PDA

View Full Version : Game Suggestions



Pages : [1] 2

Wasian
29th December 2013, 11:21 PM
Any chance there could be code added that will give alliance owners/admins the ability to delete old alliance threads in the in game messaging system? That way new alliance recruits don't look down and get intimidated by seeing 1208937592813759 new message. lol xD Or at the very least let us archive it in a place that regular members won't have to view all threads to get rid of the new messages notifications.

andyt683
30th December 2013, 12:10 AM
Working on the regular system first, and it'll translate well to the alliance system

Wasian
30th December 2013, 12:23 AM
Ok thanks andy

Kronikdeath
30th December 2013, 11:04 AM
I think a daily click bonus would be cool, so if you click a lot every day you get a soldier bonus in return for the hard work :) Another suggestion is to try to get an ad onto a website like facebook that would bring growth to the game!

OutlawDragon
30th December 2013, 07:19 PM
I think a daily click bonus would be cool, so if you click a lot every day you get a soldier bonus in return for the hard work :) Another suggestion is to try to get an ad onto a website like facebook that would bring growth to the game!

The reward for clicking is the soldiers you get from it. Getting a bonus would just widen the gap between the people who have all day to click and the people who don't. An ad would be awesome.. I'm pretty sure those cost money though.

andyt683
30th December 2013, 08:05 PM
Definitely not a facebook ad, no one reads those, and they're basically the joke of the ad community.

SonicRage
1st January 2014, 06:41 AM
Can we remove the san upgrade it still doesn't work and doesn't seem to be getting worked on.

SonicRage
1st January 2014, 06:50 AM
or remove till ready

andyt683
1st January 2014, 07:01 AM
Whoops, that button was supposed to stay in my beta land, must have leaked during one of my uploads...

MFnBonsai
1st January 2014, 07:59 AM
Whoops, that button was supposed to stay in my beta land, must have leaked during one of my uploads...

Oct 18, 2013 | Sabotage Upgrade
This is just a notice that the new mission will activate in one week. You will be limited to one sabotage upgrade per day. They do not accumulate if you don't use them.

If this delayed start thing works, it will continue on into other rounds the same way.

andyt683
2nd January 2014, 07:21 AM
Oct 18, 2013 | Sabotage Upgrade
This is just a notice that the new mission will activate in one week. You will be limited to one sabotage upgrade per day. They do not accumulate if you don't use them.

If this delayed start thing works, it will continue on into other rounds the same way.

Our news system is independent of our git server.

Carlos
2nd January 2014, 06:19 PM
-Remove the top sabbers list
-Restore the commander's UP trickling down thing

andyt683
2nd January 2014, 06:43 PM
-Remove the top sabbers list
-Restore the commander's UP trickling down thing

-Just mass the #1 sabber every day. It's going to turn into an alliance war anyways, because it's all one alliance doing the sabbing. They'd probably be doing this without the list, too.
-No thanks.

Carlos
3rd January 2014, 03:38 AM
I dont like the top sabbers thing, it's a way for noobs to get some extra attention, plus it's always nice to check when the age ends who was the best sabber. Why don't you make all stats public then?

Then the game is going to go downhill. 10-20 active clickers who can afford the UPs and the rest will barely manage to get the 3b one.

Will-
3rd January 2014, 10:12 AM
agree with carlos the up trickle was excellent i say you put up an ingame poll !

Wasian
3rd January 2014, 11:49 AM
agree with carlos the up trickle was excellent i say you put up an ingame poll !

I third this motion. UP trickle was a nice way to encourage nonclickers to still play actively even if didn't have time/want to click.

Valheru_Prince
4th January 2014, 08:07 PM
I'm new to this. UP trickles? And whats the Kill Ratio? How to get it to go higher?

tai_ne_po_ni
5th January 2014, 01:39 AM
Then the game is going to go downhill. 10-20 active clickers who can afford the UPs and the rest will barely manage to get the 3b one.

The guys clicking and banking are doing exactly what the admins want.. Sitting hour after hour on this game. So it's why it won't change.
The UP trickle was so good, yes the difference is always going to be there with TFF size, but really, not man people think they will ever get their name on #1.
But a lot more will play and have fun if they can grow a little quicker and have a decent army size.

Totally agree this feature should be implemented

FallenOne
5th January 2014, 08:00 AM
i'd rather not have the UP trickle; i mean that's why we have UP; you could increase UP but i am also against that.
by installing UP trickle especially at half the rate like before or increasing UP (depending on how much); you reduce the value of clicking; because the ratio of UP to clicking is a lot closer.
if you want faster starts we could start off with more soldiers, but it has never bothered me.

and no i do not click a lot but the value of clicking should remain as it does.
the player database will not drastically increase so it doesn't matter what changes are made, all online computer games lose players overtime.

OutlawDragon
5th January 2014, 10:02 AM
I dont like the top sabbers thing, it's a way for noobs to get some extra attention, plus it's always nice to check when the age ends who was the best sabber. Why don't you make all stats public then?

Then the game is going to go downhill. 10-20 active clickers who can afford the UPs and the rest will barely manage to get the 3b one.

I don't have a problem with the top sabber thing.. The top clicker and slayer lists are available so why shouldn't the sabbing one be as well?

I think that the current UP system is contributing to the player population shrinking. I don't have the desire or time to spend hours clicking to be able to have a good account. However, under the previous UP system I used to be able to have a decent TFF and account by maxing out my UP quickly. Now I can't increase my UP fast enough to stay even semi-competitive with the larger accounts. Makes the game pretty pointless to me because I don't even have a chance to have a decent account compared to the clickers anymore. Which might be why the game is losing some players. The game's "middle class" is shrinking because the players who don't have time to click large amounts consistently can't make decent accounts (compared to the clickers accounts) anymore. People just move on to another game where you can have a decent account without having to spend hours doing something as boring as clicking.

Wasian
5th January 2014, 02:07 PM
I don't have a problem with the top sabber thing.. The top clicker and slayer lists are available so why shouldn't the sabbing one be as well?

I think that the current UP system is contributing to the player population shrinking. I don't have the desire or time to spend hours clicking to be able to have a good account. However, under the previous UP system I used to be able to have a decent TFF and account by maxing out my UP quickly. Now I can't increase my UP fast enough to stay even semi-competitive with the larger accounts. Makes the game pretty pointless to me because I don't even have a chance to have a decent account compared to the clickers anymore. Which might be why the game is losing some players. The game's "middle class" is shrinking because the players who don't have time to click large amounts consistently can't make decent accounts (compared to the clickers accounts) anymore. People just move on to another game where you can have a decent account without having to spend hours doing something as boring as clicking.

For sure big clickers definitely have the upper hand. But, to build a moderate account, you don't need to click too much. I've only clicked about 45k this age (half of what some of the bigs do in 1 day) and if I balanced my stats right now, I could easily be in the top 10 (which I know isn't a huge feat at this point of the age). But, for many people, that would be an exciting rank to have. A lot of it is just a matter of how you play the game. A few age/rounds back, I ranked #9 without even having a trickle spot, much less being a main account. We also have an alliance member that consistently can easily rank in the 30's with 0 clicks and he never balances his stats to rank. I could give more examples but I think this is sufficient to say that even people who don't click an insane amount can have strong accounts.

andyt683
5th January 2014, 07:54 PM
I'm honestly not even considering the UP trickle idea again. It appeared after I left the first time, and was removed shortly thereafter, so I don't know exactly why it was removed, but I can guess.

Passive bonuses like trickling don't really make the game more "fun", they just unbalance the game and inflate the economy. If anything, it would increase the gaps between large chains and smaller ones.

Kronikdeath
5th January 2014, 08:08 PM
Andy, can you make it so you can display a public message when someone clicks on your profile? It used to be this way and it was helpful because you could tell people acceptable gold to hit for and more!

Will-
5th January 2014, 11:47 PM
I'm honestly not even considering the UP trickle idea again. It appeared after I left the first time, and was removed shortly thereafter, so I don't know exactly why it was removed, but I can guess.

Passive bonuses like trickling don't really make the game more "fun", they just unbalance the game and inflate the economy. If anything, it would increase the gaps between large chains and smaller ones.


thats taking it to extremes andy because the game is so small chains aren't as important your seeing the best of chains right now with the current economy if you put the up trickle back every player will have more FUN (remember what that is) ? so we wont need big chains to succeed the avg player will have a better account and im sorry to say but in this case the players are right

we are the ones spending hour after hours playing this so we know the up's and downs better then an admin ever could(no offence) the game is going downhill this is one way to fix it we would all hate to see roc die and it's ideas like this that will help us fix it :)

Valheru_Prince
6th January 2014, 04:05 AM
Let's post some stuff, prolly not great plans but who knows... might be the base of something good.

- Event: Switch stats. SA becomes DA, Sentry becomes Spy. Makes the big account vulnarable (as in, they too need to bank, even when they have outgrown top slayers) and allows smaller players with balanced stats to slay for good gold. (Specialized slayers can't hit the big accounts since they usually have low DA so they won't have much SA during the event).

- Limited clicks PER ALLIANCE. Say an alliance can do only 500k daily clicks, or perhaps give individual players a click limit of a daily 50k or so. This might encourage top clickers to send more to trickle accounts allowing more big accounts.

- Temporary army. Everyone gets a one week mercenary army that gives TBG. Say the army is 20k or so and stays active for a week then disappears. Players can choose when to use the army but the later in the age you use it the larger the army is. It might help slow starters get their accounts going while the big clickers will choose to use the army later when the amount of soldiers is bigger...

Carlos
6th January 2014, 05:20 AM
I'm honestly not even considering the UP trickle idea again. It appeared after I left the first time, and was removed shortly thereafter, so I don't know exactly why it was removed, but I can guess.

Passive bonuses like trickling don't really make the game more "fun", they just unbalance the game and inflate the economy. If anything, it would increase the gaps between large chains and smaller ones.

Ok then, with the current system an average clicking player who banks almost perfecty wont be able to buy all of the UPs. The 6b one will barely be profitable, 12b one will be just a waste of gold. Now try to encourage players, in which I include myself, to play when all I can do is grow 8k per day max if i click what a normal player would do (3,000) + my current UP.

Either go back to the old UP system (no clue what made you think that adding a 6b and a 13b one would make the game more enjoyable) or at least, as a way to only partially solve the problem, reintroduce the trickle. Else, good luck with a game full of players like me

Totals
Gold Generated 446,609,794 Gold
Pillaged 0 Gold
Gold Lost to Attacks 119,562,656 Gold
Gold Lost to Sabotage 6,710,000 Gold
Sabotage Damage (condensed) 0 Gold
Sabotage Cost 0 Gold

Where'd dem soldiers come from?
Soldiers from unit production 45,550
Soldiers from others' clicks on you 4,030
Soldiers from clicks on yourself 613
Soldiers from clicks trickled up 1,114
Soldiers from credit deflation 450
Soldiers from activity bonus 9,550

Strike: 13,776,442 #128
Defense: 24,796 #293
Spy: 3,500 #300
Sentry: 14,000 #280

As you can see, my motivation to do one click is just above 0, it's useless, unless I do 50k a day it will take me nowhere.

@Whoever said that you can rank top30 without clicking: Sure you can, out of the top50, about 35 people sell when the age ends. I don't care about my EoA rank, what I enjoy is the other 3 months. If I end #4 fine, if I end #400 fine too. Actually, I have only ended one age in the top200 and I have been playing since the first betas in the summer of 2008 or so.

Valheru_Prince
6th January 2014, 06:07 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but when UP trickle would take place it would mainly benefit the people with lots of officers right? The chain leaders or in other words, the people that were already ahead by a mile.

Besides, it would encourage creating fake accounts to slay and upgrade UP just to get fast soldiers on your main account. I don't think it's THE solution...

andyt683
6th January 2014, 11:14 AM
it was helpful because you could tell people acceptable gold to hit for and more!

It was taken away for precisely this reason.


we are the ones spending hour after hours playing this so we know the up's and downs better then an admin ever could

Because there's no way I might have game experience... from maybe playing the game I work on? Plus, we don't just blindly throw out changes (most times), they have numbers and formulas behind them. I think I'd have a deeper understanding than you can begin to imagine.


(no clue what made you think that adding a 6b and a 13b one would make the game more enjoyable)

Are you saying take away UP levels just because you feel they're not cost effective? A soldier doesn't need to earn back his upgrade to be useful....

Will-
6th January 2014, 07:35 PM
Carlos is right this is something important to us as the only players bothering to give you feedback you should listen bring back the trickle and set a click limit these will help balance the playing field i mean i click 5k a day but im still not going to be top 20 even after the sells

compare these stats to carlos's

Soldiers from unit production 112,751
Soldiers from others' clicks on you 24,356
Soldiers from clicks on yourself 5,768
Soldiers from clicks trickled up 959
Soldiers from credit deflation 8,460
Soldiers from activity bonus 9,550

and my sa da spy sentry are irrelevant since i just sold for a up :P

so im working harder then carlos is (as an example) yet i wont benefit from it very much just think if you cap clicks at 50k a day people will click almost all age rather then half of it it also means youll balance the bf alittle with there being less gaps to the non clicking players the unit production trickle also will allow bigger tff's and make it so you can almost get all of the unit production (like it use to be)

so in short it takes 3 simeple things to rebalance the game

SonicRage
6th January 2014, 09:31 PM
Or could we create a up system that cost so much per 1 soldier and make it raise price after every 10. Make up system per turn. Increasing tbg and slaying making slaying more fun.

Also makes bankers have to play harder cause tbg would be rasing faster.

And the more you spend on UP the better chance to compete with people who click. But clickers will always have the upper hand cause they have time to waste.

You could even attempt a trickle through UP but if the system was like that or similar it will give everyone more chance by just building up but would also bring a fun factor in with slaying banking and Sabbers would benefit from a proper growth.

tai_ne_po_ni
7th January 2014, 12:35 AM
Something should be done to even it out.

Swiper was removed because of the gap between players..

Now the ageless old argument of clicking is the same..

It's still no equal

FallenOne
7th January 2014, 02:24 AM
i don't agree with a click limit, it limits the aspirations or desires of those who want to click a lot; if that is how they want to spend their time we should not be allowed to stop them.
the only limits which already exist should be attack turns, attack attempts and sab attempts for obvious reasons.
i wouldn't mind the old UP system 40k for 3.2bn but i do think covert deaths should increase when probed then probing can be used as a much more destructive tool in war.

Wasian
7th January 2014, 10:24 AM
@Whoever said that you can rank top30 without clicking: Sure you can, out of the top50, about 35 people sell when the age ends. I don't care about my EoA rank, what I enjoy is the other 3 months. If I end #4 fine, if I end #400 fine too. Actually, I have only ended one age in the top200 and I have been playing since the first betas in the summer of 2008 or so.

I wasn't just talking about eoa rank. Right now, I could balance stats and probably rank top 10 and I've clicked under 50k for the entire age cumulatively. Now, I know better than to just play for rank early in the age, so my rank sucks (still mainly in the 20's). But, for some people, sitting on a top 10 position during any time would be very exciting.

@will-

Limiting clicks will only mean that the alliances/chains with the most people will usually be the best. Small chains who want to spend their lives clicking have no chance at clicking their way to the top. If you don't want to click a lot, that's your choice. But, to take that away from someone who does isn't the answer.

@Everyone

I think perhaps giving more turns per day would help bring balance for those who want to slay. As it stands, slayers can hit 4 people per day. Maybe raise that to 6-8 and things will get very interesting.

Kronikdeath
7th January 2014, 01:59 PM
I really don't like the idea of limited clicking. All players should be able to gain a TFF advantage over the rest of the battlefield by out clicking all. I agree with Carlos on the UP upgrades. The last one is not even worth it. I also can suggest to start using some of the old events like the hippie one where you can let the BF build some gold. I am getting tired of seeing "nightwalk" and "charge" every time I check current events...

Valheru_Prince
7th January 2014, 06:19 PM
@Everyone

I think perhaps giving more turns per day would help bring balance for those who want to slay. As it stands, slayers can hit 4 people per day. Maybe raise that to 6-8 and things will get very interesting.

Not really. I have a top 10 spy and SA but the amount of people i can hit (as in, decent gold, low enough DA&sentry) is almost 0. I don't like clicking but that doesn't mean I'm not active. I have to check events, stalk people for gold, be carefull i don't waste recons as i only have so many options to see if people are holding good gold behind massive sentry. And on top of that, i have the risk of an attack being unsuccesfull (someone beating me to the gold at turn). On the other hand I need to bank as close to 100% of my income to keep up with the DA's as long as possible. So slaying is fun for a few days, then the only "slayers" left are the people that have clicked a lot and still have a few targets left. There really is no other way to play this game than clicking. A lot.

And thats where the thread started with. Many people think clicking is boring (new players might get scared by the massive amounts of clicks done by dedicated top players) and choose to try and slay. Then the clickers soon become untouchable and slaying also becomes boring.

I'll try to get some info to show...

OutlawDragon
7th January 2014, 06:41 PM
I wasn't just talking about eoa rank. Right now, I could balance stats and probably rank top 10 and I've clicked under 50k for the entire age cumulatively. Now, I know better than to just play for rank early in the age, so my rank sucks (still mainly in the 20's). But, for some people, sitting on a top 10 position during any time would be very exciting.

