Jezebel said:

Alina Phoenix said:

Jezebel said:

Fireballs - there needs to be more control on them - you should not be able to send 10 at a time and you should not be able to send more than 3 times at one castle.  I get they are here to stay but the game is just full of fireball warriors - i have had more fireball reports in my Grand Marshall this weekend than anything else.  

Also they should not recover every 2.5 hours like raids it should be a 24 hour period.

You want people to use troops change it - level 6+ walls and fireballs have basically ruined castle wars.

Hello :)

When we released Fireballs, devs have balanced them to make sure they are not a game changer. Their current strength and the way they are working is balanced, and we are not planning to change it.

Though, such updates like a Unit that can be used against them, still can be added to the game.

But it isn't balanced - the level 6+ wall have basically eliminated 95% of the castles that I would hit as with any player that knows the game hitting a well fortified castle will cost you a lot of troops - so the only recourse is fireballs - I admit I got the higher level walls but fireballs are wasted on me because there is no point in defending a castle people will only hit with fireballs - I don't give points freely to people who only use fireballs for pvp

It depends on how many defensive Units a player has in the Castle as Bonus from defensive Buildings is added only if Units are stationed in the Castle.

Jezebel said:

Alina Phoenix said:

Jezebel said:

Alina Phoenix said:

Jezebel said:

Fireballs - there needs to be more control on them - you should not be able to send 10 at a time and you should not be able to send more than 3 times at one castle.  I get they are here to stay but the game is just full of fireball warriors - i have had more fireball reports in my Grand Marshall this weekend than anything else.  

Also they should not recover every 2.5 hours like raids it should be a 24 hour period.

You want people to use troops change it - level 6+ walls and fireballs have basically ruined castle wars.

Hello :)

When we released Fireballs, devs have balanced them to make sure they are not a game changer. Their current strength and the way they are working is balanced, and we are not planning to change it.

Though, such updates like a Unit that can be used against them, still can be added to the game.

But it isn't balanced - the level 6+ wall have basically eliminated 95% of the castles that I would hit as with any player that knows the game hitting a well fortified castle will cost you a lot of troops - so the only recourse is fireballs - I admit I got the higher level walls but fireballs are wasted on me because there is no point in defending a castle people will only hit with fireballs - I don't give points freely to people who only use fireballs for pvp

It depends on how many defensive Units a player has in the Castle as Bonus from defensive Buildings is added only if Units are stationed in the Castle.

we know that part but regardless of how many units are in a castle 10 fireballs will get you over 3000 points and the defenders get nothing so how is this making it worth defending against fireballs?  I have defended castles I know how it works.  So why would i give my enemies free points to earn more units without them incurring any troop loss of their own?

Fireballs are a Game changer. 

Alina , u can say what u want but this is reality!

If i defend my castle, I can get 10 packs of 10 fireballs from only 1 player= 100fireballs.

The other issue is that the fortifications bonus is not applied to FB.

I used to defend my castle with 10k griffins 10k golems 10k demons 10k nomands and 150k archers but in 2 weeks of fireballs...i was 0 units.

U know how meny attacks with units I recived in that 2 weeks ? ZERO ! I got only FB...minimum 100/day. Jez know that.

Jezebel said:

Alina Phoenix said:

Jezebel said:

Alina Phoenix said:

Jezebel said:

Fireballs - there needs to be more control on them - you should not be able to send 10 at a time and you should not be able to send more than 3 times at one castle.  I get they are here to stay but the game is just full of fireball warriors - i have had more fireball reports in my Grand Marshall this weekend than anything else.  

Also they should not recover every 2.5 hours like raids it should be a 24 hour period.

You want people to use troops change it - level 6+ walls and fireballs have basically ruined castle wars.

Hello :)

When we released Fireballs, devs have balanced them to make sure they are not a game changer. Their current strength and the way they are working is balanced, and we are not planning to change it.

Though, such updates like a Unit that can be used against them, still can be added to the game.

