interesting comments by all, I agree with a lot and also disagree with a lot.
I think one of the major problems currently from what I have heard in guild and game chat is: People get through one stage or two then find out it will be almost impossible for them to finish the weekly quest. If they had known that in advance they probably wouldnt have started the challenges and wasted so many resources.
In part it is their fault for not checking the wiki where they are listed, but there are some ways I think this could be improved by BB.
Information: All tasks from the start should be viewable to see the requirements, this lets people either plan in advance to achieve the weekly challenege or if they believe currently they are unable to do it.. leave the weekly quests and wait for the next one without wasting thousands of resources.
Coops - Bone of contention here... I hate them personally as you are reliable on others... who can be unreliable. That said I have seen a massive surge in cooperation and community togetherness trying to get the WW's for example done. This adv is more than plentiful which is good. The problem may come when nearing the end of the quest line and suddenly you find you have to do 3 of these in a day say. Solution would be to open up all 3 tiers of quest from the start so that people have all week to be able to get the coops done. This allows for those times when Real Life gets in the way for a player and the coop sits for an evening or whatever. Also include an option to remove a player when they go afk.
Adv - This is one of several ways BB has shot them selves in the foot. They are asking on some to donate several days worth of ali troops being built and donated and yet still running adv.. which ofcourse you need to build troops for. The solution of which they brought in the training grounds and previousely brought in the buffs made by things like the stronghold. The big problem here: For the rich in game and real life..this is easy and doable... they can pay there way through the game buy buying training grounds, buffs or strongholds etc. For regular players / the majority i am guessing they can not. Personally my luck on MCC is terrible.. i have a small forrest but no building drops as yet after many many runs. Solutions: Give a gaurnteed building drop. This could be first run perhaps or over 10 runs.. If people had better access to these buildings (not just the lucky or rich, who have bought several!) the quests would be more doable. Other ways: I understand you want training grounds to be difficult to achieve but again you have left it open to only the rich getting multiple either with gems or gifted. I understand you need to make a profit so I can see why you have done this. However, you could consider making more available for stalks just at an ever increasing cost say: elite 39k stalks 2nd doubles stalk cost 3rd triples etc or doubles again. Making it possible for all to do these quests. I also think the training ground should have been brought into the game before the weekly quests so people could have prep'd and got one in advance...yes i know some regulars did but I am talking all. The other issue about availability of adv. This is also cart before horse.. sayng you may introduce a way of getting these adv through merchant after the introduction of the weekly quests is just wrong. Please start thinking ahead BB and dont create such barriers it only makes people angry at you and the game, which makes people leave either short term or longterm. This could and should have been added in the last hotfix! Or as many have said allow a tier of adv options if you want to keep it more challenging e.g. any thief adv etc. but again give people a full week to get and do adv by opening up the tiers.
Update: kk 3 Wisdoms on 3rd Tier so your looking at last few days of week to do.. now if your lucky thats 3 woodcutters, 3 thieves, to do before you even get to be able to have 3 wisdoms... that is not in any way manageable let alone doing 3 wisdoms that you give upto 42 days total to complete in a 2-3 day period. BB, did you think about the toop costs and production times in previous quests and add them to doing the above chain of adv to get the follow ups and the poor drop rates you have put in? I don't think you could of at all!! As others have related to previous failure events, nice idea but completely inconcieved.
Resources: I get it should be difficult but again not seeing or being able to do all 3 strands at the same time from start makes this a bottle neck where people might be unable to do the quests producing 8700 marble for example in 3rd phase with only a day or two left might be impossible for many. That said over the course of the one I have just done it cost me around 750,000 water if not more by only the second tier quest.. thats not including what went into brew etc for the massive amount of ali troops.. thats just producing the supplies for ship and making and paying... thats exess water on top of what I use... how many people in the game really make that much excess weekly?! Can't imagine many especially when you take into account brew etc (which I also had to make and pay a massive amount). The problem is with the new way of speeding up production in multiple buildings rather than levelling you have taken away yet more space for production buildings. You have tried to negate this by giving more islands for space (only gem available) but thats only for rich and increasing building pop... but this is *** about face: You created a solution that people cant achieve (increased building pop) without completing the quests that require a massive change and increase in production buildings. Solutions: As above.. let people see and run all tasks from start so they can work out what they need so they can readjust and prep for. Let people get islands with stupidly large amounts of resources. Lower the amounts you either have to pay or make or both. When you add up all weekly tasks pay, make to pay, create troops to pay, troops for adv you have to run etc.. is this really sustainable for most people? (I am not talking about those who have been playing game for 6 years and hoarded millions of resources)
These are only my opinions from what I have seen and done so far. But as a major note: BB make these token improvements permenant! If I want to remove say a mag res I have fully upgraded costing millions of resources and stupid amounts of time I want its improvements to stay when I place it again. This is my major bug bear now and I am sure down the line when people realise its effects you will get an ear full then as well.. maybe think in advance and solve this early doors. Update: I honestly now think this doesnt need hotfixes I think it should be removed, thouhgt through properly and reintroduced when you have implemented what you need in place first, then have achievable chains that can be completed not with ease but doable by many and an actual balance to what you have to put in (everything calculated, including pay, barracks time for all parts of chain, resources for all parts of chain including barracks costs.