@will-

Limiting clicks will only mean that the alliances/chains with the most people will usually be the best. Small chains who want to spend their lives clicking have no chance at clicking their way to the top. If you don't want to click a lot, that's your choice. But, to take that away from someone who does isn't the answer.

@Everyone

I think perhaps giving more turns per day would help bring balance for those who want to slay. As it stands, slayers can hit 4 people per day. Maybe raise that to 6-8 and things will get very interesting.

Alot of people don't care about rank. I play to slay and sab, there have only been 1-2 of the 15 or so ages that I have played where I did not sell off. But if I have no chance to slay or sab because I have no chance to compete with the people who click all day there is no point in me playing.

-

I agree that limiting clicks is not the answer and is a bad idea. If you are able and willing to put in that much work you deserve to have that advantage.

But it shouldn't give you so much of an advantage that it makes it pointless for people who don't have that kind of time to play because they have no chance to compete at all. If the Unit Production levels maxed out at around 30-40k a day and the highest cost stopped at 1.6b or so like it used to then it would give the people who can't click 50k a day everyday a chance.
Of course the clickers will be able to max out their UPs first. But having a 40k Max UP that is very achievable for everyone would devalue clicking a little bit.

For example if you click 50k a day now and have 20-30k UP you're gaining 80k tff a day. Where as the people who can't click that much and therefore can't afford those more expensive UPs are stuck with the 15k UP and only get that much growth a day. That is 80k vs. 15k growth per day which is a huge gap that makes the game pretty unenjoyable for the one stuck at 15k because they can't compete at all.

If the max UP was an achievable inexpensive 40k then the people doing the clicking would grow 90k a day and the ones that don't have the time would grow 40k. 90k vs. 40k is still a large gap but not an insurmountable one. It would make the game more enjoyable and actually bring some strategy into the game instead of it just being about who can click the most.

-

I don't think that increasing the amount of turns would do any good. If you increased it from 4 to 8 attacks a day it would just devalue the attack turns to where people who would normally hit for 40M an attack would just hit more times for 20m. Which would just piss most people off because you'd have to bank pretty much every other turn or so to keep your gold.

Valheru_Prince
7th January 2014, 06:49 PM
Top SA's/Size/Estimated amount of people they can hit (500+k army size):
Ghost_Striker 1,802,816 Orcs [23]24=all, but can't hit self
Mitt_Promney 1,157,369 Orcs [17]
Relentless- 1,105,998 Orcs
Osiris 1,201,382 Orcs
MuzGash 419,040 Orcs
Trinsic 283,890 Orcs
Vredesbyrd 253,667 Orcs
Hiato 128,976 Orcs
Vicious 154,781 Orcs
Valheru_Prince 72,346 Orcs [4]

Won't give away everything but as you can see there is only one slayer that can (perhaps) hit all people and then there are 6 of his targets that he doesn't need to compete for. He can only hit 4 daily so 2 of them are safe to even outgrow the #1 slayer. And that is a slayer that has gotten quite some soldiers, most people will never get to 1.8 million soldiers. So I think it is safe to say, slaying a not an age-long playstyle.

andyt683
7th January 2014, 08:01 PM
Top SA's/Size/Estimated amount of people they can hit (500+k army size):
Ghost_Striker 1,802,816 Orcs [23]24=all, but can't hit self
Mitt_Promney 1,157,369 Orcs [17]

...

Valheru_Prince 72,346 Orcs [4]

Won't give away everything but as you can see there is only one slayer that can (perhaps) hit all people and then there are 6 of his targets that he doesn't need to compete for. He can only hit 4 daily so 2 of them are safe to even outgrow the #1 slayer. And that is a slayer that has gotten quite some soldiers, most people will never get to 1.8 million soldiers. So I think it is safe to say, slaying a not an age-long playstyle.

It looks like this is more a TBG problem than anything. Obviously, Valheru_Prince needs to train down for slaying, so isn't 500k+, and you can't expect him to always be able to beat half a million soldiers with his 70k.

But he should be able to make up a fair amount of the TBG gap with his slaying, provided he has an equal amount of coverts. Somewhere along the lines, numbers probably got changed without factoring this in....

Kronikdeath
7th January 2014, 08:06 PM
After reading all of this I think orcs should have some sort of UP bonus. The UP upgrades can cost a bit less for the orcs then in return the other races can get a small boost to there bonus. What do you guys think of this?

Wasian
7th January 2014, 09:08 PM
I understand that many people don't play for rank. But, there are A LOT who do. I'm just saying with a bit of strategy, it's really not that hard to build a top 20 account for most people. I'm playing a slayer this age, and I'm doing fairly well. And, when I ranked #9 a few rounds back without any trickle, I did so as a slayer. It's just a matter of strategy. Have I ranked better as a clicking tank? Yes. But, many people would be happy with a top 10 finish.

@Outlaw

Doubling the turns won't halve the amount slayed for if turns are every 15 minutes instead of 30. The gold will build up more often. This makes it more difficult to bank 100% but better to slay. This would close quite a bit of the gap for some players who aren't glued to this game to bank every turn.

@valheru

I don't know what kind of hits you're looking for, but my spy/sa aren't too far behind you and I'm doing just fine with a smallish army (around 200k or so I think). Hitting for 60-80m is achievable for many players with minimal effort, especially if they have alliance members to help spy out hits. I know I easily hold 60m and my DA is trash, not even top 100. With a bit of patience and strategy, hitting 100m at this point is quite easy. This is quite sufficient to get most players who wanted to rank nestled in the top 20. And I'm sure with your spy/sa I'd say you could hit even better, I'm guessing 150-200m? And that would probably be enough for rank 5 or 6 if you cared to balance your stats. All I'm saying is, most people know that a top 5 finish is reserved for the big clickers. But, to achieve top 20 would make many people very happy. And this is quite doable even without much clicking.

Carlos
8th January 2014, 01:18 AM
I wasn't complaining about clicking, I don't mind people who do 100k a day. What I was saying is that before, RoC could be played by both clickers and non clickers. Of couse the clickers would be ranked higher, elsewise would make no sense. But the nonclickers could enjoy the game. In BL we ended several ages with #1 spy, #2 SA and once even a top5 spot. Now the non clicker is doomed, by the time he has a decent UP and decides to raise his stats, the age will be over. I consider myself a good non clicking banker and I am still at the 9k one.

So in conclusion, leave the clicking as it is right now but please change the UP back to the old system, trickle or not, that I don't really mind.

http://www.ruinsofchaos.com/history.php?&gameid=19
Me ending top5 without clicking or being a trickle, try that now

Valheru_Prince
8th January 2014, 03:12 AM
@Wasian

I get hit for 40 mil, slaying for 150-200 mil indeed, always in top slayer list but it gets harder and harder. I dont have alliance help so i gotta spy for myself. But finishing top 20? Hell no, no way. But that doesn't matter, since i don't really play for rank. I won my speed round and won't go for rank in a normal age. And you have no idea what the gap with the top ranks is :P
But I slay around 2,5-3x my tbg-income so i can pretend to be a 300k army :P
Gold Generated 1,400,815,610 Gold
Pillaged 3,723,763,830 Gold
Gold Lost to Attacks 156,294,800 Gold

Wasian
8th January 2014, 09:03 AM
@Wasian

I get hit for 40 mil, slaying for 150-200 mil indeed, always in top slayer list but it gets harder and harder. I dont have alliance help so i gotta spy for myself. But finishing top 20? Hell no, no way. But that doesn't matter, since i don't really play for rank. I won my speed round and won't go for rank in a normal age. And you have no idea what the gap with the top ranks is :P
But I slay around 2,5-3x my tbg-income so i can pretend to be a 300k army :P
Gold Generated 1,400,815,610 Gold
Pillaged 3,723,763,830 Gold
Gold Lost to Attacks 156,294,800 Gold

In my case, I AM the alliance help in spying out hits for the smaller guys, so no help for me either lol. Spy is only #19 atm as I've been neglecting it for a few days now, but it is still sufficient to recon anyone with lower DA for my alliance.

And you're right, I can't spy some of the higher ranks right now. But the gap in the top 2-3 account values and the rest of us is usually ridiculously huge. In one of the speed rounds, I ranked #4 (#6 clicker), and #1 had probably 5x my value easily. So yeah, the gap is enormous. But, when you think about the possibility of someone striving for top 20 to be happy, that's really quite doable even for nonclickers.

Valheru_Prince
8th January 2014, 06:11 PM
Would it be an idea to give people a choice when a new age starts:

Start with 100k soldiers but you can't use the recruiter for the rest of the age (or perhaps a restricted recruiter with 5k clicks daily max) or start age without extra soldiers but with working recruiter.

100k free soldiers is a lot but it gets the gold going for the average joe that plays the game. And the clickers can click that in 1-2 days to catch up in TFF so throughout the age it won;t matter that much....

Wasian
8th January 2014, 09:10 PM
Would it be an idea to give people a choice when a new age starts:

Start with 100k soldiers but you can't use the recruiter for the rest of the age (or perhaps a restricted recruiter with 5k clicks daily max) or start age without extra soldiers but with working recruiter.

100k free soldiers is a lot but it gets the gold going for the average joe that plays the game. And the clickers can click that in 1-2 days to catch up in TFF so throughout the age it won;t matter that much....

The only problem with limiting clicks would be that the big alliances/chains would have the advantage every time. This is why the SR in KoC has a dynasty right now. They are the largest alliance by far and no one stands a chance to take #1. If something like that was implemented in RoC, I could see 2 mega chains forming that comprise 70% of the RoC population in order to compete for the top spot. All smaller alliances could only hope for a #3 or #4 finish at best.

andyt683
9th January 2014, 05:13 AM
I think you guys are missing the point if you're talking about removing or limiting clicking in a clicking game...

And I really don't see UP trickle going anywhere (again). The idea of activity giving more soldiers is the basis for this game, we just need to find more palatable methods of wasting time for those that dislike numbers.

Will-
9th January 2014, 06:05 AM
half the costs of up making the 13b one(the top one) 6.5 that would take half the age to bank which is the way it should then focus on stats for rest of age i get my idea was bad about limited clicking so work on the up either make it cheaper or re instate the trickle :) that will boost tbg making slaying closer to banking and it levels out the playing field

Valheru_Prince
9th January 2014, 08:00 AM
The only problem with limiting clicks would be that the big alliances/chains would have the advantage every time. This is why the SR in KoC has a dynasty right now. They are the largest alliance by far and no one stands a chance to take #1. If something like that was implemented in RoC, I could see 2 mega chains forming that comprise 70% of the RoC population in order to compete for the top spot. All smaller alliances could only hope for a #3 or #4 finish at best.

1) You are missing the point. I was suggesting to give people a choice. So people that don't click anyway get free soldiers, while clickers can just play the age normally. This way the clickers and DA/Sentry-whores will take a little longer to catch up, there will be more gold on the battlefield from the start and there is actually more to do at the start of the age. The only problem thats would need to be worked out when this would be implemented is trickle accounts. If you have an officer that clicks a lot and you yourself chose the start of age soldier bonus you will get a big advantage.

On the other hand, many of the trickle accounts help in giving clickback for everyone under main, so I think there actually are not many trickles that would chose to get 100k soldiers and NOT CLICK for the rest of the age...

2) UP trickle would not solve anything. Big accounts get their UP first, they can sell to their officers to get the trickle soldiers from them and it snowballs into the same problem as we have atm.

3) If activity giving more soldiers is key, why not hand out soldier bonussus for daily achievements, apart from the just logging in bonus? (compare time needed for the activity with average time to click and make it earn a little less than actually clicking)
For example
Spy 50 Targets=1k soldiers
Be top sabber= 2k soldiers
Don't get hit for 48 hours (requires intense banking)=2k soldiers

4) Would cheaper UP really change that much? No matter the cost, more TBG is earlier upgrades. But more expensive upgrades give others a chance of catching someone going for the upgrade and stealing heaps of gold and it will give people going for a UP upgrade a major setback. Could even add an event that lasts like 5 minutes or so: UP upgrades cost 90% of the normal gold. Everybody will want to upgrade during that, slaying heaven :)

Kronikdeath
9th January 2014, 03:20 PM
man where is the motivation in ROC???? This early in the age and only 20 people are clicking 10k a day??!!! Crazy!!!!!

Wasian
9th January 2014, 09:21 PM
man where is the motivation in ROC???? This early in the age and only 20 people are clicking 10k a day??!!! Crazy!!!!!

I think many got spoiled to swipe. I know that's the case with me. I've only clicked above 10k in a day a few times before getting bored and moving on to something else. Whereas before swipe, I could hit 20k without it being much of a problem.

On a side note, I think that perhaps making a minigame or series of minigames where points determine click credit prizes might be a really cool alternative to hitting numbers. Make traditional clicking more profitable for those who want to do it for the growth (maybe normal rate) and the minigame only 1/2 to 1/3 effective for getting click credits. This might make growing more fun and appealing for those who hate clicking but still want growth. :D

FallenOne
10th January 2014, 01:03 AM
i've always clicked; don't think i had access to swiper.
so it hasn't affected me.
the number clicking is dare i say... quite fun when you get into a rhythm.

andyt683
10th January 2014, 03:58 AM
On a side note, I think that perhaps making a minigame or series of minigames where points determine click credit prizes might be a really cool alternative to hitting numbers. Make traditional clicking more profitable for those who want to do it for the growth (maybe normal rate) and the minigame only 1/2 to 1/3 effective for getting click credits. This might make growing more fun and appealing for those who hate clicking but still want growth. :D

First step is changing how the click system works. There's no real reason for it not to be 1 credit is an immediate soldier, none of this "gives:gets" crap.

After that, yes, alternate methods of creating credits, and trading credits will be introduced. I'm thinking a casino at some point.

Valheru_Prince
10th January 2014, 04:35 AM
There's no real reason for it not to be 1 credit is an immediate soldier, none of this "gives:gets" crap.

It's still that way because of how it started in KoC I think. Back then you could only send out your recruitment link to others and when they clicked it you'd get a soldier. (Idea was to get more players that way ofcourse). So players were spamming each other with links (or posted them on big websites they hosted) until Lord_Striker made the first recruiter, which worked way better than the clicklists but still had limited clicking. Recruiters improved and nowadays we can do infinite clicks but it still awards you with soldiers the old way.

Now the only good thing about it working this way is getting soldiers from inflation.

Smitty
12th January 2014, 03:49 PM
Andy, can you make it so you can display a public message when someone clicks on your profile? It used to be this way and it was helpful because you could tell people acceptable gold to hit for and more!

Yes, yes, yes...... I sorely miss this.

Shiggity
12th January 2014, 05:06 PM
Andy, can you make it so you can display a public message when someone clicks on your profile? It used to be this way and it was helpful because you could tell people acceptable gold to hit for and more!

I'm sure most of you remember why the player profile was removed from public view and made so that only your own alliance members could see your profile. For those who don't, aside from finding the "informing people of acceptable gold to hit for" aspect quite negative and counter-productive ... it was also a full-time job just moderating the profiles because of unacceptable, obscene, and/or general disgusting profile posts. We got tired of having to constantly patrol profiles like it was Jr. High again. Who knows, we may see how it works again some day, I'm not sure; but I can say that atm the enthusiasm for going there again is pretty...nil.

andyt683
12th January 2014, 07:09 PM
I believe the best I can do is put an average gold hit on your profile, calculated automatically from your last 20 hits, or even hits through the age. We'll see.

Needless to say, the public profile on your stats is gone. We may give you a separate player's profile, well away from the game area, that you'll be able to fully customize.

Will-
12th January 2014, 11:02 PM
I believe the best I can do is put an average gold hit on your profile, calculated automatically from your last 20 hits, or even hits through the age. We'll see.

Needless to say, the public profile on your stats is gone. We may give you a separate player's profile, well away from the game area, that you'll be able to fully customize.


Good idea :) if we could get an avg gold hit for us (so our avg slay) that would be good also

Kronikdeath
13th January 2014, 02:09 PM
@ Andy Probes and enemies hitting for crap gold would mess this up. The profile description should be displayed to the public to show BF policies, decent hit amount, clickback and growth offers, and much more. A few idiots shouldn't ruin this for all. There is a reason this game is 13+ be mature. This feature should be reinstalled :)

Valheru_Prince
13th January 2014, 03:43 PM
There is a reason this game is 13+ be mature.

Agreed, so everyone can decide for himself how much he values his/her turns and what he attacks for. If you don't like being hit for it, raise DA or bank more.

Smitty
13th January 2014, 06:14 PM
I'm sure most of you remember why the player profile was removed from public view and made so that only your own alliance members could see your profile. For those who don't, aside from finding the "informing people of acceptable gold to hit for" aspect quite negative and counter-productive ... it was also a full-time job just moderating the profiles because of unacceptable, obscene, and/or general disgusting profile posts. We got tired of having to constantly patrol profiles like it was Jr. High again. Who knows, we may see how it works again some day, I'm not sure; but I can say that atm the enthusiasm for going there again is pretty...nil.

This is true Carrie, and my suggestion to Fury att was to ban those few who were abusing the profile from using it in the future. Why should 95% or more of the players be condemned by the few???