But it isn't balanced - the level 6+ wall have basically eliminated 95% of the castles that I would hit as with any player that knows the game hitting a well fortified castle will cost you a lot of troops - so the only recourse is fireballs - I admit I got the higher level walls but fireballs are wasted on me because there is no point in defending a castle people will only hit with fireballs - I don't give points freely to people who only use fireballs for pvp

It depends on how many defensive Units a player has in the Castle as Bonus from defensive Buildings is added only if Units are stationed in the Castle.

we know that part but regardless of how many units are in a castle 10 fireballs will get you over 3000 points and the defenders get nothing so how is this making it worth defending against fireballs?  I have defended castles I know how it works.  So why would i give my enemies free points to earn more units without them incurring any troop loss of their own?

Fireballs are a Game changer. 

Alina , u can say what u want but this is reality!

If i defend my castle, I can get 10 packs of 10 fireballs from only 1 player= 100fireballs.

The other issue is that the fortifications bonus is not applied to FB.

I used to defend my castle with 10k griffins 10k golems 10k demons 10k nomands and 150k archers but in 2 weeks of fireballs...i was 0 units.

U know how meny attacks with units I recived in that 2 weeks ? ZERO ! I got only FB...minimum 100/day. Jez know that.

hello the game is not what it was. could we not do a ratio for beacons?

 lvl1 ratio 1: 1

 lvl2 1: 2 

lvl3 1: 3

 lvl4 1: 4 

and lvl5 1: 5. 

for example at lvl 1 it is 1Millions def in it takes 1M off to take it. in lvl 5, there are 1 Millions of def in it takes 5 million to take it. because many leave the game, it will relaunch a dynamic.

Le Pape Yéku said:

hello the game is not what it was. could we not do a ratio for beacons?

 lvl1 ratio 1: 1

 lvl2 1: 2 

lvl3 1: 3

 lvl4 1: 4 

and lvl5 1: 5. 

for example at lvl 1 it is 1Millions def in it takes 1M off to take it. in lvl 5, there are 1 Millions of def in it takes 5 million to take it. because many leave the game, it will relaunch a dynamic.

not a bad idea in theory - but what about people who worked hard to upgrade fortresses, hero bonuses and lost arts to improve the stats of their troops - would this negate the need to do that any further? 

My suggestion cannot be concisely described in 20 words. so here it is.

On the name bar in the warriors screen for my league I would like to see:

1. An icon indicating ally/friend status. It could be a simple single letter size and contain A for ally, F for friend or N for neither. An extra feature will be to go to “Add to friends” screen if the icon contains N.

2 An icon indicating reinforcements. Again a simple single letter size containing Y for yes you have reinforcements at this player, and N for no you do not have any reinforcements there. An extra added feature will be to go to the garrison detail if the player clicks it and it contains Y or go to the Send Reinforcements screen if the player clicks it and it contains N.

These icons should be next to the “actions menu” screen you currently have in the name box on the warriors screen. Another thing you could do is instead of the actions I indicated above is to dynamically put those actions in the “actions menu” depending on the icon contents.

Purpose is to allow leagues to be more cohesive. For new leagues this is important due to their players are mostly new and are still learning how to navigate. I found learning how to do this with any efficiency takes being a player for some time.

Something you could do for the older players is add sorting to the garrison screen. I do not use it since going through something like 300 players to check if someone is missing is far to arduous.

Where are a benefits for deffensive oriented players in Mareths Quests?

In Daily Quests you receive 2 Warlock for train a 7 or 10...why you dont give us option to train a Golems?

In Weekly Quests you must defeat enemy units for 1 Fallen....why you dont give us option to earn a Hydras?

Normally,ratio 1:2...off VS deff..maybe a little bit of faith that we can tickle the hammers that circling around us like hungry sharks...

