This topic is closed

Broken Hamlets

38 Replies
tissetass
10 January, 2017, 4:29 PM UTC

With the new traveling time you cant hold a hamlet for even 1min before it will bee attacked. No one is sending more than 2 golems to hamlet anymore. You have compleatly broken it and made it mush worse than it was, I know you tried to fix it. The hamlet traveling time need to bee increased 10x or no one will use the hamlets any more.

The problem with hamlets is that you cant send all your defence to hamlet because people who are in beacon guilds have most their defense at beacon so someone will have mush more offence than you have defense, with no bonus to defense in hamlet the result is given. And even if you are in a non beacon guild like me sending defence to a hamlet is a bad idee since you take mush losses if someone send the same amount of attack. If someone send just a few trops you dont even get any points but you take losses.

Hamlets needs a complete makeover, just log in to the game and try it, totally broken.

UTC +2:00
Warrior
10 January, 2017, 5:51 PM UTC

Hamlet is a tough thing i agree. It is mostly where people find PvP. Castles have a lot of defense bonus and this makes it a advantage for the defender and disadvantage for Attacker. The hamlet provide the field for just the opposite where the attacker is at advantage and the defender is at disadvantage. This is a simple case wherein both have an equal playing ground at different places or scenarios.


We dont want always the defender to be at advantage then there will be no balance. Defenders will always win and attackers will always loose.
Please Like the Post if you agree or if it helps
UTC +6:00
FAILO
10 January, 2017, 11:03 PM UTC
With hamlets plarium took out strategy from settlement and new upgrades made it an uber coiner's dream.... 
UTC +0:00
Snowgoon
11 January, 2017, 1:15 AM UTC

Force Limits at Hamlets are grossly biased in favour of attackers

Offense units have twice the power, so needs half the force limit


Other than that they are perfectly balanced ... attackers destroy everything (often with zero loss) and get all the tournament points while defenders get wiped out and get zero tournament points
Perfect balance ... Plarium style

It amazes me that anyone sends defense to hamlets - its a mug's game




As for Warriors off-topic comments on castle walls (AGAIN)  - They are a TAX on defenders which offensive players have no need to pay. If defenders are prepared to pay this tax, then they should gain massive benefits.

However, Castle Wall benefits are slight, as they only boost the level one values of our units, and do not reduce casualties.
In fact, they increase the battle size, thereby increasing casualties to both players


Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - Pink Floyd - http://prnt.sc/dv923b
UTC +0:00
Warrior
11 January, 2017, 4:30 AM UTC
Snowgoon said:

Force Limits at Hamlets are grossly biased in favour of attackers

Offense units have twice the power, so needs half the force limit


Other than that they are perfectly balanced ... attackers destroy everything (often with zero loss) and get all the tournament points while defenders get wiped out and get zero tournament points
Perfect balance ... Plarium style

It amazes me that anyone sends defense to hamlets - its a mug's game




As for Warriors off-topic comments on castle walls (AGAIN)  - They are a TAX on defenders which offensive players have no need to pay. If defenders are prepared to pay this tax, then they should gain massive benefits.

However, Castle Wall benefits are slight, as they only boost the level one values of our units, and do not reduce casualties.
In fact, they increase the battle size, thereby increasing casualties to both players


I have players that i know personally that have not spend more than 10$ in the game and they have level 5 walls. It took them time but they reached there with 20k defense bonus. Ofcourse if you are in an active and participating league it beacons easier to reach there with less or no spending. Actually i think you did not read the tutorial properly but it boost whatever you have in the castle not the base value.
Please Like the Post if you agree or if it helps
UTC +6:00
Snowgoon
11 January, 2017, 2:16 PM UTC

Warrior said:


Snowgoon said:


 and do not reduce casualties.

In fact, they increase the battle size, thereby increasing casualties to both players

 but it boost whatever you have in the castle not the base value.