FallenOne
14th January 2014, 12:56 AM
BF policies can be seen in the alliance description; i'd rather not have the profile box.
if people hit rubbish; can always sab or warn; the message system exists to communicate with other players.
and if ignored; can still always sab.

andyt683
14th January 2014, 06:17 AM
@ Andy Probes and enemies hitting for crap gold would mess this up. The profile description should be displayed to the public to show BF policies, decent hit amount, clickback and growth offers, and much more. A few idiots shouldn't ruin this for all. There is a reason this game is 13+ be mature. This feature should be reinstalled :)

The overwhelming GUA opinion seems to be that dictating how others play is just dandy. It is not. The bulk of the profiles were "hit for x or I sab", and gradually, x crept up from 4 turns or so allllll the way up to "a good nights sleep so no one ever hits me". The number of attacks when the profiles were active dropped, and lots of slayers quit. It's boring to be told what to do, and the consequences were generally more hassle than it was worth.

Getting hit is part of the game. Turns are worth what a player using them believes they are worth, not what the defender believes they are worth. A profile is just that: something about you. No one was using them correctly, the use they were getting was detrimental, so they were removed and will stay removed. If it was only 5% of the game, that'd be fine. It was pretty much every profile, and a constant source of headaches.

If the only suggestion is "bring profiles back because omg low hits", I'm closing this thread. We've told you exactly why they left and won't be returning. It was hotly debated when they went in, and again when they came out. We've only had a better experience with them gone, so the decision is final. Move it along, guys.

Kronikdeath
18th January 2014, 12:37 PM
I thought it would be a good idea because I use to play a game that had something like this.
Top Slayer- Name displayed in Red
Top Defender- Name displayed in Blue
Top Spy- Name Displayed in Green
Top Sentry- Name Displayed in Yellow

And the colors would have to stick out so they could be very bright and vibrant so say for example the Dwarves could notice the top slayer.
I think this would be a cool feature and easy to add.
If someone holds multiple top stats they can pick the color they want

Greebel
18th January 2014, 01:03 PM
There should be some system that prevents you from training Spy or Sentry units if it will push your merc total over 25%

Whenever your merc total is currently over 25% the system wont even let you train attack or defense soldiers without un-training mercs.

FallenOne
5th February 2014, 08:08 AM
please increase covert casualties.
one should not be allowed to sit behind 500k coverts with no DA; only taking around 1k covert losses.

Valheru_Prince
5th February 2014, 06:05 PM
Keep in mind spies/sentries generate less TBG and there are no mercs to protect them. A well coordinated attack by a middle sized clan can be very destructive to these kind of players. 10 people * 5 hits = 50k losses....

andyt683
6th February 2014, 05:12 AM
Covert losses are tuned to a population of about 1000 players. They may need to increase in the future. That's not an immediately necessary tweak right now, though.

Kronikdeath
13th February 2014, 07:41 PM
I am extremely irritated by the sabbing ratio this age. Lets take stoney for example:

Me 24b spy gets in 9/10 on 39b se with one spy

2 days later......
Me 31b spy gets in 2/10 on 41b se with one spy

This makes absolutely no sense to me. I feel as if every sab is just random. I have tried over and over to master the ratio but it is clear that there is either not one or it is extremely jumbled

also to add I am a pixie with a covert ops bonus

andyt683
13th February 2014, 10:25 PM
I feel as if every sab is just random.

Sorta, they are. The sab ratios haven't changed in a long time, and the simplest explanation of it is that you only went from 1/3rd his sentry to 1/4. The 9/10 was a fluke, not the 2/10.

Each mission you send has a set % chance of failure. It starts at something silly, like 92% chance of failure (which is why the 9/10 was a fluke). Each spy you send lowers the chance even more, usually by about 2-4%, and each whole ratio above their sentry raises the chance by a lot. 1 spy at 5x their sentry has a whopping 2% chance to fail.

Wasian
14th February 2014, 04:42 AM
@Andy

So is the % to fail only reduced at whole number ratios then or is there some intermediate? And how about at ratios when your spy is lower than their sentry? I've been trying to master this too and it's been driving me nuts with such random success rates.

andyt683
14th February 2014, 05:53 AM
It's reduced in steps: 4:1, 3:1, 2:1, 1:1, 2:3, 1:2, 1:3 (+1% for every whole number ratio over 4:1). I'd give you an exact formula, but it's awful hard to put into words.

Spies are (30 - ((pow((26-$spies),0.52))*5)); Weird.

Vrasp
16th February 2014, 11:16 PM
It's reduced in steps: 4:1, 3:1, 2:1, 1:1, 2:3, 1:2, 1:3 (+1% for every whole number ratio over 4:1). I'd give you an exact formula, but it's awful hard to put into words.

Spies are (30 - ((pow((26-$spies),0.52))*5)); Weird.

This is untrue. As is the statement of there being only a 2% chance to fail. Ever. The success rate is capped at 90%, and the rate increases constantly, not just at full number ratios. Way back, oh, I dunno...2 years ago or so, that was the case, but hasn't been for awhile!

Anyway, yeah, sabotage is semi-random. This is basically how it works:

The formula calculates your success rate by taking the spy:sentry ratio and amount of spies sent into consideration (as well as any events/race bonuses that may modify the success rate). Then, you roll a random number between 1-100 and if your success rate is higher than that random number, you succeed.

andyt683
17th February 2014, 07:58 AM
This is untrue. As is the statement of there being only a 2% chance to fail. Ever. The success rate is capped at 90%, and the rate increases constantly, not just at full number ratios. Way back, oh, I dunno...2 years ago or so, that was the case, but hasn't been for awhile!

Anyway, yeah, sabotage is semi-random. This is basically how it works:

The formula calculates your success rate by taking the spy:sentry ratio and amount of spies sent into consideration (as well as any events/race bonuses that may modify the success rate). Then, you roll a random number between 1-100 and if your success rate is higher than that random number, you succeed.

That whole file is a fun time, but especially that break-in formula. I had to put it in a spreadsheet a few months back to walk through what it was doing, and I'm still getting things wrong... Reading the code version of it is so much fun, I avoid it to this day.

If I recall, we have: a magic number, and a fudge number. The magic number is called "othermod", and the fudge is "maxmod". Could be reversed, I forget. Well named variables are not our forte. Basically, one is the driver of the failure chance, the other moves it a little (tiniest bits of a percentage). Not sure why the hell it's like that, probably a great reason or a great bug. I did forget about that ratiobonus, and one of the comments when I glanced led me astray: // +1% success for every full number ratio bonus above 5x (taken from the code)

There are things in the RoC code I just assume are peyote dreams someone managed to transcribe into PHP code. This is one of them. The gist of it is: we roll a dice, the better your ratio, and the fewer spies you send, the better your roll. Balancing spies sent to maximize damage and minimize risk should be more transparent, but I'm just going to chalk this up to "serious voodoo stuff", and keep sending 25, unless they actually have sentry.

Kronikdeath
17th February 2014, 12:16 PM
Also to add sometimes sending more spies helps you get in more

An example could be:
Me- 38b spy
Titan 39b se

After sabbing all age I am noticing that if i send 5 spies on equal or close to equal se/spy I get in more times usually 6/10. If I send 1 spy I might 3/10 this happens all the time when I sab muncheese

I have a perfect ratio with 1 spy like when I sab a certain user with 1.25x my spy with 1 spy I 9/10

After sabbing all age log I am picking up on little details :D

Damedog
22nd February 2014, 02:16 PM
I suggest bringing back the causality conversions to improve slaying as a tool of war

FallenOne
10th March 2014, 04:01 AM
can anyone explain how the gold vision bonus for orcs apply?

i thought it would be (your spy)/1.25 x 1.33 is what you can see on the BF.
but i am sure i can see more.

how i came to this calculation:
divide by 1.25 because on the news page it says spy needs to be 25% more than the other persons sentry.
then times 1.33 because that is the orc bonus and i assume it applies after the set things; kind of like how tool/weapon/tbg bonuses only apply to the base.

Wasian
26th March 2014, 09:37 AM
Hey Andy, is there any way you could sneak the time in to make a delete button for alliance admins for our VERY OLD alliance chat threads in game? We have 8 month old topics that are completely irrelevant now as I'm sure other alliances do as well. And the fact that our new members will have 60 unread alliance messages is a HUGE DETERENT for them to even look at any of them. At the very least, a hide button to make it unviewable by non admins would be a helpful work around.

Damedog
26th March 2014, 03:02 PM
Or how about a way to make it auto-delete threads that aren't posted in after a certain period of time. That would save the alliance admins time spent deleting useless threads that could be better spent actually playing the game.

Wasian
26th March 2014, 05:23 PM
Or how about a way to make it auto-delete threads that aren't posted in after a certain period of time. That would save the alliance admins time spent deleting useless threads that could be better spent actually playing the game.

We actually have some threads pinned that aren't posted in that serves as introductory threads for new members. So auto delete would be annoying to me.

andyt683
26th March 2014, 10:04 PM
I'm not really adding features to the current game. I'll keep it in mind as I rewrite things, though.

FallenOne
30th March 2014, 03:57 AM
i think a new spy/sentry tool should be added after pickaxe/torch and maybe one before cloaks/horns.

the one after pickaxes/torches might not be so useful for most people in terms of value but will create more tbg for them and the other point is that i think it'd help the huge mains out with all the sells they get and the fact it gives a variation to their build from the start. should they go for the higher value on cheaper tools or lower value on more expensive ones but create even more tbg and how should the mix go throughout the age (or should it even mix)

a main who has had loads of sells vying for #1 can give a good opinion on this as they can tell us if it'd indeed help in the endgame with the huge amount of sells.
do they need another tool to make management easier?
are they forced to buy excals/skins because they are overloading on picks/torches at the end?

SonicRage
6th May 2014, 06:58 AM
An idea I've thought of for the game to create a soldier stats.

Make everyone weapon needed as much as the next.
In war each soldier needs a weapon and armour.
In stead of the.
Defence:
Sai, Shield, Mithril, dragonskins.
Helmet, Shield, Armour, Knights armour.
Dagger, maul, blade, Excaliburs.
Dagger, Swords, Long bows, Excaliburs.

Using weapons damages you can create a soldier stat.
E.g.
Helmet 30
Shield 300
Armour 3000
Defence rating: 3330

Strike I'd calculate using 2 weapons. Most soldiers would have a dagger as a back up and a main weapon.
Dagger 30
Sword 300
Strike rating: 330

Take into account tff overall strike and using this be able to make casualties more realistic.

It's just an Idea I thought of.
I would not know the extent you would need to look into it but would be a interesting change.

andyt683
6th May 2014, 09:52 AM
An idea I've thought of for the game to create a soldier stats.

Using weapons damages you can create a soldier stat.
E.g.
Helmet 30
Shield 300
Armour 3000
Defence rating: 3330


I actually played with a different system, where weapons caused damage, both offensive and defensive. Armor reduced casualties, and increased turns able to be used. Spy and sentry both did other things than they do now. The army had a few other stats, such as movement speed, agility and intellect that could be buffed up through various things.

It wasn't very fun. YMMV.

SonicRage
6th May 2014, 04:40 PM
Hmm I see. My idea was to make choosing what weapon to buy and when more critical because sending unarmed soldiers into war is well rather crazy (also funny).
So that was the point in my idea.

Jarrad-
11th May 2014, 05:15 AM
Didn't read before, but what about adding "Top Losses"?

ShadowLord
17th July 2014, 02:53 PM
Is there any argument for the "Event Name will be displayed in 42 minutes 27 seconds" improving the game rather than making it worse?

Zues
18th July 2014, 07:58 AM
Tough to say, I don't mind it i'm a lazy player sleep all night and bank just about everything while i am awake, so during the day i will catch any events that benefit me and at night i would sleep through them even if i knew they were coming. I suppose it balances the more casual players to the hardcore.

I.e hardcore guys might have planned their sleep for these events in the past, now if they miss an event they miss it, if you catch my drift.

So overall i guess it is a good thing.

Checkman
14th August 2014, 05:16 AM
Ok, so a few random ideas for events, if some have already been proposed, excuse me, been off circuit for a while.

TBG Scramble
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 72,917,610 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is scrambled from the actual numbers.

TBG Trickle
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 148,142,870 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is made up from 2 levels up the chain and 2 levels below (if they exist).

andyt683
14th August 2014, 05:29 AM
Ok, so a few random ideas for events, if some have already been proposed, excuse me, been off circuit for a while.

TBG Scramble
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 72,917,610 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is scrambled from the actual numbers.

TBG Trickle
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 148,142,870 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is made up from 2 levels up the chain and 2 levels below (if they exist).

Events adding gold have some unintended negative consequences, which is why we reduced Grave Robbing by so much (cut it in half, really)

Don't expect to see us adding these.

Checkman
14th August 2014, 05:34 AM
Time to think of some others.........
Cheers.

mix
14th August 2014, 05:43 AM
Ok, so a few random ideas for events, if some have already been proposed, excuse me, been off circuit for a while.

TBG Scramble
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 72,917,610 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is scrambled from the actual numbers.

TBG Trickle
Actual Turn-Based Gold: 17,279,160 Gold
Event Turn-Based Gold: 148,142,870 Gold
During the event, the TBG amount is made up from 2 levels up the chain and 2 levels below (if they exist).

BS Idea. Both of these would mainly benefit the already big accounts.

FallenOne
14th August 2014, 05:44 AM
hard to think of many as the game is already good especially after casualties were increased and zombies was cut.

i can only think of suggestions that vary up the game for fun; not because they are needed to make the game better.

Greebel
14th August 2014, 09:12 AM
I think we need more kittys stuck in trees.

Checkman
15th August 2014, 03:48 AM
BS Idea. Both of these would mainly benefit the already big accounts.

Not strictly true what you are saying, all accounts would have the opportunity to have picked up big amounts of gold. But as andy said these are unlikely to happen, so line drawn under.

Other thoughts:

Sabotage Surprise
During this event, it would be possible to reduce the effectiveness of the following:-
Siege Technology/Fortification - reduce the strength of the upgrade that someone is on - i.e. Falcons (3.8x) prior to the event, Falcons (3.65x) after the event, repairs needed
Unit Production - soldiers 'birthing pool' could be damaged, reducing productivity - say UP was at 16,000, sabbing takes it down to 15,400, repairs needed

Click-oncentrate
Get a bonus for clicking without making mistakes. Min 1k to be clicked in the event. 33% bonus or something. Frustrating as I make stupid mistakes all the time.

Defection
Rather than the person attacking or being attacked losing their mercs, the eventual winner of the attack not only takes gold/loses no gold, but also has any mercs involved defect from the losing person to them as well.

Checkman
15th August 2014, 03:54 AM
Did also just wonder about this.....

Bonus Backout
For the duration of the event, bonus and stats enhancements are removed.....your account is back to basics

mix
15th August 2014, 06:09 AM
Did also just wonder about this.....

Bonus Backout
For the duration of the event, bonus and stats enhancements are removed.....your account is back to basics

Whats the use for this? If everyone loses their bonuses, everyone is equal to where it was before the event. There is no gain/loss for anyone in this and thus it makes no sense at all. The purpose of those +20% SA/SP Events is to give an advantage over others.

Checkman
15th August 2014, 07:18 AM
Whats the use for this? If everyone loses their bonuses, everyone is equal to where it was before the event. There is no gain/loss for anyone in this and thus it makes no sense at all. The purpose of those +20% SA/SP Events is to give an advantage over others.

Surprised you would say that what's the use.

Not all races have strike bonus, but some have defence. If someone builds good strike with no bonus and then someone else's defence bonus reduces them to be able to be hit. That's purpose in my book.

Your statement is a little too harsh.

Zues
15th August 2014, 08:04 AM
Surprised you would say that what's the use.

Not all races have strike bonus, but some have defence. If someone builds good strike with no bonus and then someone else's defence bonus reduces them to be able to be hit. That's purpose in my book.

Your statement is a little too harsh.

Yep i was thinking similar scenario, i am orc but ended up just DA whoring so i'd love if the guys slaying me lost their bonuses to bring them back to the level i am on at least for an event time. Also would give people a chance to see what their stats really are and how much the bonus is giving them a leg up.

FallenOne
15th August 2014, 10:17 AM
in response-


sabotage surprise: sabbing UP not sure how it'll work out; sabbing fort/strike/covert upgrades not really necessary as we can already sab weapons/tools to lower those ratings.


click-oncenrate: can work but bonus has to be sufficiently large enough otherwise many would rather click normally and make mistakes than click slower and overall make less in soldiers. we have the click event now anyway so i don't think another one is necessary.

defection: as long as no tbg soldiers are created and the merc limit is still imposed it'd probably be fine but we have cheap tricks for mercs anyway which i think works quite well so again i feel it just wont be necessary.

bonus backout: for starters 'blackout' works better here as that is initially how i read it and after thinking about the event; i think it can work out. it is not a positive event like 'nightwalk' and 'charge' but it is not a passive event either (of which none exist and will never exist like DA boost or sentry boost as it doesn't promote activity). i'd class it as a negative event and that type hasn't been talked about before as far as i am aware so not sure how it'd go down with others but it can be made useable.

mix
15th August 2014, 10:37 AM
bonus backout: for starters 'blackout' works better here as that is initially how i read it and after thinking about the event; i think it can work out. it is not a positive event like 'nightwalk' and 'charge' but it is not a passive event either (of which none exist and will never exist like DA boost or sentry boost as it doesn't promote activity). i'd class it as a negative event and that type hasn't been talked about before as far as i am aware so not sure how it'd go down with others but it can be made useable.

But it actually is a passive event. Lets take the different scenarios:

- Im an Human/Elve/Goblin/Pixie and I wanna slay a DA whore who's playing Dwarves with the 40% DA bonus: Ok so here, it positively helps those four races to better slay the Dwarf, but effectively its the same as the Banzai/Charge events where you gain an SA boost.