Hello

The suggestion I have is as a commander in league... I never seem to know who is actually online and playing within my league.  This often causes frustrations when you wish to organise a league event.   May I suggest that within the embassy next to league member name that there be a green activity light saying "online"  which can be seen by captains and commanders?  Too many "lurk".....

This game is very frustrating. I made great efforts not to go beyond level 65 in the battlegrounds. And despite that, I have very few low-level bgs. As soon as I start attacking low-level bgs on a daily basis, they disappear quickly. Every day, it appears only 5. This prevents me from forming a complete army: I can not produce defense against cavalry and infantry units.

Can you arrange things so that there are more low-level bgs that appear every day?

djmoody said:

Le Pape Yéku said:

hello the game is not what it was. could we not do a ratio for beacons?

 lvl1 ratio 1: 1

 lvl2 1: 2 

lvl3 1: 3

 lvl4 1: 4 

and lvl5 1: 5. 

for example at lvl 1 it is 1Millions def in it takes 1M off to take it. in lvl 5, there are 1 Millions of def in it takes 5 million to take it. because many leave the game, it will relaunch a dynamic.

Not a big fan of making invulnerable beacons.

Yes we need to bring back a beacon game, but if no-one can attack beacons we don't really have a beacon game. The problem Plarium have is how to make any game features work in the face of uber coined hammer. Like this suggestion, give def again uber hammer, has the side effect of killing off any beacon wars between sensibly sized leagues.

Personally I think beacon attack limits like fortress is the least impacting way to restore some balance. Effectively you neuter the uber hammers by making any offence above the limit of no value whatsoever. But it wouldn't effect the attacks of a normal league who would be under the limit.

If we were to go to increasing beacon def stats then I would suggest that the def boost comes from the number of beacons held (but you would have to have address uber hammers before this would have any impact).

The trade off between holding big def in a few beacons and spreading thinner would be quite interesting. Would take quite a lot of consideration to work out the best balance for your league.

You would also get quite an interesting diplo / meta game opportunity. An alliance of leagues could agree to take heavy losses each to kill a specific enemies beacons and in doing so would weaken all the others which could then be taken for much lower losses. The beacon game is after all about encouraging people to play the MMO element to the max and interact with other people heavily. What at one time looked invulnerable could in fact become vulnerable.

I fear the only real way to sort the game out is to remove the coined uber hammers and compensate the players that own them, then remove troops from the market. And Plarium are never go to do this, they don't value the long term survial of their titles against short term profits.

I think when attacking becons and forts, it need to be an action of commitment. As this is large scale attacks of sorts. It should involve a sort of siege mechanics, not just troops arrive, smash and go again in less than a blink of an eye. Such a battle the attacker should gradual degrade the defense before over run it (if got power for it), regardless of how big the attacker is... In the process the attacking part would have his offense exposed for counter attacks by the league holding the becon/fort.

I know this is a fantasy game, but blitz war fare with huge "medieval" shaped armies is just ludacris. They already made it so you can level troops up after level 20 and offense get higher defense, so to expose your offense to a counter attack shouldn't be a total loss. 

You need to make becons and forts a more "involved affair", and a greater happening than what they are atm. 

djmoody said:

Talon said:

Thanks for your suggestion :)

The thing is that it's a big feature that will require creating a new balance; server, client, and UX/UI development; artists’ work, etc..  And we don't accept this kind of suggestions: https://plarium.com/forum/en/stormfall-age-of-war/suggestions/31546_which-suggestions-we--do-not--accept/

Our developers already plan to work on the changes and updates for the League Fortress functionality. So, let's see with what ideas they'll come up :)

Hi, thanks for your reply.  I can understand that. I will post some more suggestions then.

Question, do you want the games to survive?

If you want any long term future for the games then you need to sort out the beacon game IMMEDIATELY. It's the long term content that makes the game an MMO, requires communication, co-ordination, strategy, diplomacy i.e. in short can only be achieved by an effective team of people not players effectively playing solo. It is the MMO content.