Each level 5 wall costs 400 sapphires and adds only 0.19 to each archer and only 5.87 to each griffin.
We have much better ways to spend 400 sapphires

I would love to be proved wrong, please show us the evidence

Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - Pink Floyd - http://prnt.sc/dv923b
UTC +0:00
Warrior
12 January, 2017, 5:06 AM UTC

I hope this explains it.




Please Like the Post if you agree or if it helps
UTC +6:00
djmoody
12 January, 2017, 6:09 AM UTC

Pretty sure hamlets were another bow to the coiners.

Rather than have to worry about bumping into a league's worth of defence at a settlement and losing their offence, they wanted the coiners to be able to run free blasting everyone in their path 1 v 1 with no risk.

Goes hand in hand with making coiner offence have the stats of defence so they can never be skillfully caught and destroyed by a non-coiner for minimal losses (lvl 31/32 lost arts defence boost if you are wondering exactly what I mean).

Maybe I am being too cynical but time and time Plarium have proven to me that being too cynical is never enough where they are concerned.

The game was always massively unbalance from the start. The ability to buy infinite troops, immediately. End game purchasable without the need to engage in ANY gameplay what so ever. Not content with this ludicrous advantage they have slowly removed strategy from the game so that the dumb coiners (and yes they are always dumb as you have to have a screw loose to put tens of thousands into pixels) can make stupid mistakes and not get punished for them.

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
Alina Bright
Community Manager
12 January, 2017, 11:58 AM UTC

Djmoody, Hamlets have own mechanics, it's hard to compare them to Settlements since the mechanics is very different. For example, defensive Units don't take part in the battle and offensive Units go back to the Catacombs automatically after a Hamlet was captured. New and different doesn't mean bad.


Each player should always have a strategy. Resources are not infinite, you can't buy all troops you see at the Black Market, and all troops and bonuses that you have will be useless if you don't learn how to use them wisely.




UTC +2:00
tissetass
12 January, 2017, 1:59 PM UTC

If hamlets are working as intended why are none hamlets occupied now that there is no pvp. I tried capture a few today and get attacked strait away, at least before you decreased the traveling time you could occupie hamlets that was not in reatch of your enemy. Now if you have one enemy he can take them all in 5mins, not worth going to hamlets at all. If you stack them with defense some fool will attack with all his strength and you lose allot more than you could ever gain. We need a reason to stay online when there is not mush else to do. 

What would bee great in hamlets was if someone failed to attack it you would take no losses, that way people would actually start using them. 

UTC +2:00
BiohazarD
Moderator
12 January, 2017, 4:53 PM UTC

Snowgoon said:


Warrior said:


Snowgoon said:


 and do not reduce casualties.

In fact, they increase the battle size, thereby increasing casualties to both players

 but it boost whatever you have in the castle not the base value.

Each level 5 wall costs 400 sapphires and adds only 0.19 to each archer and only 5.87 to each griffin.
We have much better ways to spend 400 sapphires

I would love to be proved wrong, please show us the evidence

Castle defense bonus applies on the final value of all the other boosts.  I don't have the exact numbers anymore, but a while ago I set up a battle with a friend in another league who had level 5 walls.  He put out some archers, and i calculated the amount of def vs infantry they should have if it applied on the base value (which at the time I thought it did) and sent an equivalent amount of pikemen to attack.  I did this experiment twice, once as a raid and once as a siege, and both times the defender won by a significant margin.  This indicated that something was off in my assumptions and he was getting a significantly higher boost than he should.  I then repeated the experiment but assuming the defense bonus applied to the final defense value after all the other boosts, and the results were very close to even losses on both sides. 

Sorry I don't have screenshots anymore, but if you don't believe me you can easily repeat the experiment. 
UTC +0:00
nobody
12 January, 2017, 5:54 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Djmoody, Hamlets have own mechanics, it's hard to compare them to Settlements since the mechanics is very different. For example, defensive Units don't take part in the battle and offensive Units go back to the Catacombs automatically after a Hamlet was captured. New and different doesn't mean bad.


