The Lie of Balance in the Game

40 Replies
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
5 January, 2017, 10:28 AM UTC
blah blah blah said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Guys, this is a free-to-play game. And like any other free-to-play games, it allows players to use in-app purchases to develop faster. 
with NO limit then the game can be bought thank you for clarifying that
We have limits for almost everything in this game.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
blah blah blah
5 January, 2017, 11:21 AM UTC
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

blah blah blah said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Guys, this is a free-to-play game. And like any other free-to-play games, it allows players to use in-app purchases to develop faster. 
with NO limit then the game can be bought thank you for clarifying that
We have limits for almost everything in this game.
Except what matters the most, the size of the army and how much of it you can buy
UTC +5:00
2
Vodkaonice
5 January, 2017, 11:43 AM UTC

blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Guys, this is a free-to-play game. And like any other free-to-play games, it allows players to use in-app purchases to develop faster. 
with NO limit then the game can be bought thank you for clarifying that
We have limits for almost everything in this game.
Except what matters the most, the size of the army and how much of it you can buy

he is right here...

but offcourse plarium dont mind.. 

its all about the money

UTC +1:00
1
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
5 January, 2017, 2:33 PM UTC
Actually the limit for army size also exists. But it's not that easy to reach it.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
blah blah blah
5 January, 2017, 3:42 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Actually the limit for army size also exists. But it's not that easy to reach it.

lol when it takes 8 years to match what someone paid and bought for in 2 months can you explain the balance that you keep talking about.

I am guessing that limit is top secret, it would be nice to know what it is so that all the players can calculate how many years it will take to get there.


it will also help the buyers of the game with how much money they can spend.

UTC +5:00
2
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
6 January, 2017, 11:34 AM UTC

blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Actually the limit for army size also exists. But it's not that easy to reach it.

lol when it takes 8 years to match what someone paid and bought for in 2 months can you explain the balance that you keep talking about.

I am guessing that limit is top secret, it would be nice to know what it is so that all the players can calculate how many years it will take to get there.


it will also help the buyers of the game with how much money they can spend.

As I already said before:

Each and every player in Sparta: War of Empires can reach TOP positions. That, however, requires a lot of time, Resources, Units, and considerable effort. Alternatively, you can use a special Resource - Drachmas - to develop your City and increase military power to dominate the map. Everyone can get Drachmas for free simply playing the game actively, i.e. participating in Tournaments, capturing Emporia, completing quests and Achievements, etc.
Some players decide in favor of in-app purchases to save time. It allows them to progress a little faster. Sparta: War of Empires is free-to-play, and like any other game of this type it gives all players free access to all game features and an opportunity to accelerate their progress with in-app purchases. It is not unfair that players taking this route, thus supporting the development of the game, enjoy certain advantages. Again, all these advantages may be summarized in one word - time. It takes less time to advance, but does not change the core of what every player needs to do to develop their City and grow military power. Moreover, there is a number of in-game limits so no one player can dominate an entire server. Therefore, when we develop a new feature, we make sure it will not negatively affect the game balance.
Yet another thing to consider is the social aspect of our games, which is extremely important. We want our players to unite in Coalitions and build Alliances to become stronger. We understand that it is hard to compete against stronger players -- it has always been, in any game -- and that is why we pay so much attention to various Coalition activities and give players an opportunity to unite against a stronger enemy. If you have any suggestions as to how this part of the game can be improved, we will be happy to hear from you.

Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
Qojy
6 January, 2017, 5:40 PM UTC

People are right here. This game is very unbalanced and has been for a while. 

Troops not leaving when grain reaches 0 is absurd and illogical. The worst is that some ppl asked for it and they probably left this game afterwards.

Having a high lvl city is useless since you can just buy your entire army at the market, buy ressources for treaties and buy boosts to instantly upgrade those treaties. This way you might have -99999 grain production but still 200M def/off with farms and lumbyards at lvl 1. 

Political attacks prevent anyone with a brain from defending their city since their def will just die for nothing.

The General feature is also absurd given that most players will never reach anything half as good as any of what top coiners have.

You removed colonies and now emporias are empty because they're not worth playing.

Most coas don't even want to defend pantheons anymore because you brought some stupid "massacre tourney" which allows any guy to braindeadly smash any pantheon on the map and get 90% revive for free.