In the community chat January 11th, they pretty much said there will be NO CHANGES to becons though :( Which sucks for all of us. On their youtube channel they released a video saying there would be no super becons, but that not really what we asked for or need either. There need to be an balance to the game. The balance Plarium keep scream about every time we ask for changes.

I know this game been around for a while now and the people they have working on the game now, not likely to been the ones that created the legacy code for this stuff, and I know from experience, if you start dig to deep into things there is a chance you need to start re-write a lot of code. But the most simplest short term fix, would be to alter the force limits, like put them in line with what the facebook version have. And that change doesn't require much in the way of update to the code. 

There are relics for golems but none for demons - demons are used in the game a lot since you give them as rewards in tournaments there should be relics for demons

mb_lurker said:

My suggestion cannot be concisely described in 20 words. so here it is.

On the name bar in the warriors screen for my league I would like to see:

1. An icon indicating ally/friend status. It could be a simple single letter size and contain A for ally, F for friend or N for neither. An extra feature will be to go to “Add to friends” screen if the icon contains N.

2 An icon indicating reinforcements. Again a simple single letter size containing Y for yes you have reinforcements at this player, and N for no you do not have any reinforcements there. An extra added feature will be to go to the garrison detail if the player clicks it and it contains Y or go to the Send Reinforcements screen if the player clicks it and it contains N.

These icons should be next to the “actions menu” screen you currently have in the name box on the warriors screen. Another thing you could do is instead of the actions I indicated above is to dynamically put those actions in the “actions menu” depending on the icon contents.

Purpose is to allow leagues to be more cohesive. For new leagues this is important due to their players are mostly new and are still learning how to navigate. I found learning how to do this with any efficiency takes being a player for some time.

Something you could do for the older players is add sorting to the garrison screen. I do not use it since going through something like 300 players to check if someone is missing is far to arduous.

Hello.

Thanks for your suggestion! 

Both suggestions on adding additional "Status" Icons have been forwarded to devs already as well as the suggestion for changes in the Beacons menu :)

Where are a benefits for deffensive oriented players in Mareths Quests?

In Daily Quests you receive 2 Warlock for train a 7 or 10...why you dont give us option to train a Golems?

In Weekly Quests you must defeat enemy units for 1 Fallen....why you dont give us option to earn a Hydras?

Normally,ratio 1:2...off VS deff..maybe a little bit of faith that we can tickle the hammers that circling around us like hungry sharks...

onedoug902 said:

Hello

The suggestion I have is as a commander in league... I never seem to know who is actually online and playing within my league.  This often causes frustrations when you wish to organise a league event.   May I suggest that within the embassy next to league member name that there be a green activity light saying "online"  which can be seen by captains and commanders?  Too many "lurk".....

Thank you for hearing me out :D

Hello.

This feature can't be implemented technically with the current game engine, but it can be done in the future with the new engine.

Erwan said:

This game is very frustrating. I made great efforts not to go beyond level 65 in the battlegrounds. And despite that, I have very few low-level bgs. As soon as I start attacking low-level bgs on a daily basis, they disappear quickly. Every day, it appears only 5. This prevents me from forming a complete army: I can not produce defense against cavalry and infantry units.

Can you arrange things so that there are more low-level bgs that appear every day?

A slighlty more radical suggestion which would achieve the same end would be to allow users to reset their BG level. 

More low level BG's isn't necessarily a good thing. Many a time I have been frustrated as hell that all my spawns are low level and the game won't give me a sensible high level to drive a payout from.

But resetting BG level would allow players the freedom to alter their BG levels to suit their current playing needs/requirements.

Erwan said:

My suggestion is the following: you create a system of seasons,

I thought you were going somewhere else with this..... but you sparked an idea of my own.

I liked the snow update for X-mas. In a game that is pretty static and unchanging it gave the game the game-world a little bit more sense of being alive. 

So why not build on the idea and have have a full 4 seasons, each with it's own graphics for the castle and the world map.

But not only that, if the seasons had impacts on the game they could stimulate more strategy options. Potentially attacking in winter could be more difficult giving the defender higher defence bonus. Travel time in winter could be longer (although it might nice that it was a bonus of being faster in summer). Maybe troop production time could be lower in winter (everyone is at home in the warm with more time for training), possibly spying has a bonus in winter given increased cover and less daylight time.

Balanced right it might be interesting to see people plan activities, taking advantage of the best times to do certain things.

djmoody said:

Erwan said:

My suggestion is the following: you create a system of seasons,

I thought you were going somewhere else with this..... but you sparked an idea of my own.

I liked the snow update for X-mas. In a game that is pretty static and unchanging it gave the game the game-world a little bit more sense of being alive. 

So why not build on the idea and have have a full 4 seasons, each with it's own graphics for the castle and the world map.

But not only that, if the seasons had impacts on the game they could stimulate more strategy options. Potentially attacking in winter could be more difficult giving the defender higher defence bonus. Travel time in winter could be longer (although it might nice that it was a bonus of being faster in summer). Maybe troop production time could be lower in winter (everyone is at home in the warm with more time for training), possibly spying has a bonus in winter given increased cover and less daylight time.

Balanced right it might be interesting to see people plan activities, taking advantage of the best times to do certain things.

With the new game engine, it's planned to improve the graphics significantly as well. I think in the future it will allow us to have more changes related to seasons :)

Gadheras said:

djmoody said:

Le Pape Yéku said:

hello the game is not what it was. could we not do a ratio for beacons?

 lvl1 ratio 1: 1

 lvl2 1: 2 

lvl3 1: 3

 lvl4 1: 4 

and lvl5 1: 5. 

for example at lvl 1 it is 1Millions def in it takes 1M off to take it. in lvl 5, there are 1 Millions of def in it takes 5 million to take it. because many leave the game, it will relaunch a dynamic.

Not a big fan of making invulnerable beacons.

Yes we need to bring back a beacon game, but if no-one can attack beacons we don't really have a beacon game. The problem Plarium have is how to make any game features work in the face of uber coined hammer. Like this suggestion, give def again uber hammer, has the side effect of killing off any beacon wars between sensibly sized leagues.

Personally I think beacon attack limits like fortress is the least impacting way to restore some balance. Effectively you neuter the uber hammers by making any offence above the limit of no value whatsoever. But it wouldn't effect the attacks of a normal league who would be under the limit.

If we were to go to increasing beacon def stats then I would suggest that the def boost comes from the number of beacons held (but you would have to have address uber hammers before this would have any impact).

The trade off between holding big def in a few beacons and spreading thinner would be quite interesting. Would take quite a lot of consideration to work out the best balance for your league.

You would also get quite an interesting diplo / meta game opportunity. An alliance of leagues could agree to take heavy losses each to kill a specific enemies beacons and in doing so would weaken all the others which could then be taken for much lower losses. The beacon game is after all about encouraging people to play the MMO element to the max and interact with other people heavily. What at one time looked invulnerable could in fact become vulnerable.

I fear the only real way to sort the game out is to remove the coined uber hammers and compensate the players that own them, then remove troops from the market. And Plarium are never go to do this, they don't value the long term survial of their titles against short term profits.

I think when attacking becons and forts, it need to be an action of commitment. As this is large scale attacks of sorts. It should involve a sort of siege mechanics, not just troops arrive, smash and go again in less than a blink of an eye. Such a battle the attacker should gradual degrade the defense before over run it (if got power for it), regardless of how big the attacker is... In the process the attacking part would have his offense exposed for counter attacks by the league holding the becon/fort.

I know this is a fantasy game, but blitz war fare with huge "medieval" shaped armies is just ludacris. They already made it so you can level troops up after level 20 and offense get higher defense, so to expose your offense to a counter attack shouldn't be a total loss. 

You need to make becons and forts a more "involved affair", and a greater happening than what they are atm. 

Hello.