- Im an Orc who wants to slay anyone else. I just lost my 40% SA bonus. So what? Ill just wait until the event ends and slay people then. Therefore in this scenario the event makes the game more passive and promotes any other race but Dwarfs who build their DA. Terrific, you just gave those bankers another 30 minutes more time to bank their 500m gold they are holding.

- Im an Elve who loses his 30% SP bonus. So what? Ill just wait until the event ends and sab people then. Therefore in this scenario the event makes the game more passive and doesnt promote actions.

- Im anyone but an Elve/Pixie who wants to sab a SE whore who's playing Goblins/Pixies. Ok here again, it positively helps to better sab those two races, but again its the same as just sabbing during the Nightwalk event where you gain a SP boost.

- Orcs who lose their gold vision bonus are also hindered from effectively looking for slay targets...
- Dwarf casualties are not reduced during the event which would be the same as attacking dwarves during Banzai...
- Pixies CO success bonus is lost so they won't sab during this event which again makes the game more passive.

These are most of the scenarios I could think of and none of these are a real improvement. Some of the scenarios actually make the game passive which is exactly what they are trying to avoid. Thats why afaik all those old events like (Rallying Cry - All defenders gain +10% damage!) or (Damn Hippies - Your soldiers have turned into hippies and refuse to fight. Peace, love and rock and roll, man.) do not exist anymore, since they slow down the game.

FallenOne
15th August 2014, 02:02 PM
But it actually is a passive event. Lets take the different scenarios:

- Im an Human/Elve/Goblin/Pixie and I wanna slay a DA whore who's playing Dwarves with the 40% DA bonus: Ok so here, it positively helps those four races to better slay the Dwarf, but effectively its the same as the Banzai/Charge events where you gain an SA boost.

- Im an Orc who wants to slay anyone else. I just lost my 40% SA bonus. So what? Ill just wait until the event ends and slay people then. Therefore in this scenario the event makes the game more passive and promotes any other race but Dwarfs who build their DA. Terrific, you just gave those bankers another 30 minutes more time to bank their 500m gold they are holding.

- Im an Elve who loses his 30% SP bonus. So what? Ill just wait until the event ends and sab people then. Therefore in this scenario the event makes the game more passive and doesnt promote actions.

- Im anyone but an Elve/Pixie who wants to sab a SE whore who's playing Goblins/Pixies. Ok here again, it positively helps to better sab those two races, but again its the same as just sabbing during the Nightwalk event where you gain a SP boost.

- Orcs who lose their gold vision bonus are also hindered from effectively looking for slay targets...
- Dwarf casualties are not reduced during the event which would be the same as attacking dwarves during Banzai...
- Pixies CO success bonus is lost so they won't sab during this event which again makes the game more passive.

These are most of the scenarios I could think of and none of these are a real improvement. Some of the scenarios actually make the game passive which is exactly what they are trying to avoid. Thats why afaik all those old events like (Rallying Cry - All defenders gain +10% damage!) or (Damn Hippies - Your soldiers have turned into hippies and refuse to fight. Peace, love and rock and roll, man.) do not exist anymore, since they slow down the game.

fair points. it would have some passiveness and i guess it does duplicate things like 'nightwalk' and 'charge' though not to the exact same extent but close enough for the idea to be the same.

i still agree with what valheru had said about gold rush being upped from 7%; atm you don't even make 1tbg.
possibly a new spy/sentry tool; reason being 300k might be too cheap for a main who gets all those sells eoa but only one of them can properly answer that.

Carlos
17th August 2014, 03:59 PM
The only thing that needs to be changed is the clicking upgrade thing

Upgrading it with cc is not worth it at all. My next upgrade is either 58m or 33k clicks. Who is going to pay 33k clicks when you can just get it for 58m? You'd need to do 330k clicks for it to pay off....

mix
17th August 2014, 06:10 PM
The only thing that needs to be changed is the clicking upgrade thing

Upgrading it with cc is not worth it at all. My next upgrade is either 58m or 33k clicks. Who is going to pay 33k clicks when you can just get it for 58m? You'd need to do 330k clicks for it to pay off....

better start clicking then.

Zues
17th August 2014, 06:12 PM
The only thing that needs to be changed is the clicking upgrade thing

Upgrading it with cc is not worth it at all. My next upgrade is either 58m or 33k clicks. Who is going to pay 33k clicks when you can just get it for 58m? You'd need to do 330k clicks for it to pay off....

My upgrade is 4.7b or 58k credits, a bit more reasonable comparison there, i know that when you get up to 1 or 1.1 it is like 4t gold vs 100k credits, its only really viable for the absolute top tier clickers the rest of us probably just stop upgrading when the gold is to much.

FallenOne
18th August 2014, 02:33 AM
My upgrade is 4.7b or 58k credits, a bit more reasonable comparison there, i know that when you get up to 1 or 1.1 it is like 4t gold vs 100k credits, its only really viable for the absolute top tier clickers the rest of us probably just stop upgrading when the gold is to much.

makes you wonder how far it goes.

mix
18th August 2014, 06:38 AM
makes you wonder how far it goes.

Well Gundarl's at 1.1 and he's been at 1.1 for quite a while now. So either he thinks its too expensive to get 1.2 or it stops there? UP also stops after 19 Upgrades. 1.1 would be 11 Upgrades...

Zues
18th August 2014, 07:42 AM
Well Gundarl's at 1.1 and he's been at 1.1 for quite a while now. So either he thinks its too expensive to get 1.2 or it stops there? UP also stops after 19 Upgrades. 1.1 would be 11 Upgrades...

Pretty sure it does go up 1 more at least, i think the credit amount is fairly steady increments of like 9k 1.1 is somewhere around 150k id guess Gun would know better, but once you have spent some 500k credits on it you have to click 5m to cover it back, so don't think anyone will be doing that especially in this shortened age.

andyt683
18th August 2014, 08:15 AM
The only thing that needs to be changed is the clicking upgrade thing

Upgrading it with cc is not worth it at all. My next upgrade is either 58m or 33k clicks. Who is going to pay 33k clicks when you can just get it for 58m? You'd need to do 330k clicks for it to pay off....

Gold is an exponential scale. Paying by CC is not. There's a clear range where you're supposed to switch from gold to CC's, depending on the remaining time in the age.

I want events that are FUN, not boring. These event suggestions are quite boring.

Adding stats... bleh. Adding gold... no. Nerfing stats for 30 minutes... double bleh. Give me something fun and exciting that makes you want to play extra hard for 30 glorious minutes.

Obviously Nippler
18th August 2014, 07:47 PM
Gold is an exponential scale. Paying by CC is not. There's a clear range where you're supposed to switch from gold to CC's, depending on the remaining time in the age.

I want events that are FUN, not boring. These event suggestions are quite boring.

Adding stats... bleh. Adding gold... no. Nerfing stats for 30 minutes... double bleh. Give me something fun and exciting that makes you want to play extra hard for 30 glorious minutes.

1. An event where one spy can sab as much as the maximum, but getting caught is guaranteed (no ghosting). Maybe something like "Spies absorbed some radiation and are now superhuman for x amount of time"

2. A lottery event where 10 random accounts are given 10x (or 20x) their TBG at the turn.

3. An event that pushes for recycling. Recycling is good. A user can see 50% of damaged weapons.

Wasian
18th August 2014, 09:25 PM
To add some chaos to the mix, how about an event where any casualties to untrained troops will instead be recruited into your army. :D

FallenOne
19th August 2014, 03:01 AM
To add some chaos to the mix, how about an event where any casualties to untrained troops will instead be recruited into your army. :D

chaos indeed but why restrict it to the enemy's untrained troops; should include their coverts as well so total deaths excluding mercenaries are added to your army.
i would be for it but it'd be too overpowered and would devalue clicking with so many free soldiers.
it'd have to be a mere fraction of the total for it to have some balance like 1/10th.

Checkman
19th August 2014, 06:28 AM
Gold is an exponential scale. Paying by CC is not. There's a clear range where you're supposed to switch from gold to CC's, depending on the remaining time in the age.

I want events that are FUN, not boring. These event suggestions are quite boring.

Adding stats... bleh. Adding gold... no. Nerfing stats for 30 minutes... double bleh. Give me something fun and exciting that makes you want to play extra hard for 30 glorious minutes.

Ok, point taken on some of the previous ideas, I can see that it needs to be something that it different from what is already out there.

How about:-

Trojan Horse
During the event, you have the ability to plant infiltrators into other people's armies. Those infiltrators will steal a percentage of whatever gold hits that person makes until caught.
There would be no limit to the amount of people that you could infiltrate within the event. Mass infiltration by an alliance into someone's army could potentially wipe out a large proportion of their subsequent hits. Would be very interesting to see this event happen prior to a Size Doesn't Matter event and therefore make it a real lottery for sell-offs!!!

Full House
Within the time boundaries of the event, your account has to complete a number of defined tasks, each have to be completed to receive the bonus resulting from the activity.
I don't know - something like....

Attack 10 people with 12 turns.
Sab 10 people or more, causing at least 'x' amount of damage.
Recon 50 people at least once.
Complete 1 siege or fortification upgrade.
Click 1000 times in the recruiter.



The list would cover the majority of activities in the game, thereby encouraging people to do all things for a burst of time.
The bonus could come in a number of forms, bonus points, bonus turns, bonus credits, I don't know.
Just a slightly more challenging idea I guess.

Zues
19th August 2014, 07:35 PM
Ok, point taken on some of the previous ideas, I can see that it needs to be something that it different from what is already out there.

How about:-

Trojan Horse
During the event, you have the ability to plant infiltrators into other people's armies. Those infiltrators will steal a percentage of whatever gold hits that person makes until caught.
There would be no limit to the amount of people that you could infiltrate within the event. Mass infiltration by an alliance into someone's army could potentially wipe out a large proportion of their subsequent hits. Would be very interesting to see this event happen prior to a Size Doesn't Matter event and therefore make it a real lottery for sell-offs!!!



Don't mind this so much as an idea, as an event seems silly but as a mechanic to add in another troop type, 10k to train can be planted in accounts based on your spy and can provide live gold and updated stats each turn depending on your spy/number of infiltrators. They would give no tbg of course.

Then you could look at an event of them stealing treasury gold e.g

Treasury siphons - "Each infiltrator implanted steals .1% of gold from enemy treasury and sends it to you"

These are completely arbitrary figures of course ill leave it to greater minds to determine the actual cost of troops, how much they can steal in info/gold/stats and of course how to get rid of them, id get pretty pissed if i have 1000 infiltrators and my whole tbg gets siphoned :p

Xdal
20th September 2014, 12:18 PM
I have read through this thread and archive of roc changes since forever (shrug) and decided to throw in some of my own ideas.

1. New event: Sabotaged weapons are broken immediately. Why? Because chaos.
2. Events could have "event power" having an interval to choose from rather than having a static value. For ex. instead of +20% spy action, roll randomly from interval 1-40%, zombies: 50-150 tbg and etc.
3. Make possible that two events overlap.
4. Training upgrade that would resurrect a part of your zombies on every troop distribution. It could be a static value or percentage based on amount of your zombies. For example 500 zombies, or 1% of total every 6 hours.
5. Some simple events (like stat boost) could have their duration extended to something like 60-90 mins. Cyanide doesn't fall into category of simple events.
6. New event: Upgrades can be bought at reduced price: 5-30% discount.
7. Current clicking event. 1 soldier for every 2 clicks. What is this, event for ants?
Check my stats:

Where'd dem soldiers come from?
Soldiers from unit production 310,787
Soldiers from recruiter upgrades 70,234
Soldiers from others' clicks on you 211,835
Soldiers from clicks on yourself 19,441
Soldiers from clicks trickled up 72,971
Soldiers from credit deflation 13,502
Soldiers from activity bonus 0
Soldiers from events 1,022
For these few minutes, make the bonus like 10-15 additional soldiers per click. That would make things going.
8. I am not really a fan of this next idea, but something might spark from it. Training upgrade, that adds gold per click made. Like starting at 500g at level 1, then 1k 2k 5k 10k gold per click and so on. I think the last sane upgrade level would be ~25-30k gold per click.
9. Event when your bonus points power are increased by a factor of 5-10-20-chaos. If i have +7% to strike, it would be 7*Multiplier for the duration of event.
10. Now for the idea that needs a bit more explanation. Clicking. Tbh it sucks, i rather be clearing rifts in diablo, spend evening with RL friends i pretend to have, prepare for my certification exam, than just sit here and m.... mindless clicking. + it gives me headaches if i try it for too long. It's the first age in ages i played that i tried to do a bit more serious clicking, because i wanted to try at least once to build a proper account. 150k clicks in and I am so fed up of it, i will probably end up doing a 5 age break if nothing will change about it. Clicking is the reason i can't recommend this game to anyone. You have to click to be successful, or you have to receive massive gold sells from your ally, so you can keep up.
Also I fully understand that the clicking is the essence of this game and it's here to stay. The problem is that those who click a lot, get advantage which is almost impossible for a non clicker (or someone who doesn't click much) to overcome. I have a proposal on how to partially dampen the effects of this henry style clicking.
Implement something called "Diminishing returns" (google it). This basically makes your click less effective the more you do it. This is not a hard limit on daily clicks or something similar proposed before.
They way i think it could work is this:
First 1000 clicks on a player on a day would give 5 soldiers (not credits) and usual 1 click trickles up.
1001-3000 clicks on a player would give 3 soldiers
3001-6000 clicks - 2 soldiers
6001-10000 - 1.5 soldiers
10001 and up - 1 soldier
So if a player gets 10k clicks on him every day, this would give 1000*5 + 2000*3 + 3000*2 + 4000*1.5 = 23k soldiers. There is still no limit if you wanna go up, just it wont be as effective as first clicks.
Every number can be moved around to balance things, but idea would still be the same.

Zues
21st September 2014, 07:55 PM
I really like idea 10. It fits with my idea of equalizers rather than hindering bigger "investors in the game" i love the concept of the first 10-20k clicks being more valuable than the next 20k it does not hinder the big clickers but encourages everyone to click that first 10k, the concept of soldiers rather than credits is also a pretty good idea, as it would not allow big alliances to pull further away with most of their smaller accounts now contributing more credits.

Clicking is really a tough thing to deal with, almost everyone hates it but almost everyone accepts that it is the best way to allow people to invest and be rewarded in this game, i think this though gives a bit of a boost to those who don't enjoy clicking and want to enjoy the game a little more.

Xdal
22nd September 2014, 03:08 AM
+ it might encourage more active credits sharing inside alliances, because in some cases it might be more effective to let smaller accounts have their first daily credits rather than use it for massive trickles.

kavallier
22nd September 2014, 03:44 AM
And what about the people that are busy working a day job from monday till friday and try to grow their accounts on the weekends by getting alot of clicking in on saturday and sunday?

Xdal
22nd September 2014, 05:44 AM
And what about the people that are busy working a day job from monday till friday and try to grow their accounts on the weekends by getting alot of clicking in on saturday and sunday?

Simply just click as much as they want or bank on weekend and release the credits daily to get the maximum bang.

Carlos
22nd September 2014, 05:53 AM
What a retarded idea, will make the difference between clickers and people with a life even bigger

Xdal
22nd September 2014, 06:38 AM
What a retarded idea, will make the difference between clickers and people with a life even bigger

And what do you suggest? A welfare program for real lifers?

Zues
23rd September 2014, 06:28 AM
What a retarded idea, will make the difference between clickers and people with a life even bigger

Umm even the people who claim to have a life can click 1k in a day, it is 5 minutes for a half competent clicker you will get 5k soldiers instead of 1k under this scheme closes the gap a little, but of course if you don't want to click at all then just play as you always have and get a higher sab total than ever before.


And what do you suggest? A welfare program for real lifers?

I'm sure that is what a few people would like.

Kavs point is valid in that some people struggle to click during the week and make up for it on weekends it does present an issue that the people who truly devote serious time to the game will get an advantage over those who try to devote as much as they can, i don't think those who hardly click at all should have much issue with this, but those restricted to click 200k over 2-3 days vs those who click 200k over 7 days will definitely be disadvantaged.

Lodewijk
23rd September 2014, 02:27 PM
Seems like the gold vision bonus for orcs is not working at the moment. Anyone else has this problem?

Carlos
23rd September 2014, 03:09 PM
Welfare system, sounds nice. How about the first 1000 clicks are tax free, then an increase of 2% for every 1000. The wealthy clickers will help the small players grow by being forced to donate a part of their work.

If it works in the real world, why not try it here.

Also, how about adding a tax to saved cc to keep the economy growing

FallenOne
24th September 2014, 03:28 AM
Seems like the gold vision bonus for orcs is not working at the moment. Anyone else has this problem?

not orcs this age so can't say.
what sentry ratings are you seeing?

i have asked about the calculation before in a different thread but didn't get a reply.
it doesn't fit in with the way i calculate it so not sure how it is figured.

Lodewijk
24th September 2014, 03:48 AM
With 1bil spy I can't see gold of players with 1.1bil sentry. While it supposed to be visible until like 1.3bil sentry

FallenOne
24th September 2014, 04:59 AM
With 1bil spy I can't see gold of players with 1.1bil sentry. While it supposed to be visible until like 1.3bil sentry

see if i understand correctly the ratio isn't 1:1 so the calculation isn't as simple as multiplying by 1.33.
you need like 20-25% more spy than their sentry to see their gold without the bonus so with the 33% bonus you might be seeing only a few percent more.