Alyona is right > Other Free-to-Play games do have features to increase the speed using some money > but they do not create such a gap between spenders and others ; also, the price of everything is way too expensive in this game.

UTC +1:00
2
blah blah blah
7 January, 2017, 4:29 AM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Actually the limit for army size also exists. But it's not that easy to reach it.

lol when it takes 8 years to match what someone paid and bought for in 2 months can you explain the balance that you keep talking about.

I am guessing that limit is top secret, it would be nice to know what it is so that all the players can calculate how many years it will take to get there.


it will also help the buyers of the game with how much money they can spend.

As I already said before:

Each and every player in Sparta: War of Empires can reach TOP positions. That, however, requires a lot of time, Resources, Units, and considerable effort. Alternatively, you can use a special Resource - Drachmas - to develop your City and increase military power to dominate the map. Everyone can get Drachmas for free simply playing the game actively, i.e. participating in Tournaments, capturing Emporia, completing quests and Achievements, etc.
Some players decide in favor of in-app purchases to save time. It allows them to progress a little faster. Sparta: War of Empires is free-to-play, and like any other game of this type it gives all players free access to all game features and an opportunity to accelerate their progress with in-app purchases. It is not unfair that players taking this route, thus supporting the development of the game, enjoy certain advantages. Again, all these advantages may be summarized in one word - time. It takes less time to advance, but does not change the core of what every player needs to do to develop their City and grow military power. Moreover, there is a number of in-game limits so no one player can dominate an entire server. Therefore, when we develop a new feature, we make sure it will not negatively affect the game balance.
Yet another thing to consider is the social aspect of our games, which is extremely important. We want our players to unite in Coalitions and build Alliances to become stronger. We understand that it is hard to compete against stronger players -- it has always been, in any game -- and that is why we pay so much attention to various Coalition activities and give players an opportunity to unite against a stronger enemy. If you have any suggestions as to how this part of the game can be improved, we will be happy to hear from you.

Repeating this over and over does not make it correct. its just the company policy,  ALOT Of time  8 years to match these players, do you think this game will be around in 8 years.  The time is NOT balanced its right above in figures so that you can see. If players can buy what it takes 8 years to do in less than two months. the game can be bought you cannot deny that.

And just so you know if you haven't looked to see who I am, I spend quite heavily at one point on server 2 I was running -100k per hour grain but but i am not getting in a pissing match with money with players that just buy an army.












I have one suggestion to you and that is enforce the grain limit. then everyone can calculate the max size,  and then the game returns to being a game of strategy and not let me go buy more troops than anyone else and beat them.


all the other things your put in the game they are players choices that need to be made and I could care what they are and the game should develop. I think the game is fine but coals have no chance of competing against this type of spending.

I understand that you need to make money but if all players know the limits and feel that have a chance to win and succeed they will spend to revieve their troops and but to get to the limit quickly but when they feel its a lost cause why would they bother.

Buying the game is the problem and not acknowledging that is a lie hiding behind pretend balance.

UTC +5:00
2
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
10 January, 2017, 1:01 PM UTC
blah blah blah said:



I have one suggestion to you and that is enforce the grain limit. then everyone can calculate the max size,  and then the game returns to being a game of strategy and not let me go buy more troops than anyone else and beat them.


We have removed the grain limit, because our players asked us. Unfortunately, this limit won't return.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
blah blah blah
10 January, 2017, 10:50 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


blah blah blah said:




I have one suggestion to you and that is enforce the grain limit. then everyone can calculate the max size,  and then the game returns to being a game of strategy and not let me go buy more troops than anyone else and beat them.


We have removed the grain limit, because our players asked us. Unfortunately, this limit won't return.

they asked for it be removed now we are asking for it to be put back or the game is pay to win there is no strategy    people are just buying their status.  And don't pretend that you don't have the stats or the capability to produce them. drachma purchases = position and Army size.


being from the IT industry most likely everything is in a SQL database run the reports and it will prove my point but of course you already have these stats and your only interest is what you think will extract more money.  its a short term view as people need some value and only people left will be those willing to spend on a power trip with low intelligence and that is the environment that you will create.

UTC +5:00
0
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
11 January, 2017, 10:29 AM UTC

I understand your point, but our developers have their own vision of the game, and it should come as no surprise that the game development process is mostly based on their vision, and their plans. Of course, multiple factors are taken into consideration: analytics, stats, player feedback and suggestions, marketing research, and many other things. However, neither of the factors can be prevalent. We understand that some players would like others to have smaller armies. However, it's not the direction we'd like our game to evolve in. 

We strive for the massive battles, not small local fights. We give players an opportunity to unite against the stronger enemy. Only up to 3 players can attack at the same time. And 160 can defend (if we're talking about the Capital or a Pantheon). 3 against 160! Even if those 3 have huge armies, they're still limited with how much they can send at a time. And the Defenders have no limits. All your power can be combined against the upcoming attack. And it's up to the Coalition leadership to motivate their Coalition mates to send their Defense to protect their Coalition's strategic points. 

A single player cannot defeat the joint Defense, even if he has a huge army. This game is not about single warriors, it's about coalitions, unions, allies, sacrifice of your own Units for the common good, etc. It's hard, challenging, sometimes it may seem almost impossible. It's easier to say that the things are not fair, that some players have bigger armies while you have nothing to put against them. But there's also another way, which is much harder, but which can bring you to the glory - build, fight, unite, use all your potential, motivate others, and show your enemies no mercy!
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
blah blah blah
11 January, 2017, 3:17 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


I understand your point, but our developers have their own vision of the game, and it should come as no surprise that the game development process is mostly based on their vision, and their plans. Of course, multiple factors are taken into consideration: analytics, stats, player feedback and suggestions, marketing research, and many other things. However, neither of the factors can be prevalent. We understand that some players would like others to have smaller armies. However, it's not the direction we'd like our game to evolve in. 

We strive for the massive battles, not small local fights. We give players an opportunity to unite against the stronger enemy. Only up to 3 players can attack at the same time. And 160 can defend (if we're talking about the Capital or a Pantheon). 3 against 160! Even if those 3 have huge armies, they're still limited with how much they can send at a time. And the Defenders have no limits. All your power can be combined against the upcoming attack. And it's up to the Coalition leadership to motivate their Coalition mates to send their Defense to protect their Coalition's strategic points. 

A single player cannot defeat the joint Defense, even if he has a huge army. This game is not about single warriors, it's about coalitions, unions, allies, sacrifice of your own Units for the common good, etc. It's hard, challenging, sometimes it may seem almost impossible. It's easier to say that the things are not fair, that some players have bigger armies while you have nothing to put against them. But there's also another way, which is much harder, but which can bring you to the glory - build, fight, unite, use all your potential, motivate others, and show your enemies no mercy!

in theory this is correct BUT look at what is going on server 2. one coal is bullying the server and not allowing armies to grow and as has been show above unless you spend large amounts of money its impossible to catch up. 8years to match what they have done in 2 months. what you have done by removing the grain restriction is taken the balance away I was personally running  -100k per hour. you really want balance that is what will get it back. I like to spend as anyone does but if there is no value in spending that is where I draw the line.

three players took down the whole of death dealers, two pans and their cap, death dealers was the number one coal at the time.


UTC +5:00
0
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
12 January, 2017, 10:38 AM UTC
But this is a war game, dominating Coalitions do get deposed, new forces rise, massive and epic battles occur. That's exactly what this game is about.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
0
Vodkaonice
12 January, 2017, 11:04 AM UTC
blah blah blah said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


I understand your point, but our developers have their own vision of the game, and it should come as no surprise that the game development process is mostly based on their vision, and their plans. Of course, multiple factors are taken into consideration: analytics, stats, player feedback and suggestions, marketing research, and many other things. However, neither of the factors can be prevalent. We understand that some players would like others to have smaller armies. However, it's not the direction we'd like our game to evolve in. 

We strive for the massive battles, not small local fights. We give players an opportunity to unite against the stronger enemy. Only up to 3 players can attack at the same time. And 160 can defend (if we're talking about the Capital or a Pantheon). 3 against 160! Even if those 3 have huge armies, they're still limited with how much they can send at a time. And the Defenders have no limits. All your power can be combined against the upcoming attack. And it's up to the Coalition leadership to motivate their Coalition mates to send their Defense to protect their Coalition's strategic points. 

A single player cannot defeat the joint Defense, even if he has a huge army. This game is not about single warriors, it's about coalitions, unions, allies, sacrifice of your own Units for the common good, etc. It's hard, challenging, sometimes it may seem almost impossible. It's easier to say that the things are not fair, that some players have bigger armies while you have nothing to put against them. But there's also another way, which is much harder, but which can bring you to the glory - build, fight, unite, use all your potential, motivate others, and show your enemies no mercy!

in theory this is correct BUT look at what is going on server 2. one coal is bullying the server and not allowing armies to grow and as has been show above unless you spend large amounts of money its impossible to catch up. 8years to match what they have done in 2 months. what you have done by removing the grain restriction is taken the balance away I was personally running  -100k per hour. you really want balance that is what will get it back. I like to spend as anyone does but if there is no value in spending that is where I draw the line.

three players took down the whole of death dealers, two pans and their cap, death dealers was the number one coal at the time.


death dealers didnt have pans nor a good lvl cap so you are confused here i guess
UTC +1:00
0
blah blah blah
12 January, 2017, 1:50 PM UTC

Vodkaonice said:


blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


I understand your point, but our developers have their own vision of the game, and it should come as no surprise that the game development process is mostly based on their vision, and their plans. Of course, multiple factors are taken into consideration: analytics, stats, player feedback and suggestions, marketing research, and many other things. However, neither of the factors can be prevalent. We understand that some players would like others to have smaller armies. However, it's not the direction we'd like our game to evolve in. 

We strive for the massive battles, not small local fights. We give players an opportunity to unite against the stronger enemy. Only up to 3 players can attack at the same time. And 160 can defend (if we're talking about the Capital or a Pantheon). 3 against 160! Even if those 3 have huge armies, they're still limited with how much they can send at a time. And the Defenders have no limits. All your power can be combined against the upcoming attack. And it's up to the Coalition leadership to motivate their Coalition mates to send their Defense to protect their Coalition's strategic points. 

A single player cannot defeat the joint Defense, even if he has a huge army. This game is not about single warriors, it's about coalitions, unions, allies, sacrifice of your own Units for the common good, etc. It's hard, challenging, sometimes it may seem almost impossible. It's easier to say that the things are not fair, that some players have bigger armies while you have nothing to put against them. But there's also another way, which is much harder, but which can bring you to the glory - build, fight, unite, use all your potential, motivate others, and show your enemies no mercy!

in theory this is correct BUT look at what is going on server 2. one coal is bullying the server and not allowing armies to grow and as has been show above unless you spend large amounts of money its impossible to catch up. 8years to match what they have done in 2 months. what you have done by removing the grain restriction is taken the balance away I was personally running  -100k per hour. you really want balance that is what will get it back. I like to spend as anyone does but if there is no value in spending that is where I draw the line.


three players took down the whole of death dealers, two pans and their cap, death dealers was the number one coal at the time.



death dealers didnt have pans nor a good lvl cap so you are confused here i guess

i am not confused they has pan 9 and 10 and their cap at the time was 7.  if I could be bothered to dig up the screen shots I would show you.


regardless after what happened last night there with origine there will be more screenshots coming soon to show the point.
UTC +5:00
0
blah blah blah
12 January, 2017, 1:53 PM UTC

blah blah blah said:


Vodkaonice said:


blah blah blah said:


Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


I understand your point, but our developers have their own vision of the game, and it should come as no surprise that the game development process is mostly based on their vision, and their plans. Of course, multiple factors are taken into consideration: analytics, stats, player feedback and suggestions, marketing research, and many other things. However, neither of the factors can be prevalent. We understand that some players would like others to have smaller armies. However, it's not the direction we'd like our game to evolve in. 

We strive for the massive battles, not small local fights. We give players an opportunity to unite against the stronger enemy. Only up to 3 players can attack at the same time. And 160 can defend (if we're talking about the Capital or a Pantheon). 3 against 160! Even if those 3 have huge armies, they're still limited with how much they can send at a time. And the Defenders have no limits. All your power can be combined against the upcoming attack. And it's up to the Coalition leadership to motivate their Coalition mates to send their Defense to protect their Coalition's strategic points. 

A single player cannot defeat the joint Defense, even if he has a huge army. This game is not about single warriors, it's about coalitions, unions, allies, sacrifice of your own Units for the common good, etc. It's hard, challenging, sometimes it may seem almost impossible. It's easier to say that the things are not fair, that some players have bigger armies while you have nothing to put against them. But there's also another way, which is much harder, but which can bring you to the glory - build, fight, unite, use all your potential, motivate others, and show your enemies no mercy!

in theory this is correct BUT look at what is going on server 2. one coal is bullying the server and not allowing armies to grow and as has been show above unless you spend large amounts of money its impossible to catch up. 8years to match what they have done in 2 months. what you have done by removing the grain restriction is taken the balance away I was personally running  -100k per hour. you really want balance that is what will get it back. I like to spend as anyone does but if there is no value in spending that is where I draw the line.


three players took down the whole of death dealers, two pans and their cap, death dealers was the number one coal at the time.



death dealers didnt have pans nor a good lvl cap so you are confused here i guess

i am not confused they has pan 9 and 10 and their cap at the time was 7.  if I could be bothered to dig up the screen shots I would show you.




regardless after what happened last night there with origine there will be more screenshots coming soon to show the point.

don't get me wrong I am not blaming best squad they are playing within within the so called balance of the game and purely buying their first place. all with in plariums rules of making money. its a great strategy buy as many troops as you can and hit sitting ducks.

UTC +5:00
0
Vodkaonice
13 January, 2017, 10:06 AM UTC

I understand the players using what plarium gives them and allowes them to use are not to blame.

i completely agree with you that the balance is gone.

Yes spending money should give advantage thats what this game is based on.

but the advantage gets way to bigg and takes away al strategy in the game.

UTC +1:00
1
blah blah blah
13 January, 2017, 12:14 PM UTC

Vodkaonice said:


I understand the players using what plarium gives them and allowes them to use are not to blame.

i completely agree with you that the balance is gone.

Yes spending money should give advantage thats what this game is based on.

but the advantage gets way to bigg and takes away al strategy in the game.

I am not blaming the players at all. there is no strategy at all, they hit all the pan holders, they bullied the whole server and they did it just by virtue of the fact they spent a ton of money. Many are taking about not playing anymore that is the result of this huge imbalance that plarium has allowed.

players are saying that these guys works for plarium

and really its a hollow victory, no skill and no strategy anyone with a ton of money to burn could have done this after playing the game for a month.

UTC +5:00
0
Vodkaonice
14 January, 2017, 11:09 AM UTC

blah blah blah said:


Vodkaonice said:


I understand the players using what plarium gives them and allowes them to use are not to blame.

i completely agree with you that the balance is gone.

Yes spending money should give advantage thats what this game is based on.

but the advantage gets way to bigg and takes away al strategy in the game.

I am not blaming the players at all. there is no strategy at all, they hit all the pan holders, they bullied the whole server and they did it just by virtue of the fact they spent a ton of money. Many are taking about not playing anymore that is the result of this huge imbalance that plarium has allowed.

players are saying that these guys works for plarium


and really its a hollow victory, no skill and no strategy anyone with a ton of money to burn could have done this after playing the game for a month.


i know these guys very well and they do not work for plarium i can assure you ! they just have very very very deep pockets and are willing to spend a lot of money to be the best in the game.  i do understand the feelings grom others because well not a lot off people can spend those amounts on a game...


UTC +1:00
0
blah blah blah
14 January, 2017, 3:25 PM UTC
Vodkaonice said:

blah blah blah said:


Vodkaonice said:


I understand the players using what plarium gives them and allowes them to use are not to blame.

i completely agree with you that the balance is gone.

Yes spending money should give advantage thats what this game is based on.

but the advantage gets way to bigg and takes away al strategy in the game.

I am not blaming the players at all. there is no strategy at all, they hit all the pan holders, they bullied the whole server and they did it just by virtue of the fact they spent a ton of money. Many are taking about not playing anymore that is the result of this huge imbalance that plarium has allowed.

players are saying that these guys works for plarium


and really its a hollow victory, no skill and no strategy anyone with a ton of money to burn could have done this after playing the game for a month.


i know these guys very well and they do not work for plarium i can assure you ! they just have very very very deep pockets and are willing to spend a lot of money to be the best in the game.  i do understand the feelings grom others because well not a lot off people can spend those amounts on a game...


As I said before I don't blame them, but it hardly makes them the best in the game. Your comments, and we have we have agreed in most part in what we have written, show that the only people that pretend to not know the game is pay to win is plarium. its just dishonest and treats players like they are stupid. its also creating a path where your friends will be the only ones playing and they will have nothing to smash.
UTC +5:00
0
1781278 users registered; 48445 topics; 287497 posts; our newest member:Long 3