I don't mind challenges or spending resources, it makes it overall more demanding and has you think about economy and balance again, instead of having a million of a resource sitting in star. However, I still think requiring someone to run 3x ToW is problematic, as it is a follow up to a follow up, so exceedingly rare.
Basically an expanded version of what I proposed on the other Thread, so count me in for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin
The current 'all or nothing' has far too many people voting for 'nothing'. Being able to decide what to pursue strikes a better balance between fun and challenge than the current setup.
"Last week I only got Stage 1 and 2, but this week I can manage 1, 2, and 4. Score!", instead of "Crap, I can't finish the whole thing, so there's no point in starting."
Making additional Advs available for Map Frags doesn't change the problem with Advs unless you make the actual Advs required available.
If you're going to require Advs, then they need to be Advs that are reasonably accessible to players who don't have access to God-mode.
I'm also fine with making piles of Troops...but I'm not okay with immediately purging them 'just because'. The fact that our Barracks/eBarracks are already running flat out (both mine are L6, with Skunks and Recruit Guides) and can't keep up just with the requirements of the Advs we 'must' do, makes those sorts of losses unreasonable. Especially when they're Troops that are seldom/never used, like Swordsmen. That time could be much better spent making useful Troops for those Advs we have to run.
Another thing that the game in general needs is to change the Treasure/etc Search requirements to "X Search OR LONGER". Running constant Prolonged means that I often won't get my Explorers back in time to run the required Search.
Everything I've seen so far leads me to believe that Weekly Challenges are less about adding cool or useful new features, and more about punishing players. Anyone who thought "Gee it would be fun to make Players play in Crisis Mode 24/7!" clearly doesn't understand game design well enough to be in charge of one...and that's coming from someone who used to work in the studio of a major gaming company, so I know what I'm talking about. Too much Crisis Mode burns people out and they either stop playing parts of the game (That's right PvP, I'm looking at you.), or they just stop playing.
People play games because they are BOTH fun AND challenging. For too long BB has been ignoring the fun and ramping up the 'challenge'.
As a side note, I will say that they struck the right balance in offering one Training Grounds and Elite Training Grounds for Stalks and unlimited for Gems. I'm far more likely to get one of each (Stalk one now, Gem one at Christmas) than I would have been to get any if they had been Gems only. Ditto the Scout Post. I was able to get one in the Event, so I feel it's reasonable to pay for a second. Good balance between fun rewards and paid rewards.
*That's* the balance players will reward by spending money.
Now if I could upgrade a few of these Dark Castles for a reasonable level of effort, I would give away some Pirate Res to lower level Guilders to free up space for the TG/ETG/SP.
I like the foreign ship, no issues with free xp on that for some minor conversions.. another bonus to idle questing when your time is limited.
scenarios and uncoordinated co-ops are just terrible in so many ways. its generally why most people avoided them at all costs prior to being forced to do them which again will be avoided. You have to make them more readily available, TR, GC, HoTW seem on the rare side?
ToW/sinbad/thieves advs would be is short supply after some time if not owning zero already.
resources for delegate, produce, seems exorbant at level 66+ for +20 population, xp and the 4 extra token payout. i guess if your not running adv and want to idle xp its a larger loss turnaround for 500-600K, but i dont see much gains at some point, as population is plentiful already done right, and/or XP is not desired. i wouldn't mind some visual upgrades on buildings, or future plans to have different token purchases for something more worthwhile.
One recurrent problem is client communication. In the past, with PvP or the Black Knight event, BB created a hype but was unable to live up to the expectations. Black Knight event was supposed to be the greatest event ever, but it was just a prank, and PvP was supposed to be... PvP. With Weekly Challenges, players were expecting to be able to upgrade their population buildings on a "weekly" basis, but in most cases, it's just impossible.
Surely, what people want to believe is not BB's fault, but somehow, BB knows that something went wrong and instead of admitting what was wrong or trying to improve the situation, BB offered "Winter Presents" and "Dev Notes". (This said, the use of "I" in the Dev notes sounds odd... It sounds as if everything was decided by one single individual. Or is it that one person is taking all the responsibility? Just a weird way to communicate...)
Anyway, I would guess that the objective the Weekly Challenges was to increase the number of regular players in order to make more money. Therefore, the idea of "completely optional", albeit true, is totally absurd from a business perspective. If BB could have thousands more players to log in everyday for the sake of tokens, they would pass on, because of "rather challenging content"? It's not that tokens should be easy to get, it's just that PLAYERS ARE CLIENTS and the product is disappointing.
Agreed kzar, weekly challenges will now be filed away in "The Library" ... or should I say with it.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by kzar
One thing I have learned through this discussion is I don't want to level up and have the same experience as some of the other levels are talking about. So I decided not to spend real money on gems for a premium year, and gem pits which I was thinking of before. I will just keep coming and enjoying a bit of game play each week but that is it.