FragileGallows
24th September 2014, 03:19 PM
Turns out clicking 1k a day is pretty hard if you got kids...


So the gold rush event. Any chance of switching it up a having it switch up percentages randomly? At present it is 7%. Why not add 3%, 12% and 16%.

In fact how about adding another event called something obvious like "Corrupt Government" and have negative values like -7% and 12%? Would hurt some accounts more than others if they have not banked, plus would also make things a little more interesting to see how people react to such an event.

Another idea may be one where you negate all race bonus for one event. That would stir up some action I bet. Reduced DA and Sentry would get some in range where as others who rely on SA and Spy may lose sight of many of their targets.

Zues
24th September 2014, 06:03 PM
Negating race bonuses would have no difference at the top end, Mains are dwarves, big slayers are orcs so the event would be pointless for them, but in the middle ground might shake some people around who are slaying as pixies or elves for sabbing etc.

FragileGallows
24th September 2014, 07:31 PM
Would make people think twice about race at start of an age though

FallenOne
27th September 2014, 01:56 AM
tax on clicks, negative tbg, negated race bonuses is not going to happen so no point of mentioning ideas that are negative/cause deductions.
as it is just a game there is no need for any sort of distribution like taking a bit from the top and spreading it amongst everyone or just taking from the top.
this is why we have UP. UP is the balance for people who don't want to click or have less time to click and grow their account.
generally the higher the UP the worse it gets for clickers unless it is balanced by a high price which allows them to get it far in advance of non-clickers and make it less worth it for them.
50k UP is high but the price is probably about right for it to be fair to both clickers and non-clickers.

Carlos
27th September 2014, 03:09 AM
Remove zombies, that will actually make people play. Why bother building an account when you can just zombie your way up

RDX_Star
27th September 2014, 11:08 AM
Remove zombies, that will actually make people play. Why bother building an account when you can just zombie your way up

Dammit I have to agree with Carlos :/

andyt683
29th September 2014, 08:41 AM
Dammit I have to agree with Carlos :/

We nerfed them pretty hard already, looking at another round in the future.

FragileGallows
29th September 2014, 09:24 AM
I agree however with the advent of smart phone banking the slayer has become an almost lost concept. Having zombies, or a suitable replacement, gives the game an edge that is starting to dwindle.

Obviously Nippler
29th September 2014, 07:09 PM
I agree however with the advent of smart phone banking the slayer has become an almost lost concept. Having zombies, or a suitable replacement, gives the game an edge that is starting to dwindle.

I disagree. As a slayer, I can find loads of hits, especially while using my smart phone or on weekends and the times some people sleep. Zombies should be removed. What's really damaging slaying are the alliance bf policies of farming. We need to work on making alliances change those :wink:

Wasian
29th September 2014, 10:16 PM
I disagree. As a slayer, I can find loads of hits, especially while using my smart phone or on weekends and the times some people sleep. Zombies should be removed. What's really damaging slaying are the alliance bf policies of farming. We need to work on making alliances change those :wink:

I concur. The retarded farming and low hit rules need to be removed. They do nothing but stifle this game and cause players to think twice about attacking for what they think is good gold out of fear of retaliation. It's time to bring the oppression to an end.

FragileGallows
3rd October 2014, 10:39 AM
What would ultimately boost the game is more players. The majority of us have been around this game since it's inception and likely in KoC before it too. How was the game originally marketed when it started? As numbers remain static and KoC gets shitter and longer winded by the day, new members in the game eoukd really boost the overall. Hell, even as a member of the only Sab chain in RoC I'd consider leaving off new people so they are encouraged to stick around. Even consider a limbo policy for new members, if that can be done without existing people taking the piss with it.

andyt683
3rd October 2014, 06:50 PM
Hell, even as a member of the only Sab chain in RoC I'd consider leaving off new people so they are encouraged to stick around. Even consider a limbo policy for new members, if that can be done without existing people taking the piss with it.

We used to have a "noob mode". I should know, I made it. I wasn't around when it was removed, but I'd assume people complained about it?

FallenOne
4th October 2014, 03:52 AM
We used to have a "noob mode". I should know, I made it. I wasn't around when it was removed, but I'd assume people complained about it?

was that the 100m armory thing?

it's true the only boost needed is more players which unfortunately isn't likely to happen as people just move on.
i think a lot of things in the game are completely fine and in fact when you make too many changes it can get worse but then the other side is even if everything was fine people would get bored unless there were changes; so there's never a perfect balance.
for me i just hope there isn't too many radical changes to break the game and it's a dangerous thing when there isn't much wrong in the first place.

FragileGallows
5th October 2014, 05:35 PM
What he said, and nicely put

SonicRage
7th October 2014, 07:00 PM
I think get rid of Zombies and make Gold Rush slightly more effective. maybe 15% and a 10% DA increase.
That would be bit of a shake up.
Also have the swiper app finished so i can use it to bank and so on.
I found the swiper a useful clicking option considering i play mostly on phone.
But people abused it maybe if we have the rest of it working and have swiping disabled for now till its made to be un abusable lol.

Other then that i don't think we need many changes.

Checkman
8th October 2014, 04:26 AM
I think get rid of Zombies and make Gold Rush slightly more effective. maybe 15% and a 10% DA increase.
That would be bit of a shake up.
Also have the swiper app finished so i can use it to bank and so on.
I found the swiper a useful clicking option considering i play mostly on phone.
But people abused it maybe if we have the rest of it working and have swiping disabled for now till its made to be un abusable lol.

Other then that i don't think we need many changes.

I have to say that I totally agree with the Gold Rush event.
Zombies is so much more of a gold rush than Gold Rush.


There are also a few other things that I would like to see too:-

I would like to be able to sort the summarised results of my intel logs per stat, at the moment I cannot do that, so I would recon the BF, and normally go through page after page, I have to flick through them to see who is the top 1-x of any stat, sorting it would make that simpler.

I would personally also like to see the alliance history of a player for a specific Age, but obviously only the current age. Out of nosiness more than anything :rolleyes:

I don't know whether I would like the following as an event or just continuous functionality, TBG Sacrifice, donate x% of your TBG to another account. I would suggest that there is a cap on % and on how many people can receive sacrificed TBG, maybe only 1 or 2 incoming sacrifices per account.

I know that the BF has been the BF for a long time now, but I would like to also see the DA value of a player next to the gold, but only if you have directly reconned them, otherwise if someone else in the alliance has reconned them then it shows as ???.

Just a few ramblings.

Checkman
8th October 2014, 10:10 AM
As I was just clicking.....thought of something.....

A bit like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.....

A golden number, if it comes up in your sequence and you click it with the mouse, not type it, some type of bonus.....? Bonus point? 5,000 soldiers? % reduction of an upgrade of some form?

FallenOne
8th October 2014, 12:59 PM
As I was just clicking.....thought of something.....

A bit like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.....

A golden number, if it comes up in your sequence and you click it with the mouse, not type it, some type of bonus.....? Bonus point? 5,000 soldiers? % reduction of an upgrade of some form?

i don't think chance things like that are a good idea. u could get really lucky or really unlucky. the field needs to remain level in all aspects and clicks should be the same for everyone.

Checkman
8th October 2014, 03:47 PM
i don't think chance things like that are a good idea. u could get really lucky or really unlucky. the field needs to remain level in all aspects and clicks should be the same for everyone.

Whilst I get what you are saying, isn't the chance element in any event that comes along, some may be online, some may be asleep, the field is not level in that regard?

FallenOne
9th October 2014, 01:11 AM
Whilst I get what you are saying, isn't the chance element in any event that comes along, some may be online, some may be asleep, the field is not level in that regard?

well no because everyone has the option of using that same bonus if they'd been online.
the only real imbalance should be time; where if a player spends less time they'll generally perform worse than someone who spends more time on the game.

if we take an extreme example; one player could get 10 golden numbers in a row while another player only has time to do 5k clicks and doesn't get a golden number.
now you might say the odds of that happening are seriously unlikely but the odds still exist which can break the game.
u still have the same problem if you restrict the golden numbers; someone might get them early and someone else might not get them at all after clicking much more.
non-clickers could also potentially have a problem; they could fall far behind those who click with golden numbers popping up.

the only way to make it fair is for the interval to be the same for everyone (say every x amount of clicks) but we already have the recruit center bonus.
even that i am only partially keen on because non-clickers are put at more of a disadvantage; though UP now goes to 50k so perhaps it evens it out a bit.

Xdal
22nd October 2014, 02:49 AM
Another round of ideas and random brain waves. It mostly consists on things on how to help the smaller players, non clickers, and how to hammer down the untouchable big accounts.

1. Periodically (once every 24h) give away 1-2-3-5% of total clicks made in last 24 hours to every active player on battlefield. For example: at the moment there is 811080 total clicks made in last 24 hours, so a bonus of 1-2-5% would be ~8-16-40k soldiers. By active, it might be: logged in or banked gold at least once in last 24 hours.
2. Reduce the weapon sell value from 80% to 50%, no one wants to buy your bloody daggers anyways. This will hurt bigger accounts trying to recycle sabbed weapons, will dampen the effects of end of age sell offs or random gold feeding. Of course upgrade costs should be reduced to compensate that weapons value loss. This might put a meaning to word "war", when you can actually do some damage.
3. New event: "The 1 percent". Every sabotage mission has 1% added to success chance. Go and take down those big guys. No matter your spy rating you have that 1 percent chance of success.
4. Drastically increase the spy weapon damage while sabbing low value targets, almost to the point when where is no difference on who you sab, you just pay the +- static amount. This is very needed upgrade to game. I can basically faceroll through everyone with less than half of my sov with no sabbing costs. It makes very hard for smaller players to stand up by themselves. If you want to run a 20-30-40b spy rating army, be ready to pay for every sab. This might even discourage people from troll sabing or just inflating their sab damage by sabing all battlefield.
5. As someone already stated, gold rush rate now sucks. Zombies > gold rush atm.
6. Make max unit production achievable much faster. When you finally get that 42k or 50k UP in a middle of an age, it's too little too late and it takes weeks and even months to repay itself, not to mention that you just wasted huge pile of gold and recovering your stats makes you unable to fight back for a while.
7. A mandatory 6 hours account lock every 24 hours. This means that every 24hours there must be a 6 hour period when you can't login to your account. I've seen few games do it, and it was quite an effective way to constrain people from 24/7 banking.
8. Round 2 of my clicking stats and an opinion on them. With some changes on how i click i managed to do some big amounts daily, but it's still fucking retarded. I waste so much time on it, but until next WoW expansion i don't have anything better to do.

Soldiers from unit production 1,804,106
Soldiers from recruiter upgrades 1,365,076
Soldiers from others' clicks on you 1,634,038
Soldiers from clicks on yourself 225,004
Soldiers from clicks trickled up 189,535
Soldiers from credit deflation 190,270
Soldiers from activity bonus 81,450
Soldiers from events 1,327

8.1 Recruiter upgrade benefits only clickers (captain obvious). Make that upgrade mandatory for clickers to allow them to click further, rather than giving a free bonus.
For example:


Total clicks made: \ Recruiter upgrade:
0
0.1
0.2
0.3


100k
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3


200k
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.3


300k
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0


400k
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.9


500k
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6



So if a person made 400k clicks and has only 0.1 recruiter upgrade, every click he receives gives him only 0.6 soldiers. If he wants to be more effective, he must buy an upgrade. Of course these ratios now are completely random and would need a bit more careful balancing.

8.2 Soldiers from activity bonus 81,450 :D (at least 10x this)
8.3 Soldiers from events 1,327 :D

Checkman
24th October 2014, 07:28 AM
8.1 Recruiter upgrade benefits only clickers (captain obvious). Make that upgrade mandatory for clickers to allow them to click further, rather than giving a free bonus.
For example:


Total clicks made: \ Recruiter upgrade:
0
0.1
0.2
0.3


100k
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3


200k
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.3


300k
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0


400k
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.9


500k
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6



Like this idea, but I was thinking, why stop there, why not associate the relative upgrade for covert and SA and DA and then the account that upgrades all things is more effective than someone who just does covert and no upgrades on DA for example....

kavallier
24th October 2014, 08:35 AM
If you keep punishing the more active accounts for being active then you might just end up with a game full of inactives...

Why punish people who put more time and effort into the game? That's sure to drive them away or to just play half-assed like the rest... Doesn't seem like the smart thing to do when trying to improve activity.

What I do like is the recent introduction of recruiter upgrades that DO NOT trickle up. That way individual people who put more time and effort into their accounts can still have a chance at keeping up with the mains of the big alliances... So instead of punishing big accounts for being big, how about introducing more features that focus account-growth more on individual effort rather than alliance-effort.
We could for instance try an age where the trickle is halved from 50% to 25%. Or even more dramatic, lets try an age where there is no trickle at all. That would certainly shake things up and would make the race for #1 different for a change. Mains would be chosen near the end of the age rather than at the beginning of the age.

I'm a fan of changing the rules every age, that way the game becomes less boring and people have to rethink their strategy every age.

Xdal
25th October 2014, 05:55 AM
If you keep punishing the more active accounts for being active then you might just end up with a game full of inactives...
Why punish people who put more time and effort into the game?

The problem occurs whenever someone decides to be too active. And putting effort into game just to click 24/7 isn't exactly appealing, especially to new players.

MFnBonsai
26th October 2014, 05:19 AM
The problem occurs whenever someone decides to be too active. And putting effort into game just to click 24/7 isn't exactly appealing, especially to new players.

They will just have to learn to put as much time and effort in if they want to win.... Just because they are new does not mean they should get added bonuses to try and compete with someone that puts the effort in....

Xdal
27th October 2014, 05:35 AM
They will just have to learn to put as much time and effort in if they want to win.... Just because they are new does not mean they should get added bonuses to try and compete with someone that puts the effort in....

If you read it again, it's not about adding bonuses to new players, but about trying to reduce the need to click to grow big. Clicking effectiveness could be reduced by either lowering clicking bonuses or giving more soldiers from UP or activity bonus.

Xdal
27th October 2014, 02:19 PM
Possible additions to "Top Players" page. We seem to have none of "live" alliance stats, only personal. Of course alliance should have (if they don't already) their own separate stat counters, so no players can switch alliances and increase the new alliance stats. It's a counter of what was done under that alliances flag.

1. Is there any reason why there is "Top Slayers Today" but no "Top Farms Today"? I understand that top slayers/farms this age would be spoiled with sell offs for the duration of entire age, but daily stats come and go.
2. "Top sabbers this age", any reason it's not there? And "Top sabbing alliances today/age" stats.
3. "Top losses today/age". It's an attempt to evaluate on how hard player is getting attacked/sabbed + the cost to sab back. It's not about gold farming, but sabs/5*1's/attacks damage to player. You break your 500 excaliburs, 500m gets added to the stat. You recycle sabbed weapons, it adds 20% of weapon value to this stat. Someone wipes your 900k mercs, 900k*2500 gold gets added to that stat. You 5*1 others and kill your own mercs, stat++. Sabotage cost also gets added to this stat. This can also be alliance wide stat. For ex, how bad alliance "X" was hit today and see the cumulative stats for whole age.
4. Join stats pages like "Clickers Today | Clickers This Age". Is there any reason to keep this in 2 pages?
5. Biggest 1 attempt sab damage achieved today/age.
6. Sab attempts counter, daily/age and personal/alliance. A stat from this number on intelligence page: "21,739 sabotage, 3,306 reconnaissance, 25,045 operations total | page 1 of 835". Of course recons do not count, but sabotages do.

And some more
7. A possibility to reset your bonus point distribution once every week or 2 weeks or whatever time interval. Basically a button in command center "Reset bonus point distribution", and a text nearby "you'll be able to do that in 1w3d22h7m".

8. Make a fund raising event exclusively aimed at advertising the game.

Carlos
28th October 2014, 07:31 AM
You were a test tube baby right xdal? No chance you were the most powerful sperm that beat the rest in the race to the ovary. So many stupid ideas in one post...

FallenOne
28th October 2014, 08:07 AM
Another round of ideas and random brain waves. It mostly consists on things on how to help the smaller players, non clickers, and how to hammer down the untouchable big accounts.

1. Periodically (once every 24h) give away 1-2-3-5% of total clicks made in last 24 hours to every active player on battlefield. For example: at the moment there is 811080 total clicks made in last 24 hours, so a bonus of 1-2-5% would be ~8-16-40k soldiers. By active, it might be: logged in or banked gold at least once in last 24 hours.
2. Reduce the weapon sell value from 80% to 50%, no one wants to buy your bloody daggers anyways. This will hurt bigger accounts trying to recycle sabbed weapons, will dampen the effects of end of age sell offs or random gold feeding. Of course upgrade costs should be reduced to compensate that weapons value loss. This might put a meaning to word "war", when you can actually do some damage.
3. New event: "The 1 percent". Every sabotage mission has 1% added to success chance. Go and take down those big guys. No matter your spy rating you have that 1 percent chance of success.
4. Drastically increase the spy weapon damage while sabbing low value targets, almost to the point when where is no difference on who you sab, you just pay the +- static amount. This is very needed upgrade to game. I can basically faceroll through everyone with less than half of my sov with no sabbing costs. It makes very hard for smaller players to stand up by themselves. If you want to run a 20-30-40b spy rating army, be ready to pay for every sab. This might even discourage people from troll sabing or just inflating their sab damage by sabing all battlefield.
5. As someone already stated, gold rush rate now sucks. Zombies > gold rush atm.
6. Make max unit production achievable much faster. When you finally get that 42k or 50k UP in a middle of an age, it's too little too late and it takes weeks and even months to repay itself, not to mention that you just wasted huge pile of gold and recovering your stats makes you unable to fight back for a while.
7. A mandatory 6 hours account lock every 24 hours. This means that every 24hours there must be a 6 hour period when you can't login to your account. I've seen few games do it, and it was quite an effective way to constrain people from 24/7 banking.
8. Round 2 of my clicking stats and an opinion on them. With some changes on how i click i managed to do some big amounts daily, but it's still fucking retarded. I waste so much time on it, but until next WoW expansion i don't have anything better to do.