Each player should always have a strategy. Resources are not infinite, you can't buy all troops you see at the Black Market, and all troops and bonuses that you have will be useless if you don't learn how to use them wisely.




the comparison is in value:  risk vs. reward;  when my level was in the 40's, new to the game, my first couple months,  i could take settlements by jousting with other players, some of those players levels were in the 70's.  once i established myself, i would hold on to the settlement for 2days to 2 weeks.  gathering gold twice a day.  that gold was valuable.  when i got bumped off a settlement i then had to establish myself again.

there was a topic on changing settlements, the only good suggestion was making teirs, that would have meant that i would go against level 40's instead of 60's and 70's.  plus if they kept the same amount of settlements for each tier, that would make more resources available with less jousting.  i could tell from the suggestions that the main push was to turn settlements into a duck hunt.

and that is exactly what hamlets are.  a duck hunt.  risk vs reward.  there is no longer any value in gathering at hamlets.  its only value is a duck hunt.

what strategy is there in being a sitting duck pertaining to "resources are not infinite"?  and what do you mean by "learn how to use them wisely? is being a sitting duck "wisely".

it is extremely easy to compare settlements to hamlets.  settlements were a valuable risk vs. reward gathering of the "not infinite resources".  hamlets are a duck hunt.

the comparison of risk vs. reward also includes this:  there was never a settlement open, therefore if you wanted one you had to joust for it.  again there was never a settlement open.  hamlets on the other hand when there were 90 hamlets, only 3 or 4 would be taken, 3 or 4 out of 90.  that is with players being allowed to hold 3 each if they find the risk vs. reward valuable.  this is within a 150 mile radius, that is a 300 mile diameter.  even 3 weeks ago it was difficult to find one hamlet with a player on it in order to pvp it for the quest.  that is, that it was difficult, to find one sitting duck in a 300 mile diameter.  just one duck!

so why is it that when a player makes a thread that the risk vs. reward in hamlets is absolutely of no value to the gatherer,  that the message is not, way to catch up Einstein!, i saw from the suggestions when hamlets were being proposed that that would be the case.

instead the messages are copy and paste:  some players like this, some players like that, you can participate or not, be super duper smart and use strategy.  or my favorite,  you just aren't putting enough defense on them, please put your entire defense on a hamlet, plz, plz, plz.

strategy, wisely, be smart...........i am definitely toooooooo dumb for this game.



comparison:  risk vs. reward; actions speak louder than words.  settlements not one open ever.  hamlets 95% open within a 300 mile diameter with players allowed 3 hamlets.  not used does = bad,  used does =good.  you can participate or not.  that is why i love bot castles,  without bot castles there would be no game.  that is why the only part of the game i participate in is raiding bot castles for the "not infinite resources".  i wonder if that could be strategy, maybe i am smarterest after all.

while i wait on the returning raids to my favorite and only game content i participate in, i am here in the forums.  if i had actual game content, i would not be here.


UTC +0:00
Snowgoon
12 January, 2017, 7:25 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Djmoody, Hamlets have own mechanics, it's hard to compare them to Settlements since the mechanics is very different. New and different doesn't mean bad.

You do not understand

We are comparing hamlets with the old pre-hamlet design


I used to send one archer to the old fashioned Sapphire Settlements and collect 72 sapphires per day.
I had no reason to send more than one archer, and it was rarely attacked
I could often hold an old settlement for 3 or 4 days, but now it is impossible to hold a new hamlet for more than 3 or 4 minutes
Sending a large defense force is a losing proposition. Many will die and we are likely to lose all. Increasing attack speed has made this situation even worse
Why are they allowed to attack at over 6,000 mph?



