This event has the potential to break the game for everyone.
Many see our league as a destructive force, but even for a villain there is no point in destroying the world. After all, that's were all the best slaughter takes place.
Die blutige Horde will not start the fire...
All these games end the same way. Either we pay up or leave.
It is a business.
It costs money to run.
We are the moneytree.
In my opinion, this tournament could be fun. It gives newer leagues who have always been worried about trying to obtain a beacon a chance to test it out knowing that losses will be minimal. It will also help to weed out inactive players defense from holding beacons.
My only suggestion would be a timer extension on any hits made. If someone attacks a beacon with only 60 seconds left in tourney, the timer should be extended for both of those leagues for a set amount of time e.g. 30 minutes. If another attack occurs, it would be extended again. This would help get rid of the fear most people are facing about this tournament.
my league also supports this petiton and will not be participating
this tourney has to potential to create a mass exodus from the game and run most of the non coiners out of the game if there is massive damage
Good point. But if they don't hold those Beacons, someone else will recapture them and put some Defense in.
What if I tell you there are players who are just gonna harass beacons without any intention to hold it? Does your vision catch a glimpse of that?
djmoody said:
Seriously - the volume and complete unanimous nature of the feedback isn't overwhelming enough for you. You want to force us all to provide the feedback all over again. Yes sir Plarium - we'll jump through hoops for you like performing dogs.
I can't pass the feedback as it is - 'We don't like it, don't launch it'. Sorry, but it's true. Our devs ask for constructive feedback from players. That's why I ask players to share their thoughts after the Tournament, when you all will get more information about it, and probably participate in it.
To make some improvements our devs need to know what exactly you don't like, and which parts of the Tournaments you'd like them to change.
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
I can't pass the feedback as it is - 'We don't like it, don't launch it'. Sorry, but it's true. Our devs ask for constructive feedback from players. That's why I ask players to share their thoughts after the Tournament, when you all will get more information about it, and probably participate in it.
To make some improvements our devs need to know what exactly you don't like, and which parts of the Tournaments you'd like them to change.
Well the trouble is Alyona, that if we say one thing you guys do exactly the opposite. If we say no, you'll still do it, if we say yes you'll stop it. That is the problem most times here. You just don't listen. And that you'll need only the feedback afterwards is just nonsens.
scarlet said:
In my opinion, this tournament could be fun. It gives newer leagues who have always been worried about trying to obtain a beacon a chance to test it out knowing that losses will be minimal. It will also help to weed out inactive players defense from holding beacons.
My only suggestion would be a timer extension on any hits made. If someone attacks a beacon with only 60 seconds left in tourney, the timer should be extended for both of those leagues for a set amount of time e.g. 30 minutes. If another attack occurs, it would be extended again. This would help get rid of the fear most people are facing about this tournament.
Sorry but your logic is flawed
Newer leagues would never be able to hold a beacon even if they were capable of capturing one, and extending the timer would actually make it worse for them.
If you have played other plarium games like Total Domination then you would see the devastation on their beacon maps.
They have decided to abandon any attempt to hold beacons. Beacons have no value except as pvp targets.
Plarium have turned Beacons into giant Hamlets
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
djmoody said:
Seriously - the volume and complete unanimous nature of the feedback isn't overwhelming enough for you. You want to force us all to provide the feedback all over again. Yes sir Plarium - we'll jump through hoops for you like performing dogs.
I can't pass the feedback as it is - 'We don't like it, don't launch it'. Sorry, but it's true. Our devs ask for constructive feedback from players. That's why I ask players to share their thoughts after the Tournament, when you all will get more information about it, and probably participate in it.
To make some improvements our devs need to know what exactly you don't like, and which parts of the Tournaments you'd like them to change.
we dont want an event that upsets 4-5 years of hard work. Everything the players have struggled to achieve gets destroyed in 12 hours of an event with no rewards.
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
djmoody said:
Seriously - the volume and complete unanimous nature of the feedback isn't overwhelming enough for you. You want to force us all to provide the feedback all over again. Yes sir Plarium - we'll jump through hoops for you like performing dogs.
I can't pass the feedback as it is - 'We don't like it, don't launch it'. Sorry, but it's true. Our devs ask for constructive feedback from players. That's why I ask players to share their thoughts after the Tournament, when you all will get more information about it, and probably participate in it.
To make some improvements our devs need to know what exactly you don't like, and which parts of the Tournaments you'd like them to change.
Be honest at least once. It is not your dev team but your sales team.
I do not see how could a developer with self respect come up with an idea this stupid.
For what it's worth, Plarium is running the same tourney in Sparta: War of Empires. (Beacons=Pantheons). It is getting the same cold reception.
Only in SWOE there are federations of coalitions (uber leagues?) that can coordinate a message quicker. So the leaders of a group of teams, get together, decide on a boycott, and which then mean thousands of accounts then decide on the same boycott. In this massacre boycott for example, one of the 3 largest coalition federations (IFS) decided on a boycott, meaning at least 25 coalitions boycotted it. I don't see any action from the Terminators' federation (another top 3 federation coalition). The 4th largest coalition federation (HBG) didn't outright boycott, but said it was dumb, so their coalitions aren't participating in any meaningful way. A handful from the 5th largest coalition federation (UFC) are participating. The other big 3 (NWO) only seems to have their parent coalition participating and kind of lackluster, similar to the parent of the 6th largest (LOP) coalition federation.
So it's been kind of a dud. Maybe the prediction of a last minute flurry will come true in Sparta, but like with most things in life, people are averse to change.
They don't know what they could gain,
but they know what they could lose.
So they do nothing
looks like everyone on S2 boycotted the event.
No profit for plarium
Let's hope they go back to the drawing board
I lost one griffin on S2 and revived for free, lost nothing on S1
.... and the Facebook servers crashed for the final 15 minutes, so not much there either :)