8.1 Recruiter upgrade benefits only clickers (captain obvious). Make that upgrade mandatory for clickers to allow them to click further, rather than giving a free bonus.
For example:


Total clicks made: \ Recruiter upgrade:
0
0.1
0.2
0.3


100k
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3


200k
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.3


300k
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0


400k
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.9


500k
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6



So if a person made 400k clicks and has only 0.1 recruiter upgrade, every click he receives gives him only 0.6 soldiers. If he wants to be more effective, he must buy an upgrade. Of course these ratios now are completely random and would need a bit more careful balancing.

8.2 Soldiers from activity bonus 81,450 :D (at least 10x this)
8.3 Soldiers from events 1,327 :D

1,3,7 will not fly; that i can be certain. u'd lose players for sure.
2) is very unlikely; the idea of recycling should exist properly as there is a skill element. at 50% i don't think many would even bother recycling much.
6) is very bad because as i have stated before if people get it too easily you devalue clicking too much and inflate the BF. either high UP should exist and cost a lot OR max UP should be low but be inexpensive.
so 30k 3.2bn was ok because at least clicking retained a fair amount of power with the lower UP. i also think the higher 50k for 12.8bn is ok as it costs more.
4) it already costs more to sab when your account is bigger though i am not sure if it depends on your spy value or value of account. i also do not know if it is too little or too much or just about right as i have never been a big sabber myself; that'd be for someone else to answer.
5) i've always been in support of increasing gold rush %age but i can see why it is so low (to not give too much power to massive accounts as those %ages will be worth a lot more to them than smaller ones in raw gold terms).
8) don't really follow but i probably haven't looked at it properly. recruit center upgrades are ok but even if they didn't exist it'd work fine.

Checkman
28th October 2014, 12:55 PM
5) i've always been in support of increasing gold rush %age but i can see why it is so low (to not give too much power to massive accounts as those %ages will be worth a lot more to them than smaller ones in raw gold terms).


Is there a way that the % could be proportional to the amount of people who could hit, or the number of relatively sized accounts?

I mean the Gold Rush event is not really for the person who is receiving it in all honesty, but to create more possible attacks on the BF?

If only 1 or 2 people can hit that person, give them a lower % than someone who has a lot of people being able to hit them.....

Ready to be shot down in flames :wigglinge

Xdal
5th November 2014, 07:40 AM
So many stupid ideas in one post...
If you ever tried to use your head you should know that it takes a lot of shitty ideas to get one right. And as I see, you can't even think of one yourself.


1,3 will not fly; that i can be certain. u'd lose players for sure.
Both of them can be balanced to add just a bit, enough to make impact, but not so OP as zombies.

Anyways, some more random thoughts:
1. Additional sabbing attempts for a cost of gold/credits. For ex. 11th sab attempt 500cc's, 12th- 1000cc's, ..., 15th - 5000cc's and so on.
2. Make a Credit/Gold trading market where people can put their credits for sale/buy. This might encourage smaller players to click some in exchange for gold which most likely would be bought by players with huge TBG. For example: random player clicks 4k credits and puts them for sale for 500m gold. Gets up in the morning and if someone bought them, claims the gold.
Or someone could make a credit buying event, like buying 5k cc for 800m. But this idea still has a serious game breaking flaw, it would make sell-offs very easy and without the need of SDM events. You could sell amount of 100cc's for 50b and etc. It would be nice to see this credits market coming to life, but I have no idea atm on how to control the gold transfer without leaving a hole to exploit it. Maybe alternate currency, limit daily transfers to something like 10 turns of TBG, a public transaction log, don't know.

Lil_Wolfy
5th November 2014, 12:26 PM
An auction-type system could be implemented. Would be interesting to see how much 10k credits would go for at various stages of the day/week/age.

Not sure how the cash would be passed to the seller though, maybe the set amount would automatically be reduced from the buyer's tbg? 4% per turn for 24 hours. Obviously the seller gets it upfront in a lump sum from the system itself which the buyer then slowly repays over the time period

Lil_Wolfy
10th November 2014, 05:53 PM
Events [?]

Current Events
None
Upcoming Events
Event Name will be displayed in 6 minutes 3 seconds; Event begins in 36 minutes 3 seconds
Event Name will be displayed in 1 hour 22 minutes; Event begins in 1 hour 52 minutes
Cyanide - Failed sabotages are anonymous. Your spies have been outfitted with cyanide pills, even the ones who succeed. (6 hours 58 minutes)
Cyanide - Failed sabotages are anonymous. Your spies have been outfitted with cyanide pills, even the ones who succeed. (7 hours 21 minutes)


CONSISTENCY PLEASE

SonicRage
11th November 2014, 12:54 AM
Can we make it able to search bf by alliance.

JeNnAjAmEsoN
11th November 2014, 04:54 PM
What about having additive events?. It might be too destructive thought but for sure will add some more chaos to the game


Current Events
Upcoming Events

Nightwalk-All spies gain +20% Spy Action! (1 minutes 58 seconds left) Nightwalk-All spies gain +20% Spy Action! (11 minutes 58 seconds left) +so 40%spy
Event Name displayed in 26 minutes 58 seconds; Event in 56 minutes 58 seconds Event Name displayed in 40 minutes 58 seconds; Event in 70 minutes 58 seconds
Event Name displayed in 1 hour 35 minutes; Event in 2 hours 5 minutes Event Name displayed in 1 hour 43 minutes; Event in 2 hours 13 minutes
Event Name displayed in 2 hours 52 minutes; Event in 3 hours 22 minutes Event Name displayed in 3 hours 02 minutes; Event in 3 hours 32 minutes

andyt683
11th November 2014, 07:51 PM
Events [?]

Current Events
None
Upcoming Events
Event Name will be displayed in 6 minutes 3 seconds; Event begins in 36 minutes 3 seconds
Event Name will be displayed in 1 hour 22 minutes; Event begins in 1 hour 52 minutes
Cyanide - Failed sabotages are anonymous. Your spies have been outfitted with cyanide pills, even the ones who succeed. (6 hours 58 minutes)
Cyanide - Failed sabotages are anonymous. Your spies have been outfitted with cyanide pills, even the ones who succeed. (7 hours 21 minutes)


CONSISTENCY PLEASE

Bug. The events are running far closer to each other this round for some reason.

Our event list is 4-5 deep. If one is expired, it waits until the next turn to drop it off the list, grabs the current event list and cooldown list, makes a new one, then adds the new cooldown to the cooldown list. In this case, TWO events dropped off before a turn occurred. It grabs the cooldown and event list, generates a Cyanide, so it checks to make sure that's not on cooldown. Nope, so it moves onto the next event to generate. Makes another Cyanide, and since we haven't submitted the FIRST one, the second one still doesn't have a cooldown. Now, both get submitted, and voila, double Cyanide.

I'll be fixing that.

thealmightyfish
11th November 2014, 11:43 PM
Double Dip - Lasts 2h. Runs concurrently with other events. makes each regularly scheduled common event that occurs during its running time give an additional effect of another random common event. Upon start of the regularly scheduled event, Double Dip changes into that additional random event to let us know what it is, and upon conclusion of the regularly scheduled event, changes back to Double Dip. Occurs with about the same frequency as rare events would, so maybe a half dozen to a dozen per age or whatever. Announced 30m in advance.

I'll Have Two Of Everything And A Side Of Fries - Lasts 10m. Has the effect of every event in the game, including rare ones, at the same time, with double effect (if applicable). Only once or twice per age. Announced hours in advance.

Vrasp
2nd December 2014, 01:20 PM
Just passing through...



1. Is there any reason why there is "Top Slayers Today" but no "Top Farms Today"?
3. "Top losses today/age".


Negative statistics aren't generally ranked for everyone to see. No one wants to be on a Wall of Shame.



7. A possibility to reset your bonus point distribution once every week or 2 weeks or whatever time interval. Basically a button in command center "Reset bonus point distribution", and a text nearby "you'll be able to do that in 1w3d22h7m".

Time to be TBG all age, then swap at the end. Same reason race changes aren't allowed.



2. Make a Credit/Gold trading market where people can put their credits for sale/buy.

Was considered in the past, not sure why it still doesn't exist, really. Although back in the day, the main concern was how would people get the gold? If it goes straight to their account and they're offline, well, there goes your gold. If it gets sent to an account that can't be stolen from, goodbye sell-catching. Perhaps this is still the reason it doesn't exist yet, so maybe some suggestions here would be nice.



2. Reduce the weapon sell value from 80% to 50%, no one wants to buy your bloody daggers anyways. This will hurt bigger accounts trying to recycle sabbed weapons, will dampen the effects of end of age sell offs or random gold feeding. Of course upgrade costs should be reduced to compensate that weapons value loss. This might put a meaning to word "war", when you can actually do some damage.
3. New event: "The 1 percent". Every sabotage mission has 1% added to success chance. Go and take down those big guys. No matter your spy rating you have that 1 percent chance of success.
4. Drastically increase the spy weapon damage while sabbing low value targets, almost to the point when where is no difference on who you sab, you just pay the +- static amount. This is very needed upgrade to game. I can basically faceroll through everyone with less than half of my sov with no sabbing costs. It makes very hard for smaller players to stand up by themselves. If you want to run a 20-30-40b spy rating army, be ready to pay for every sab. This might even discourage people from troll sabing or just inflating their sab damage by sabing all battlefield.
5. As someone already stated, gold rush rate now sucks. Zombies > gold rush atm.
6. Make max unit production achievable much faster. When you finally get that 42k or 50k UP in a middle of an age, it's too little too late and it takes weeks and even months to repay itself, not to mention that you just wasted huge pile of gold and recovering your stats makes you unable to fight back for a while.
7. A mandatory 6 hours account lock every 24 hours. This means that every 24hours there must be a 6 hour period when you can't login to your account. I've seen few games do it, and it was quite an effective way to constrain people from 24/7 banking.


2: Seems like recycling would be pointless, yeah? I also think this hurts smaller accounts more than bigger accounts (pointing this out because it seems to be a big focus of your posts). The big accounts can typically just hold their gold to buy upgrades - small accounts _need_ to bank, then sell for them.

3: I can dig it, but I don't know that it'd really be useful at 1%, and if it's higher, you're gonna have a lot of complainers. It'd also make it impossible to recycle for the person being sabbed though, and while it'd certainly be chaotic, it'd be pretty frustrating. Maybe if you got ONE ATTEMPT at 1% during the event. So like, if you sab someone during the event, it counts as 10 attempts. IDK. I like the idea though, perhaps it could be balanced out.

4: Something similar is already in place: you can't sab as much off of accounts with much less value than your own, just as smaller accounts can't sab as much off of bigger accounts.

5: I've tried to get them to nerf zombies harder than they did for the past 2 ages, maybe next age they'll do it. =p

As for Gold Rush, I never had a problem with it, but I can see how it's not considered very useful (but then again, if zombies weren't so stupid, maybe it'd be considered useful). Either way, raising it to 15% or so probably wouldn't be the worst thing since it doesn't last very long.

6: While it seems like a good idea [for small accounts] to make max UP attainable more quickly, it's actually a bad thing. The big accounts get it so much faster than everyone else anyway, and it's just that much worse. It also makes every account on the battlefield have billions of gold all the time, so having defense is pointless, because you'll never pass the slayers who have infinite gold available to them.

7: Wat?



Also, earlier in the thread, someone mentioned diminishing returns on clicks in a day - that's also been mentioned in the past. I don't think it's the worst idea, but I'd disagree with the values they presented, and also someone *cough*fury*cough* hates all ideas that hurt his beautiful clicking system. =p



EDIT:

Oh yeah, and someone mentioned randomizing the 'value' of events - as in, 10-20% bonus instead of flat 15%, etc. That'd be pretty awesome too.

Zues
3rd December 2014, 05:37 PM
I would not mind a new rare 6-10 min event that resurects 1% of zombies per minute? Something with the rarity of click or make it more common and less zombies come back. Some would say oh its bad because it diminishes the effectiveness of killing but i would say
1. It reduces the effect of grave events marginally.
2. These troops have to be retrained and are always likely to be killed again (slayers will train them to spy anyway so tbg gain is not that much)
3. this is an equalizing measure i highly doubt many of the big accounts have a tonne of zombies so more benefit from it would go to the smaller people.
4. it gives a smidgen of recovery to accounts that get #wrektson meaning it is less depressing to make a horrible error.

I realize that there should be consequences for actions but i think this would make minimal difference seeing as those who do not have many zombies will not be hindered by this event much at all and those who have zombies are still being punished, just a bit less than they used to be it would still always be preferable to not lose your soldiers. I like the zombie system to track losses and id love to have top zombies displayed at eoa to see who copped it the worst (ofc many people will sell and get ripped but still fun to see)

andyt683
4th December 2014, 09:41 PM
Zombies will never turn into soldiers again.

1) They're not a troop value, they're just a column tracking how many deaths you've had. Altering the would change the statistic.
2) They weren't even supposed to impact the game itself. It was going to be a mini-game, and someone else added Grave Robbing. I disagree in principle with the event entirely. I'm not going to make the problem worse by making them impact the game more.
3) Dead soldiers coming back would just weaken the 5x1, one of the only tactics remaining for getting rid of lone wolf sabbers.

Lil_Wolfy
11th December 2014, 09:17 AM
Pressed all the buttons in my messages options and managed to delete the past 5 days of messages.

Thanks andy!

andyt683
11th December 2014, 09:36 AM
Pressed all the buttons in my messages options and managed to delete the past 5 days of messages.

Thanks andy!

Since I specifically didn't enable Delete, I assure you that whatever you did, that wasn't it.

Carlos
11th December 2014, 02:03 PM
Did you get rid of the sdm or what andy??!!

ManOwaR669
11th December 2014, 02:58 PM
what the hell is Instaclicks?!?

Carlos
11th December 2014, 03:27 PM
what the hell is Instaclicks?!?



Are people like you and killa really going to end top6?

ManOwaR669
11th December 2014, 05:38 PM
sorry for not playing from age 4 till 16.
smartass.

andyt683
11th December 2014, 11:06 PM
sorry for not playing from age 4 till 16.
smartass.

We had instaclicks in age 1. The timer appearing is kind of neat, but probably because I set it all up to be automated now. Normally, we'd just distribute the clicks manually a day before the age ended.

Back to suggestions, people!

Lil_Wolfy
12th December 2014, 03:36 AM
We had instaclicks in age 1. The timer appearing is kind of neat, but probably because I set it all up to be automated now. Normally, we'd just distribute the clicks manually a day before the age ended.

Back to suggestions, people!

I suggest deleting grave robbing and bumping gold rush up to 70% of tbg per minute

cata-ro
12th December 2014, 06:09 AM
Grave robbing is the shit keep it :D, i'm ending with 4 mil zombies evry age when i go kamikaze :p.

Xdal
12th December 2014, 06:16 AM
We had instaclicks in age 1. The timer appearing is kind of neat, but probably because I set it all up to be automated now. Normally, we'd just distribute the clicks manually a day before the age ended.

Back to suggestions, people!

5 minutes turn age for the duration of holidays

Carlos
12th December 2014, 07:06 AM
New age will start sometime after boxing day. I told andy to start it after new year and run some speedrounds or beta during those 10-14 days. Who seconds my motion!?

Cipher_21
12th December 2014, 01:17 PM
maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think assholes that sab just to win top sabber are driving inexperienced and casual players away from the game.

i mean, sure, we can all say we enjoy playing against the same 350 people every age, but without growth this game is going to fail.

i mean shit, i'm plying on my own because i dont want the drama of an alliance, but when i get 4 dudes getting in on me 8-9x a day, recycling isn't worth it....and im lucky that i know to recycle

not really a suggestion, just pointing out an issue that need to be corrected unless you want to watch the number of players continue to fall.
eventually getting int to top 100 will only require signing up!

going by the loss of players from my last time playing....there's about another 18months of ROC before no one gives a shit anymore.

Wasian
12th December 2014, 03:02 PM
I don't disagree. But I doubt the few selfish people who do this care about anyone but themselves on this game. Lost some really cool people to crap like that.

Lil_Wolfy
12th December 2014, 03:59 PM
I don't disagree. But I doubt the few selfish people who do this care about anyone but themselves on this game. Lost some really cool people to crap like that.

If sabbing was only in the game to appease a few selfish people then why dont the unselfish majority form a petition?

Wasian
12th December 2014, 04:38 PM
If sabbing was only in the game to appease a few selfish people then why dont the unselfish majority form a petition?