I like the variety that the quest adds although I found it difficult to find the number of players required for all the cooperative adventures. It didn't take too much out of my barracks at this level, but I certainly won't be eager to level up. When eventually I do, I will probably stop doing the weekly quests.
My idea doesnt seem to be gaining any traction, but I was thinking that additionally if the devs decided to make them a less crisis-similar feature, it might be wise to have them be like dailies but you know... weeklies. maybe with or without the "waiting" option if you keep working on the same one for more than a week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raega
EDIT: my original post was longer, i edited for relevance, but I did also comment on what happens when you make 25% of the players search for the same adventures that already aren't particularly easy to acquire. I'm okay with multiple big hard adventures involved, just give us short lists of 2-4 adventures, instead of a "list" of 1
Two thoughts:
1) I am okay with producing a ton of troops, but can you split them 80% top line (recruits / bowmen / militia / swordsmen / mounted swordsmen / knights) and 20% other troops (any). Can we delegate less than all of the top line troops and all of the other troops. Reason: if we keep the adventure requirement high, most players bottleneck will be the barracks. Allow us to keep some of the top line troops produced for the adventures, as these are the ones that most commonly are lost. Troops like Besiegers are almost never lost, so I don't need to keep any of the ones produced. But having me make 450? That's a ridiculous number, my standing army (in a pop of 29K) is only 350-400. Well it was that until Pathfinder made me build 100 a few times.
2) Adventure variation is needed. Right now we have four quest chains, requiring us to run the same four adventures or scenarios or coops. This is in addition to running anything needed for guild quests (today I had woodcutter) and Pathfinder (nothing this week, but let's think about the weeks you have to run Snake or Besieged, and then what about running Snow White or MCC for the # of times needed to build up those epic buildings and obtain the obsidian needed to get the good buildings there). And if your favorite adventure isn't on the list, but you are trying to play the new content, you could go weeks without running your favorite adventures trying to keep up.
Suggestion - 10 total quest chains:
Two for scenarios - complete any four scenarios / complete two of a specific scenario
Two for co-ops - complete any four coops / complete two of a specific coop
Five for missions - From complete any five adventures, four of a specific/available solo advent (Witch of the Swamp or Woodcutter), three of a more difficult list (Nords / Surprise Attack and First / Second / Third Thief), two even harder (any two Tailors or any two Wisdoms/Knowledges/Snakes/Besieged), or one specific end game (Betrayed / Heroic, Princess)
One for ventures - for the top levels, this could be "complete any venture from the Snow White or Mountain Clan campaigns"
That's ten different adventure options, so each one only comes up once every 10 weeks (or sooner, but that's on us if we're doing 2-3 challenges a week, not the devs).
Anyway, sorry I rambled a bit, but I think the difficulty does not need to lessen at all, just the variation to reduce the stress on the barracks and specific advents.
With a lvl 6 barracks buffed with a skunk alone you have no problem doing all 4 challenges in one week though in terms of that, so really doing one of these shouldn't be a problem in that regard at all. This is in the lvl 56-66 range but really in the 66 plus range I can't see why you would have a huge problem in that regard either because you have more buffs available to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by KingHomer
I would like to be able to select from the Evil Queen questline because as it is after this week I will just stop doing these challenges to work on that again since I don't have my farmyard yet.
The best selection list suggestion I have seen was based on difficulty - lvl 56-66 could just select from adventures lvl 10 or higher in difficulty or ventures level 10 or higher. The 46-56 lvl 8 or higher.
I would like to comment on your quest chains suggestions but I really don't understand what you are suggesting - surely a lvl 70 isn't going to get to choose from a witch of the swamp or a woodcutter ? Also your difficulty is off, woodcutter is 'harder' to do than surprise attacks or nords and the tailors as well for that matter. If it wasn't you wouldn't be suggesting the change in fact.
This idea may not be very popular, but have you considered giving the players the option of doing PvP adventures or regular adventures, as this may revive interest in PvP. At the very least I agree that we should be given a range of adventures rather then being told that we must do only this adventure to succeed.
BB_Alex, the overall concept and execution is thoughtful and interesting, and the introduction of tokens to increase populations in buildings where we did not expect it is terrific. Making it optional is great, for those weeks when we just don't want to redirect out resources.
I would simply broaden the "adventures" category. The idea I liked best from players was to make the adventures fall in a difficulty category, e.g., run three adventures difficulty ten and up"--that, in and of itself, will get many players to push themselves that week. If you feel that is too broad, then at least give a few options for the adventures to be run, like "run three Ali Baba" or "run three of any combination of the following four adventures". For the quest chain with Whirlwind, well at least expand it to include all co-ops, as Tomb Raiders is popular and attainable, if you want to include co-ops as the category.
That's my main recommendation. I'm happy to earn the tokens, and also happy to try the quest chains, plus feel okay ignoring them if I don't want to expend the time and resources.
Thank you for the new content, regardless. It just needs a little tweakoning for our Happy Holiday seasonings!
(I DO appreciate BB's ideas and work, very much!)
spot on! I agree with the below
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaTime