This topic is closed

Balancing Balur units in BGs!!!!!!

11 Replies
Extremption
15 October, 2016, 2:56 AM UTC

Wanting to take advantage of these BG heat tournaments i set myself up to do a huge run of them, max resources etc


Did the check method with 1 unit at each BG from levels 28 all the way to 46. Couldn't believe my fkn eyes when EVERY single one of them where highly defended with beastiary/occult. I don't know about most players but itd take months to build up 1-2mil+ offense/defense in infantry/cavalry to do bgs properly without heavy losses. How am i suppose to do these tournaments with these bg mashups while gaining some sort of advantage from doing them in the tournament, if i did them id loss heaps more than i get back from the bgs + tournaments combined.

Now ive noticed since about 6months ago with the new bg mechanic changes the majority of bgs 8/10 are highly defended with occult/beastiary units which just increases our loss overall. Was this a move by plarium in hopes of players spending more money to cover their losses? I'm kind of sick of these exploits. At this point im deciding whether to just give up bgs completely which is a big part of why i stick around in this game because it becomes quite boring without that to look forward too.


I'd like for the developers to look into this and to look at the balance of units as you climb higher in the battlegrounds like 28-30+. It seems to me the low level bgs always highly defended with infantry/cavalry and weak to beastiary/occult but when you hit the 30+ margain its the other way around with it being highly defended with beastiary/occult and weak to infantry/calvary.


Now think about that for a minute.... the higher level bgs require a lot more offense/defense to complete so wouldn't it make sense for the lower level bgs to be weak to infantry/cavalry and the high levels to beastiary/occult or at least a more balanced field.... cause its heavily biased atm. I find this EVERYTIME i do bgs so don't tell me its luck of the draw. I've been testing this for months compared to the past and i know for a fact the Beastiary/occult units in the high level bgs have been highly increased making it real difficult for people at level 30+ bgs to make ANYTHING from them.


I may be one voice but im sure there is many more as im in contact with most of the community and they all agree with me. Doing BG's 6 months ago was worth it. Now its only worth doing if you in the levels 20-36ish.


Why has it been reworked like this?? Because the players certainly do not benefit from it.....

UTC +10:00
1
Extremption
15 October, 2016, 3:08 AM UTC

If anything at the current time with coiners being able to buy advantages left right & center you don't exactly want to make the grind x10 longer for f2p players or players who spend little to save up months of infantry/cavalry to do bgs properly to actually benefit from doing bgs.


If they did them and forced them with beastiary/occult they would suffer heavy losses. So its the choice between waiting months and months to make the best of your hard work & patience or try and force the bgs and pray for the best but knowing your going to suffer heavy losses anyway.


The balance of BG units in the high levels, especially 30+ need a huge rework. Like 80% of the bgs i see above level 30 are heavily defended by occult/beastiary and has been that way for the last couple of months. Actually overall bgs in general seem to be heavily defended with beastiary/occult since your bg re-works to stop these "unfair" advantages in the past. 


I fail to see increasing the losses for all players overall to be taking these "unfair" advantages to a small minority as playing fair, more taking advantage of a situation, but why do damage to your game & players??


I think it's safe to say you could of stopped that without re-working the BG's to inflict more losses on the players overall.


Your motive? Money (hopefully they spend more to replace the losses)


Your mistake? Ruined a big mechanic of the game


What needs to be done? Re-work the balance of units on BG's bringing in more bgs heavily defended by infantry/cavalry increasing the activity players can do on bgs & activity in general and also the overall rewards for us.


Is it hard? No... the battlegrounds would be the same strength just with different units so those that are doing battlegrounds at 30-40-50+ can actually do half or most with beastiary/occult which is quite plausible seen as those bgs want 100-200-300k+ offense/defense to complete and at those levels you need to do multiple for your big payout so roughly 600k-1m-2m+ offense/defense to get your big payout which cannot be done properly with infantry/cavalry on every bg tournament or second or third (have to build for months).


It's not a bad idea, i don't see how it'd effect the game in anyway except make the whole community more active overall, bring life back into a key mechanic of the game & make a lot of players happy that can then do their bg's a lot more often.
UTC +10:00
1
Extremption
15 October, 2016, 3:14 AM UTC

Having the majority of bgs heavily defended with beastiary/occult just makes the grind alot longer for players to build up the troops (infantry/cavalry) to do bgs so in turn you have made the community more inactive with that mechanical change. Changing it back to a more balanced structure will get alot more players involved with bgs and activity in general. It's a win win situation for Plarium.


And as DJmoody said hes already found a way to get around the "unfair" advantage mechanical update or has found another way to get what you were trying to stop 


So really that update did nothing but damage to the community


I'm asking for the developers and staff to have another look at the BG mechanic situation and make it more suitable for the entire player base, i mean even big coiners are losing more cause i doubt they have 2-3m+ in infantry/cavalry to throw in BG's everytime either.


Balur's units in the Battlegrounds need to be more balanced with more bg's being highly defended by infantry/cavalry and weak to occult/beastiary not the other way round. You'll find a lot more players doing bgs and more often.... 

UTC +10:00
1
BiohazarD
Moderator
15 October, 2016, 9:12 AM UTC

TL;DR The idea with bgs is that you either build and load in units for months, then kill one and maybe win a bunch of units back, or sent your units to the bgs, revive them with sapphires, then send again until you kill the bg and maybe win units back. 

Btw if you're on level 40- and already having problems you're gonna have fun when you get to level 100+, some of them have 5-10 million power, so it could take over a year to kill one with just building infantry and cavalry (and on average you'd have to kill 4-6 of them before one gives you a big troop payout). 
Any opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of or constitute official statements by Plarium.
UTC +0:00
0
Snowgoon
15 October, 2016, 2:58 PM UTC

BiohazarD said:


TL;DR The idea with bgs is that you either build and load in units for months, then kill one and maybe win a bunch of units back, or sent your units to the bgs, revive them with sapphires, then send again until you kill the bg and maybe win units back. 

Btw if you're on level 40- and already having problems you're gonna have fun when you get to level 100+, some of them have 5-10 million power, so it could take over a year to kill one with just building infantry and cavalry (and on average you'd have to kill 4-6 of them before one gives you a big troop payout). 

Bio, Have you ever played the Pirate game?

Pirate devs designed a fifth 'balur' unit for their red battlegrounds which has 30 defense against all offense types.
It is very similar to our Huntress unit.
Some of their red battlegrounds use griffins, golems etc but the numbers seem to be capped

They only use marennon, ogres, orcs and raiders on their green battlegrounds

A much fairer system for everyone - low level or high level

http://prntscr.com/cu5tl7

So how many level 32 pikemen will I need to kill a level 150 bg? lol

Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - Pink Floyd - http://prnt.sc/dv923b
UTC +0:00
0
Extremption
16 October, 2016, 12:48 AM UTC

BiohazarD said:


TL;DR The idea with bgs is that you either build and load in units for months, then kill one and maybe win a bunch of units back, or sent your units to the bgs, revive them with sapphires, then send again until you kill the bg and maybe win units back. 

Btw if you're on level 40- and already having problems you're gonna have fun when you get to level 100+, some of them have 5-10 million power, so it could take over a year to kill one with just building infantry and cavalry (and on average you'd have to kill 4-6 of them before one gives you a big troop payout). 

That's bad management of the game if they expect players to wait months or in the 100+ bg's case, years to use a big mechanic of the game.


EDIT: Especially since they put on Battleground tournaments every second day. I mean c'mon surely they can see it's a mess, not every update has to be for people to spend more money.... fixing the structure & integrity of the game is essential for its future so you CAN implement more updates for more money. Get me? It's a catch 22.


That's what this thread is all about is to make bgs more balanced so more accessible for players overall & can do them more frequently. I don't see how this will increase ones strength in anyway from the previous system because the reward system will remain the same just the balance of units needs to be re-worked to make it fairer for players overall....


They were definitely a lot more balanced 6+ months ago which confirms my suspicions that this "unfair advantage" patch update was a cover story to implement these mechanical changes to increase the losses on players overall in hopes of them spending more money to cover the losses.


Maybe they did fix these unfair advantage BS but they definitely made bg's worse off than before. A lot of players don't even touch them anymore and its a key mechanic of the game... how sad that they tried to "fix" something but at the same time they broke it 


Needs a re-work, big part of anyones game especially those that don't spend a lot of money or none at all. Those customers should be valued as highly as coiners cause without those players coiners don't have anyone to use their money on :p 

UTC +10:00
0
BiohazarD
Moderator
16 October, 2016, 9:18 AM UTC

Extremption said:


BiohazarD said:


TL;DR The idea with bgs is that you either build and load in units for months, then kill one and maybe win a bunch of units back, or sent your units to the bgs, revive them with sapphires, then send again until you kill the bg and maybe win units back. 

Btw if you're on level 40- and already having problems you're gonna have fun when you get to level 100+, some of them have 5-10 million power, so it could take over a year to kill one with just building infantry and cavalry (and on average you'd have to kill 4-6 of them before one gives you a big troop payout). 

That's bad management of the game if they expect players to wait months or in the 100+ bg's case, years to use a big mechanic of the game.


EDIT: Especially since they put on Battleground tournaments every second day. I mean c'mon surely they can see it's a mess, not every update has to be for people to spend more money.... fixing the structure & integrity of the game is essential for its future so you CAN implement more updates for more money. Get me? It's a catch 22.


That's what this thread is all about is to make bgs more balanced so more accessible for players overall & can do them more frequently. I don't see how this will increase ones strength in anyway from the previous system because the reward system will remain the same just the balance of units needs to be re-worked to make it fairer for players overall....


They were definitely a lot more balanced 6+ months ago which confirms my suspicions that this "unfair advantage" patch update was a cover story to implement these mechanical changes to increase the losses on players overall in hopes of them spending more money to cover the losses.


Maybe they did fix these unfair advantage BS but they definitely made bg's worse off than before. A lot of players don't even touch them anymore and its a key mechanic of the game... how sad that they tried to "fix" something but at the same time they broke it 


Needs a re-work, big part of anyones game especially those that don't spend a lot of money or none at all. Those customers should be valued as highly as coiners cause without those players coiners don't have anyone to use their money on :p 

No there definitely was an advantage that could be considered unfair (I personally don't think it was unfair since everybody had the same chance to discover it that we did, but that's beside the point) and it did need to be changed to preserve game balance. Another important thing to consider is that some players spend thousands of dollars per month on the game, so there are daily tournaments to give those players something to spend their troops on.  You don't have to (and it is highly inadvisable as a non coining player to) participate in every tournament.



Snowgoon said:


So how many level 32 pikemen will I need to kill a level 150 bg? lol
With good items and boosts you can get pikemen to about 130 offense.  So to kill a 150 it would take about 90k pikemen.  But using just pikemen you'd have to kill 8-12 before you got a payout. 
Any opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of or constitute official statements by Plarium.
UTC +0:00
1
Stewart
16 October, 2016, 9:55 AM UTC

BiohazarD said:

You don't have to (and it is highly inadvisable as a non coining player to) participate in every tournament. 



A very important thing to be able to do, build and prepare for certain tourneys. You will be more 
effective and happier with the results.

Noodle maker extreme
UTC +0:00
1
djmoody
18 October, 2016, 1:24 AM UTC

Anyone that does BG's will know that offensive BG's are overstacked with maranon.

It's not the end of the world tbh. BG's are about loading resource. Loading it quickly isn't that much of a problem, just shorter time to your next big payout.

Slighly annoying if you are a small player trying to use one of the BG tricks and you only just have enough army to get to 155. If you get the wrong troop match for your troops it can defend anywhere between 7-21m. That is a pretty crazy range and can put you at a point where you effectively run out of troops and can't finish.

On the flip side you can do defence for less than the base value of the BG is you match up right, so it's swings and roundabouts.

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
0
Extremption
19 October, 2016, 2:37 AM UTC

djmoody said:


Anyone that does BG's will know that offensive BG's are overstacked with maranon.

It's not the end of the world tbh. BG's are about loading resource. Loading it quickly isn't that much of a problem, just shorter time to your next big payout.

Slighly annoying if you are a small player trying to use one of the BG tricks and you only just have enough army to get to 155. If you get the wrong troop match for your troops it can defend anywhere between 7-21m. That is a pretty crazy range and can put you at a point where you effectively run out of troops and can't finish.

On the flip side you can do defence for less than the base value of the BG is you match up right, so it's swings and roundabouts.

No its not but why hinder the community in partaking in BG's more often by increasing the Beastiary/Occult units? Doesn't exactly make sense now does it? That's the whole point of this thread, to re-work the balance of Balur's Units in the Battlegrounds so players can partake in them more frequently, participate in tournaments etc and increasing the overall activity of players across the board, which is an issue at the moment.


Why make the grind longer when you can make it shorter? All players will benefit so no "unfair advantages" will occur its just making them more accessible to the community and giving players more things to do everyday so it isn't such a long boring grind.


It's not about the rewards, they are fine 


EDIT: Most of you have replied without addressing the key issue of the topic which is the balance of Balur Units, i don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a good thing to re-work the balance of Balur units to increase the activity of players overall. 
UTC +10:00
0
Extremption
19 October, 2016, 2:41 AM UTC
Stewart_KT1 said:

BiohazarD said:

You don't have to (and it is highly inadvisable as a non coining player to) participate in every tournament. 



A very important thing to be able to do, build and prepare for certain tourneys. You will be more 
effective and happier with the results.

Agreed and i do not attempt to partake in EVERY tournament but it's more of the grind to build up enough infantry/calvary to partake in a SINGLE tournament to get your rewards. The point of this thread is to reduce the grind for players by re-working the balance of BG's so beastiary & occult will be more effective in them increasing the activity of players in BG's and on the game overall.
UTC +10:00
0
djmoody
20 October, 2016, 12:30 AM UTC

Extremption said:


 EDIT: Most of you have replied without addressing the key issue of the topic which is the balance of Balur Units, i don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a good thing to re-work the balance of Balur units to increase the activity of players overall. 

It's not that it wouldn't be a "good" update.

It's just that it isn't really necessary. You can get around it will some judgement and thought. So personally it's not something I would want Plarium to focus time and effort on, not with some of the other problems they have (change the level that beacon defence is visible to captains/marhsal for instance).

In a way I quite like the danger factor it provides and that it makes them a little more difficult, requiring some planning and thought sometimes.


Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
0
1779077 users registered; 48225 topics; 286668 posts; our newest member:Вася рогов