In a sense, we did. Most of RoC banded together last age or age before to go after Sannicola

Lil_Wolfy
12th December 2014, 05:28 PM
In a sense, we did. Most of RoC banded together last age or age before to go after Sannicola

Apparently we have different ideas of what a petition entails lol

Carlos
12th December 2014, 05:33 PM
If you cant handle the sabs play something like call of duty. Poor cipher still hasnt forgotten the brutal raping he suffered in age 14 beta.

Wasian
12th December 2014, 05:44 PM
I don't think sabbing should be gone. But the unprovoked ones constantly going for sab stats drives people away.

MFnBonsai
12th December 2014, 08:08 PM
I have only sabbed in 2 RoC ages....

Definitely Not Age 14 - Take 2 and this age.... Yet I have been sabbed every age by every alliance playing.... I have never complained because it is part of the game....

I expect to be attacked and sabbed no matter what I do in the game.... Just because I am playing.... If you do not want to be attacked or sabbed go play tetris it will not happen there....

To blame BBLDT for making players quit is ludicrous really.... We have one or 2 sabbers every age that go for top sabber sure.... But do you see us brag about our sabb stats.... NO....

There is only one alliance THAT claims to be the best sabb alliance that even puts their totals in their alliance page that sabb all of RoC as an alliance.... That is the alliance that is making players quit.... Not one or 2 individuals that take away a certain alliances ability to get top sabber as a whole when they cannot even get that right....

If you want to be pissed at someone be pissed at them ;)....

andyt683
12th December 2014, 08:17 PM
There is only one alliance THAT claims to be the best sabb alliance that even puts their totals in their alliance page that sabb all of RoC as an alliance.... That is the alliance that is making players quit....

Oh, you mean the alliance that caused me to rethink being an admin due to their terrible entitled attitude, directly leading to me quitting next age? No way they make people quit....

Obviously Nippler
12th December 2014, 08:21 PM
Cipher, other than what wolfy, Carlos and Bon told you, having people that can click 100Ks per day drives people to quit too. What's the point of clicking to get a high rank if someone that has no life can just outclick you and win?

Sabbing is part of the game, get over it. If you want to play a peaceful game where you build your own empire without being attacked, I suggest Farmville.

MFnBonsai
12th December 2014, 08:32 PM
When an alliance thinks their shit don't stink and they work as a team not only to dictate what players in a game can/should do and what they think they can dictate to admins/mods to try and ban their competition over pettiness then I do not think removing the ability to sabb is really the issue....

It is more about removing said alliance from the game then you won't have one or 2 individuals going for top sabber just to annoy that said alliance every age....

Clearly my idea is a win/win for all ;)....

Wasian
12th December 2014, 08:59 PM
When an alliance thinks their shit don't stink and they work as a team not only to dictate what players in a game can/should do and what they think they can dictate to admins/mods to try and ban their competition over pettiness then I do not think removing the ability to sabb is really the issue....

It is more about removing said alliance from the game then you won't have one or 2 individuals going for top sabber just to annoy that said alliance every age....

Clearly my idea is a win/win for all ;)....

I never said remove the ability to sab. It's a part of a war game. However, people sabbing for sab stats aren't acceptable. And that DOES kill it for players. You guys are like the whiny 10 year old idiots farting into the mic trying to be cool on Call of Duty. Nobody likes you, and you aren't making the game enjoyable for anyone but yourselves.

And for your info, if you are being sabbed by our alliance without you sabbing first, it is because at least 4-5 of your alliance buddies have shown aggression towards us in that age (many of them chaining) and we are no longer going to keep it 1 vs 1. We give everyone a clean slate every age, and every age, your buddies blow it. Anyone in your alliance knows to expect massive aggression shown towards them because of the astounding number of random terrorists in your group. Don't give me this "2 individuals going for top sabber" crap.[/rant]

MFnBonsai
12th December 2014, 09:45 PM
I do not know what alliance you are in.... Not that it matters anyway....

In the 2 ages I have actively sabbed I have waited till the last 2 weeks of the age.... before retalliating on anyone that has shown up in my logs throughout the age.... Yet I have been sabbed by others from the start of the age.... Reasons do not matter to me but their reasoning is because I or members of my alliance are going to sabb them eventually.... Do I care no....

The way I see it is.... If you are not in my chain.... YOU ARE THE ENEMY.... Regardless of what alliance you are in.... So if I want to sabb you or anyone else in game there is only one solution.... be in chain.... If you do not want to be in chain then expect to be sabbed.... But don't cry about it....

Unfortunately sabbs are a par of the game.... Do I get pissed off because someone clicks millions every age.... NO.... Do I get pissed because someone banks all age.... NO.... DO I get pissed if I get sabbed all age.... NO.... I just play the game that is all....

Wasian
12th December 2014, 10:25 PM
I do not know what alliance you are in.... Not that it matters anyway....

In the 2 ages I have actively sabbed I have waited till the last 2 weeks of the age.... before retalliating on anyone that has shown up in my logs throughout the age.... Yet I have been sabbed by others from the start of the age.... Reasons do not matter to me but their reasoning is because I or members of my alliance are going to sabb them eventually.... Do I care no....

The way I see it is.... If you are not in my chain.... YOU ARE THE ENEMY.... Regardless of what alliance you are in.... So if I want to sabb you or anyone else in game there is only one solution.... be in chain.... If you do not want to be in chain then expect to be sabbed.... But don't cry about it....

Unfortunately sabbs are a par of the game.... Do I get pissed off because someone clicks millions every age.... NO.... Do I get pissed because someone banks all age.... NO.... DO I get pissed if I get sabbed all age.... NO.... I just play the game that is all....

There is a difference between playing the game and hindering others from playing the way they wish. People clicking doesn't hinder you from enjoying the game your way. People banking doesn't hinder you from enjoying the game your way. People sabbing does prevent people from enjoying the game in many cases. Look, I don't give a rip that I'm random sabbed. But, I do care if this gaming community that I've made many good friends in is shrinking because of this stupidity. I do care if I have friends who no longer wish to play the game because of this sort of behavior. Outsiders don't care to keep playing because they don't want their efforts torn away because someone wanted to go for sab stats. And don't try to justify the use of sabs in the manner your alliance uses it by making the connection between your style and the existence of the sab button. The "Delete Account" button exists too. And when someone has to resort to using it, it's a loss for the community.

The point is, if I were playing an FPS in a capture the flag game, the equivalent of your alliance would be the person who determines he wants to play to see how many of his teammates he can kill each round. While the stat may be tracked and he may enjoy that manner of play, no one else enjoys it. Many would even leave the game because of it. Stop killing this community. It's dying fast enough without players helping it along with selfish actions. Seems like you all won't be happy until you've driven every player not in your alliance/chain out of this game.

thealmightyfish
12th December 2014, 10:42 PM
sabbing is already so goddamn weak by the numbers, what room for change do you honestly think there is? if you're saying what's driving people away is the psychological aspect of it, they're playing the wrong game, period.

Wasian
13th December 2014, 01:26 PM
sabbing is already so goddamn weak by the numbers, what room for change do you honestly think there is? if you're saying what's driving people away is the psychological aspect of it, they're playing the wrong game, period.

Make sabbing costs turns or some other consumable resource. This would, in my opinion, put a lot more strategy into becoming top sabber. If I was an indiscriminant sabber, I would actually enjoy the challenge of having to strategize the best possible way to generate the stats rather than just click 10x for each player in the game within range. I think it would add quite a dynamic to it. We already make probes cost turns for massing. And when that was removed, look what it did to our community in the murder round. We lost a lot of really awesome people around here. :(

andyt683
13th December 2014, 07:49 PM
Make sabbing costs turns or some other consumable resource. This would, in my opinion, put a lot more strategy into becoming top sabber. If I was an indiscriminant sabber, I would actually enjoy the challenge of having to strategize the best possible way to generate the stats rather than just click 10x for each player in the game within range. I think it would add quite a dynamic to it. We already make probes cost turns for massing. And when that was removed, look what it did to our community in the murder round. We lost a lot of really awesome people around here. :(

Murder round, most people left because they refused to play "different". I brought our game rules to an extreme end, mostly to see what happened with a lot more destruction in terms of gameplay dynamics. The number of signups at the beginning was very low, people didn't even give it a chance, and then just simply never returned.

I'm a data-driven kind of guy, but the only useful data I could get out of that round was a warning not to change too much, because our players don't actually want change.

Wasian
13th December 2014, 07:57 PM
Murder round, most people left because they refused to play "different". I brought our game rules to an extreme end, mostly to see what happened with a lot more destruction in terms of gameplay dynamics. The number of signups at the beginning was very low, people didn't even give it a chance, and then just simply never returned.

I'm a data-driven kind of guy, but the only useful data I could get out of that round was a warning not to change too much, because our players don't actually want change.

They may not want change, but the truth is, what we are doing now is not working. People are slowly leaving and we aren't getting many if any new players.

FragileGallows
13th December 2014, 09:28 PM
Nothing wrong with the game, there are simply more interactive ones out there with more tangible reward. Young people can't handle a game like this so don't stick around. All us oldies that have been around firever will likely live and die with it, and the game with it.

Accept it and enjoy it for what it is

Lil_Wolfy
14th December 2014, 03:55 AM
Murder round, most people left because they refused to play "different". I brought our game rules to an extreme end, mostly to see what happened with a lot more destruction in terms of gameplay dynamics. The number of signups at the beginning was very low, people didn't even give it a chance, and then just simply never returned.

I'm a data-driven kind of guy, but the only useful data I could get out of that round was a warning not to change too much, because our players don't actually want change.

There are two types of change:

Change for progression

and Change for the sake of change.

My feelings about the murder round was the latter.

Carlos
14th December 2014, 04:32 AM
Free ride - weapons take no damage at all, meaning they dont break either if sabbed

FallenOne
14th December 2014, 04:46 PM
They may not want change, but the truth is, what we are doing now is not working. People are slowly leaving and we aren't getting many if any new players.

we wont get new players whatever happens. people just evolve with the times; like new consoles and games vs old consoles and games.
this game has actually been good for quite a while and it hasn't really needed changing but people just want change for variety.
the 2 new races, recruit center bonus, zombies, constant changes in UP haven't really been necessary but have just been for change.
UP change can be dangerous but has still managed to remain rather balanced from the stock 30k 3.2bn that i remember so well.

there were inherent flaws at the beginning (like the ridiculously high UP and pathetic weak sabbing in the early ages) but they've been sorted.

if i could suggest SOMETHING it'd be a new more expensive spy/sentry tool so accounts can detrain slower if they wish and use their tbg more and maybe more covert level upgrades at the higher end as the majority are able to get through them quite easily; but this is probably just nitpicking and again isn't necessary but a fair variation for change.
i've said in the past it is hard to suggest decent changes when a lot of it is so good already.

Xdal
17th December 2014, 09:56 AM
Why are people complaining about a core feature of the game which will never get removed? How often people use it is decided between alliances or individual players. There is button "Sabotage" and players press it, deal with it.

The problem I see with sabotage:
Sab damage is too weak, and cost to sab is too small Sabbing should be an action of war or action taken when all else fails. It might even look like cold war. Both parties has the weapons but are cautions about using them, because that will end in huge losses. As the age progresses it's just a matter of time who snaps first. Now it's impossible to do real damage that would force opposition to discuss peace. You can war from day 1 do the end of age with minimal losses. Unlike zombies, it really has no noticeable impact.

For ex, like 6 weeks ago TC and WP war for "fun": i was sabbed daily by top 7-9 of TC players (+ saniflush) who were getting in easily with their spy, yet they couldn't do noticeable damage. Daily loses to sab damage was ~2-3b which is ~10-20% of my daily tbg, that includes recycling costs. I was spending more gold on repairing spy weapons than loosing to sabs. Even now it's about the same when i sab everyone.
Gold Lost to Sabotage 60,238,158,000 Gold
Sabotage Cost 54,850,479,700 Gold

Retaliating and damaging the aggressor is not possible
I started sabbing whole battlefield 5 days ago. Now I got like 40-50 fanboys sabbing me back, trying turn farming or 5*1'ing. They can't do shit to me. In these 5 days my SOV only droped from 142b to 139.5b (zombie growth rate is another story lol). We should also notice that my 6m tff and 100m SA doesn't allow me to attack for gold, which is like 1.5-2b gold for each zombie hit. Any player who can count to 10 will be easily able to successfully manage their sab account.


The suggestions i have on sabing are these:
1. Make the sabing cost equal when sabing both high value targets and lowbies (I already suggested that). When i have 20m 30m or even bigger repair bill for a sab attempt, I really start counting them. But when it gets to lower sentry targets: 1m 500k repairs, meh. 10 captchas, another target, 10 captchas, another target, 10 captchas, another target. I don't have any big reason to sab everyone apart from sab damage, and wouldn't sab everyone if repair bill was calculated by my current SOV.

2. Increase sabing power, but in a bit different way. Don't just add a static +25% to sab damage and be done with it. The idea is to increase the sab damage when you're retaliating against someone and to decrease damage when only one side is sabing. Add a bonus sab damage (and/or success rate) to those sabs that are retaliation to player sabing you.

For example player X sabbed me first. Because i haven't made any sabs on him in last 24 (48) hours, he can only sab me for 66% of normal damage. If i keep ignoring him, he still can sab me, but will never get through that 66% sab damage barrier.
One day i decide to start sabing back, and because that player has been sabing me daily (24-48h since last sab), i get a bonus sab damage when sabing him, lets say 200-250% of normal damage + ignoring Jack Bauer protection (we really want it to hurt). The next day player X has me in his logs, and can sab back for the same 200-250% increased sab damage. Now we get into vicious cycle of who is gonna fall first and surrender.
This "retaliation" mode MUST be also enabled by attacks/probes. Like 5 attacks in last 48 hours enables that sab damage bonus.



And some random thoughts:
3. Zombie event. Leave the zombies at 100 gold per minute, but limit gold amount to 20-50% of players TBG. I have 5m zombies but only 100m TBG, that means my zombie gold per minute will not exceed 50m. Zombie problem solved.

4. Boost gold rush to like 20%. It won't make such difference as zombies did and we'll have a nice event.

5. Event: Friends with benefits. You get 20% of your commanders gold every minute. To prevent commander hopping from out of alliance members, it might need to have approved alliance member status or something.

6. Change banzai "filler event" with something else. It's not funny. You can change the banzai and click events places. Players will thank you.

SonicRage
26th December 2014, 06:18 PM
Idea in the swiper app could we take it back to a normal clicker.
Use a number pad and load numbers.
User a dial pad and normal recruiter numbers. Make it 3 numbers and should be able to pick a decent speed up.
Then that prevents auto swiping.

Wasian
26th December 2014, 11:50 PM
Glad to see grave robbing got nerfed hard. Now someone can't play a few days at the end of age and negate all the effort of someone who played all age. Effort is being rewarded.

Anshul235
27th December 2014, 12:19 AM
Glad to see grave robbing got nerfed hard. Now someone can't play a few days at the end of age and negate all the effort of someone who played all age. Effort is being rewarded.

Zombies: 253
Minute-Based Gold: 25,300 Gold

Looks like we are still getting 100 TBG per minute....They gotta fix it!!

Lil_Wolfy
27th December 2014, 02:27 AM
Glad to see grave robbing got nerfed hard. Now someone can't play a few days at the end of age and negate all the effort of someone who played all age. Effort is being rewarded.

Are you deluded? The problem was the sheer number of zombies EVERYONE had, not the damn zombie event itself, its called cause and effect lol.

But whatever this might work as well i guess.

andyt683
27th December 2014, 03:27 AM
Zombies: 253
Minute-Based Gold: 25,300 Gold

Looks like we are still getting 100 TBG per minute....They gotta fix it!!

I changed that number in 4 different places, I guess I missed the fifth. It's still correctly giving you 25 gold per zombie, the base is incorrect.

Jarrad-
27th December 2014, 07:43 AM
Upcoming Events
- (3 minutes 53 seconds)

What's this supposed to be?

FallenOne
27th December 2014, 08:47 AM
Upcoming Events
- (3 minutes 53 seconds)

What's this supposed to be?

ah i missed it; what was it in the end?

Jarrad-
27th December 2014, 09:19 AM
Unless it lasted a very short amount of time it wasn't anything

SonicRage
28th December 2014, 05:32 AM
and can we please be able to delete our alliance msgs they become annoying.

SonicRage
28th December 2014, 05:37 AM
and fix merge button to please.

Chocolate_Milk
30th December 2014, 02:39 PM
Is it in the works to add the recruiter upgrade costs to the help page?

Some other things I'd like to see:
-a detailed breakdown on your kill ratio. How many soldiers/mercs/coverts of each type you've killed, side by side with how many you've lost.
-sort battlefield by race
-ability to spend x amount of gold repairing weapons instead of being forced to fully repair weapons on checking the repair box
-fix deleting messages in inbox. It seems as of now, you cannot delete any. Kind of frustrating.
-a breakdown on what actually goes into calculating your alliance points in the help section
-Add something that allows you to view player stats in past ages in a list displaying only that player, and each age theyve played-with a link that directs them to the already existing breakdown of that age for them. Sure, you could do it the hard way and hunt them down in each ages stats, but some people are proud of their accomplishments and it'd be cool to allow them to display those achievements, even if its accessed via a link on their profile. I would make it an option, so it only displays if they choose to allow it to be public info.

andyt683
30th December 2014, 07:51 PM
-fix deleting messages in inbox. It seems as of now, you cannot delete any. Kind of frustrating.