It is blatantly obvious to all that the new hamlets were designed purely as pvp targets - they have nothing to do with gathering resources


Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - Pink Floyd - http://prnt.sc/dv923b
UTC +0:00
Alina Bright
Community Manager
13 January, 2017, 5:48 PM UTC
Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.
UTC +2:00
Stormfall
13 January, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

Did you tried to hold a hamlet lately?

UTC +2:00
Drogar61
13 January, 2017, 8:34 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

You (smart) know better what is better for us, and we (stupid) don't want to listen and for majority of time no one holds hamlet(s).

Please, learn us, help us to understand. I know that it is a hard job, but please don't give up. Maybe, there is chance for us, still.
UTC +0:00
Warrior
14 January, 2017, 7:45 AM UTC

Drogar61 said:


Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

You (smart) know better what is better for us, and we (stupid) don't want to listen and for majority of time no one holds hamlet(s).

Please, learn us, help us to understand. I know that it is a hard job, but please don't give up. Maybe, there is chance for us, still.

I agree it is hard to hold a hamlet.. it is basically a source of PvP but so was  Settlement.. the better side is hamlet could be held by forces of individual where as settlements can be reinforced by the league which was also source of easy PvP but for the defender. Strangely everything in the past seemed to benefit the defender.. Castle defense bonus + for defender - for attacker, beacons + for defender - for attacker, fortress + for defender - for attacker, settlements ofcourse i dont have to repeat that.. but out of the blues i think plarium made a mistake by making Hamlets, a good source of resources, a - for defender and + for attacker, how can Plarium do this to us. The game seems so balanced when everything tilts toward the defender..


So i completely agree with you it is hard to hold a hamlet.
Please Like the Post if you agree or if it helps
UTC +6:00
nobody
14 January, 2017, 11:42 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

false, inaccurate, incorrect, wrong.  you completely do not get the point.

risk vs. reward:  you spend real life time, effort and money.  developers create game content.  this is the content.  spend more of your real life time sacrificing your troops to the pvper's while not gathering any resources.  that is hamlets.  losing resources (troops) without gaining any resources.

do you understand cost/gain, risk vs. reward?  then do the math.  resource gathering:  risk/loss/cost 10k in resources vs. gain/reward 0.

do this math:  95% of hamlets are empty.  you take 3 that are open, that makes 90% of hamlets empty.  a player does not capture any of the open hamlets, neither do they capture the 3 hamlets you are on.  they kill your troops and leave the resources.  this is not fighting for resources, this is not establishing yourself, this is nothing but being offered to the pvper's as a sitting duck. the more troops you have on the hamlet the more desirable a target you are.  this is not fighting with others for resources.

"You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements."  false, inaccurate, incorrect, wrong. you completely do not get the point.  i think i gained 28k gold per day in settlements.  i gather nothing in hamlets.

you do not get the point, you do not understand game content.  your answers are more infuriating than the initial complaint.

all answers that are copy/paste, lack of understanding game content, showing that you have never experienced that part of the game in a true setting  are a negative impact on the relationship between corporation/customer.  the cattle are not interested in being herded/managed.  men want to be reasoned with until understanding is gained.  this is the purpose of the forums, both ancient and modern.
UTC +0:00
Knightmare
15 January, 2017, 12:35 AM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

Do you even play this game?


If people type in Cyrillic would you understand better what they are saying?



Nug Life !
UTC +7:00
roadstar Pitbull
15 January, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC
GoGo Knightmare said:

Eugenia Misura said:


Lords and Ladies, I can see your point. However, it's a war game and it's normal to fight for something to become yours. Same with Resources, it's fair to fight for them with others. You can gain more Resources from Hamlets than you could gain from Settlements.

Do you even play this game?


If people type in Cyrillic would you understand better what they are saying?



She plays nice on the "test server",, no clue about the real world game...
UTC +0:00
1666025 users registered; 33943 topics; 253343 posts; our newest member:Castle №10914603