You've never been able to delete, I'm kind of stuck there. Don't want people trolling message threads by deleting important stuff, so there has to be a permission system.

Wasian
30th December 2014, 10:54 PM
I've suggested it before, but I'll do it again. We should incorporate an alternative to clicking in the form of mini games. Make it nowhere near as effective as clicking for serious growers, but will still attract stagnant current players to do more and maybe even attract new players.

Game Ideas:

1. Retro Game knock offs (Pacman, space invader, snake, etc.)
2. Casino type games where you can gamble ingame gold in hopes to get cc
3. Battle Royale Events (First person shooter/fighting games/sports/anything competitive) and let players pay cc/gold to enter tournaments where the server donates x number of cc prizes.

This would be something I would think I could invite friends to and many join up.

Chocolate_Milk
30th December 2014, 11:03 PM
I've suggested it before, but I'll do it again. We should incorporate an alternative to clicking in the form of mini games. Make it nowhere near as effective as clicking for serious growers, but will still attract stagnant current players to do more and maybe even attract new players.

Game Ideas:

1. Retro Game knock offs (Pacman, space invader, snake, etc.)
2. Casino type games where you can gamble ingame gold in hopes to get cc
3. Battle Royale Events (First person shooter/fighting games/sports/anything competitive) and let players pay cc/gold to enter tournaments where the server donates x number of cc prizes.

This would be something I would think I could invite friends to and many join up.

I've thought about this before and I definitely think it would be an awesome way to draw in new players and make the game a lot less about mindless clicking of numbers. Although it sounds good, I feel like having all these games running on the site may slow it down. Then the big question is...how many soldiers are rewarded for each game? It's a good idea, but in order for it to not be op would be difficult to pull off I think. Someday, maybe.


You've never been able to delete, I'm kind of stuck there. Don't want people trolling message threads by deleting important stuff, so there has to be a permission system.

I've never really tried deleting before, so I guess I just recently found that out. Not a huge deal, compared to other things that could be broken :-p

Wasian
30th December 2014, 11:33 PM
I've thought about this before and I definitely think it would be an awesome way to draw in new players and make the game a lot less about mindless clicking of numbers. Although it sounds good, I feel like having all these games running on the site may slow it down. Then the big question is...how many soldiers are rewarded for each game? It's a good idea, but in order for it to not be op would be difficult to pull off I think. Someday, maybe.

It could honestly be pretty easy to calculate it to not make it OP. And for it to be so, contests with prizes would have to be a bit more rare. But the goal might be to make it possible for the best side gamers to hit only 1/3 of the cc that an average clicker might hit for the duration of a game. Making a game based on points or timer would make it easier. As for the server, use a different one and have a script automatically collect the scores and do the calculations for cc. Heck, you could even attach it to a new forum where games could be loaded. It's fairly easy to do.

HungryMan
1st January 2015, 03:38 PM
Event Idea.

1. like in the speed round we got turns every ten minutes. Give and event that gives us turns every 5-10 minutes...that would add a lot of activity to the game during that event.

2. now i know there was lots of talk about events doing negative things to accounts but how about an even that DA means nothing. now if people dont like that because then people could just hit all the bigger gold players....maybe during this even sentry ratings still apply for recons but no gold is visible on the battlefield so you would have to recon to see if there is gold to take.

Chocolate_Milk
1st January 2015, 04:12 PM
Event Idea.

1. like in the speed round we got turns every ten minutes. Give and event that gives us turns every 5-10 minutes...that would add a lot of activity to the game during that event.

2. now i know there was lots of talk about events doing negative things to accounts but how about an even that DA means nothing. now if people dont like that because then people could just hit all the bigger gold players....maybe during this even sentry ratings still apply for recons but no gold is visible on the battlefield so you would have to recon to see if there is gold to take.

1. giving extra turns doesnt promote activity during that time. it just adds turns you can use later. it doesn't really promote anything. events like gold rush and grave robbing reward players who are online because they see the gold go up-they slay it-ppl log on later and its already done with. activtity is rewarded.

2. this would start a LOT of problems lol. lowering DA at any rate penalized players who have all da. how would soldier casualties be affected? why should the guy in last place be allowed to hit the guy in first? they COULD instead propose an event where strike is greatly improved (30% or so) but only for 5 mins. that would promote activity, but only for players who actually were building strike. see the difference?

one event idea would be a reduced price in training units. 500 gold to train to attack/defense/spy/sentry
another idea would be similar to the current gold rush thing...but make it something James Bond oriented....coverts pay out 20 gold each minute. That could raise some mayhem on the battlefield.

Another good spy oriented event would be a recon event where recon attempts are 20% more likely to succeed (or increasing the # of spies used doesn't reduce the % of being caught), but spies are 50% more likely to die. This gives you a chance to figure out exactly how much sentry that guy you cant recon has-because you can use the full 25 spies and get a full detailed report, with a higher chance of success, yet-you may have to pay the price in losing spies if you go recon crazy. it wouldn't "hurt" the people you recon, but would amplify the # of zombies you have, and would mean those players bent on knowing everyones stats has another event besides the spy% event to help them out.

A complete alternative to this would be "007"-a successful recon will reveal all details about an enemies base (no ????s). During this event, only one spy can be used, which naturally increase success %. That one spy either fails if the spy rating is too low, or 100% succeeds and unlocks all available data on one success. Again-geared toward gathering data, and doesnt really "hurt" anyone, but promotes activity during that time.

An interesting event you could do too would be a sab defense event. During this event, if you have sabotaged weapons-only half of them will break with each action you make. Did you fail to recycle successfully? If you're scared stiff, wait for this event to act, then if you lose weapons, recycle the # of weapons that broke, and you're good. Nothing broke? You did good...or OVER recycled. You'll never know.

There could be an event where mercs have increased performance by a %. This works both ways. If you have mercs holding SA, your SA will increase. People with mercs holding DA will have their DA increase for a duration. Having mercs (or killing them) could make this an interesting 20-30 mins.


It could honestly be pretty easy to calculate it to not make it OP. And for it to be so, contests with prizes would have to be a bit more rare. But the goal might be to make it possible for the best side gamers to hit only 1/3 of the cc that an average clicker might hit for the duration of a game. Making a game based on points or timer would make it easier. As for the server, use a different one and have a script automatically collect the scores and do the calculations for cc. Heck, you could even attach it to a new forum where games could be loaded. It's fairly easy to do.

I agree, using a diff server would make this a better idea. But these games could only be available during events or something. Or events give increased credits for high scores? Its viable.

HungryMan
1st January 2015, 05:14 PM
I do see your point on that DA thing i guess there would need to be something put into effect so that a last player could not hit the first player....maybe no blind attacks during that event..as i said you wouldn't be able to see the gold on the BF so you would have to recon and if you can not recon then you can not hit,

The extra turns even would be nice because not only do we gain turns to use later but there would be a lot of more gold on the fields getting full TBG every 5-10 minutes ass tons of gold to steal thus adding activity.

i do like your idea where during an event you can only send one spy and either he gets nothing or he gets it all.


Also i am not sure if it is an event but should be....army size does not matter when attacking for gold. hat would be nice although it may already exist.

Chocolate_Milk
1st January 2015, 11:57 PM
I do see your point on that DA thing i guess there would need to be something put into effect so that a last player could not hit the first player....maybe no blind attacks during that event..as i said you wouldn't be able to see the gold on the BF so you would have to recon and if you can not recon then you can not hit,

The extra turns even would be nice because not only do we gain turns to use later but there would be a lot of more gold on the fields getting full TBG every 5-10 minutes ass tons of gold to steal thus adding activity.

i do like your idea where during an event you can only send one spy and either he gets nothing or he gets it all.


Also i am not sure if it is an event but should be....army size does not matter when attacking for gold. hat would be nice although it may already exist.

there is an event called size doesnt matter but it doesnt happen as often as the other events because its a big deal. keep your eye open for it!

since the stats fluctuate 10% when attacking/defending...one idea that would make it rather interesting (though math heavy) would be if the attacker always got the benefit of the 10% when attacking. so the dmg done would increase 10% for the attacker, and the defense would do exactly the damage as their defend rating (so they dont lose damage, just dont gain any for the hit). so even if you have less strike than your target, so long as your strike +10% beats the enemy defense by 1 point, you will always successfully attack. no more having 5-20m more strike than their defense and losing (for the event anyway).

save us the math by making their defense blue instead of white/red when viewing their stats.

HungryMan
6th January 2015, 04:04 PM
How about an actual bank that opponents can not hurt or see.

banking weapons is one thing and cost about 20% these can be sabbed...as long as not broken still worth the same. but they can be broken and you loose your banked cash

i say a real bank that you put gold into but this one cost must more say 30-40 % maybe even more if you feel like it is needed.

i said that the other players couldnt hurt but maybe one day a feature to send troops to try to rob the bank would do something. but say they can't find out how much is in the bank

Zues
16th January 2015, 03:12 AM
I was doing some thinking (it has been known to occur) i reckon i really like the recruiter upgrade, but it has made it massively lopsided in favour of heavy clickers. I've always said clicking should be rewarded the most of all play styles but currently clickers are the only ones who add anything special to their alliance, slayers and sabbers wont add or remove more value from their rivals than those rivals generate for their chain

I would like to see an event where your commander receives a bonus of the gold you have slayed something like scavangers (which i have yet to see work off about 5 hits during the event). or maybe just a command centre upgrade like recruiter where you can increase turn production (dislike more turns honestly) or gold funnels up as a 1%-10% upgrade with gold costs or now as i type that just an "interest upgrade" where gold stolen is increased by a recruiter like upgrade.

Anyway i just spit balled this whole post so might seem disjointed but bottom line is recruiter upgrade has made tank and bank significantly more appealing slaying without the support of a solid group is very hard with tonnes of slayers in the middle band chewing up the gold from the low-mid clickers and each other.

Lil_Wolfy
16th January 2015, 03:59 PM
I was doing some thinking (it has been known to occur) i reckon i really like the recruiter upgrade, but it has made it massively lopsided in favour of heavy clickers. I've always said clicking should be rewarded the most of all play styles but currently clickers are the only ones who add anything special to their alliance, slayers and sabbers wont add or remove more value from their rivals than those rivals generate for their chain

I would like to see an event where your commander receives a bonus of the gold you have slayed something like scavangers (which i have yet to see work off about 5 hits during the event). or maybe just a command centre upgrade like recruiter where you can increase turn production (dislike more turns honestly) or gold funnels up as a 1%-10% upgrade with gold costs or now as i type that just an "interest upgrade" where gold stolen is increased by a recruiter like upgrade.

Anyway i just spit balled this whole post so might seem disjointed but bottom line is recruiter upgrade has made tank and bank significantly more appealing slaying without the support of a solid group is very hard with tonnes of slayers in the middle band chewing up the gold from the low-mid clickers and each other.

Recruiter upgrade has gotten silly.

Should be maxxed at .7

Jarrad-
16th January 2015, 05:46 PM
I agree, tls chain have atleast 3 people with over 1.3.....

Chocolate_Milk
19th January 2015, 11:18 PM
Recruiter upgrade has gotten silly.

Should be maxxed at .7

If this change is not implemented, I think instead you should remove the option to pay for click upgrades with credits. In order for you to get an upgrade to anything, you should have to spend time growing your account by way of banking gold, not credits.

Part of making any game enjoyable means there needs to be balance, and that means there needs to be a way to counter different styles and types of play. If you want to purchase a large upgrade, there is a moment where you can have somebody steal your gold. Well...with credits, its a guaranteed transfer. How do you counter that? Currently there is no way. So I say, again, remove the option to pay for the upgrade with credits, or massively raise the amount of credits needed to buy them. Right now its too easy for a few people to send credits to one guy and they can just grow with no fear of retaliation.

What would make this game seriously interesting would be to make it so that if you attack somebody, their credits can be stolen. This makes actively playing the game rewarding, and the players who are just clicking and sending credits away for nothing now have to actually do something(build defense). To make it fair, this should be an event. This will mean clickers need to actually bank in the game and stay ahead of players (who maybe cant click as well as them) or risk losing part of their progress. This will also make sitting on credits that are doing nothing a risky move (if you know who to hit).

Also, I think it would be interesting if it were possible to sab recruiter upgrades. This would be tricky to make fair, but after a set time, the upgrade could go back to its original level. Again, to make a game fair-there needs to be a level playing field. These changes would offer a way for people to hinder progress, if they have higher stats than another player. Thats what the games about, right? Chaos?

andyt683
20th January 2015, 06:59 AM
Has anyone actually sat and pondered recruiter upgrades? You should be overjoyed that people have wasted their credits buying an upgrade that they will never earn back. It's not multiplicative, they're paying more and more credits each time to add 1/10th of a click. To go from 0.9 to 1.0, you need to spend 80,000 credits. In order to break even, you'll need to click 800,000 clicks. This is not including any "click debt" from purchasing the prior upgrades.

Basic math, guys.

Wasian
20th January 2015, 01:17 PM
Nerfing recruiter upgrades aren't going to help. The problem is, people who want to waste their lives clicking 5+ hours daily should be rewarded for their effort. You can't possibly expect someone who spends 15 minutes reconning and slaying to have the same caliber account as a person who plays for hours every day. I'm a minimal clicking slayer and am doing pretty well. But honestly, if a top 3 finish could be achieved with minimal effort, no one would click, and this game would have more of a lack of activity than ever.

Lil_Wolfy
20th January 2015, 02:56 PM
Nerfing recruiter upgrades aren't going to help. The problem is, people who want to waste their lives clicking 5+ hours daily should be rewarded for their effort. You can't possibly expect someone who spends 15 minutes reconning and slaying to have the same caliber account as a person who plays for hours every day. I'm a minimal clicking slayer and am doing pretty well. But honestly, if a top 3 finish could be achieved with minimal effort, no one would click, and this game would have more of a lack of activity than ever.

Its relative, the amount of effort i put in last age compared to many others was considerably less but i still managed #3 when the age finished.

Wasian
21st January 2015, 10:38 AM
Its relative, the amount of effort i put in last age compared to many others was considerably less but i still managed #3 when the age finished.

True, but the majority of those who put in more effort sold. If no one sold, you may not have made top 10.

Carlos
22nd January 2015, 12:28 AM
Without sells only kalusha and anteraz would have ended higher

Wasian
22nd January 2015, 01:36 AM
Without sells only kalusha and anteraz would have ended higher

And Wolfy would have ended lower without sells

Carlos
22nd January 2015, 05:47 AM
And Wolfy would have ended lower without sells

Fine. Not going to argue with someone as stupid as you. Waste of my time

Jarrad-
22nd January 2015, 10:43 AM
Without sells only kalusha and anteraz would have ended higher

vanity
killa
anteraz
whishy
cernnunos
kalusha
maybe even manowar
thattcguywhosoldoffearlyanddeleted
bigtoe
relentless?(lol)
not in order

and just fyi, kalusha was only able to slay so much because of all his sells, so he probably wouldnt be there, i'm just being nice

there's probably a lot more, wolfy took many mid age sells to boost his sentry and da so who knows, he wouldnt have been top 10 if nobody sold though.

Carlos
22nd January 2015, 04:38 PM
vanity
killa
anteraz
whishy
cernnunos
kalusha
maybe even manowar
thattcguywhosoldoffearlyanddeleted
bigtoe
relentless?(lol)
not in order

and just fyi, kalusha was only able to slay so much because of all his sells, so he probably wouldnt be there, i'm just being nice

there's probably a lot more, wolfy took many mid age sells to boost his sentry and da so who knows, he wouldnt have been top 10 if nobody sold though.

True, maybe not even top20!!! Fact is manowar had more tbg, took more sells and wolfy still managed to end #3. And I thought his people were good with gold and banking haha

Lil_Wolfy
22nd January 2015, 06:39 PM
vanity
killa
anteraz
whishy
cernnunos
kalusha
maybe even manowar
thattcguywhosoldoffearlyanddeleted
bigtoe
relentless?(lol)
not in order

and just fyi, kalusha was only able to slay so much because of all his sells, so he probably wouldnt be there, i'm just being nice

there's probably a lot more, wolfy took many mid age sells to boost his sentry and da so who knows, he wouldnt have been top 10 if nobody sold though.

I did a lot of maths the last 2-3 weeks and the only people who _might_ have beaten me were BigToe and ManOwar.

ManOwar doesnt know how the game works so that was okay and BigToe had only small weapons so that was easy too, same for Whishy and Cernnunos. I planned ahead and only held big weapons all age so i had a comfortable margin when it ended.

The only mid-age sells i got went to UP, ask carlos as he was the one providing them.

Jarrad-
22nd January 2015, 07:26 PM
I'm probably thinking of when Umbrus sold to you a few weeks before the end, past mid but definitely not EoA

Wasian
22nd January 2015, 10:48 PM
To change the subject, has anyone seen the scavengers event work yet? I've yet to see any positive effect from attacking during the event.

andyt683
22nd January 2015, 11:18 PM
To change the subject, has anyone seen the scavengers event work yet? I've yet to see any positive effect from attacking during the event.

It's working, it's just not exactly telling you how much was added (yet). I'll add that message tonight, and you'll be able to see what you've gotten in the past, too. I set that event up to track the extra gold, so it shouldn't be hard.

I kind of retired this past age, without telling most people. A decision was made amongst the Gamefiar staff that while we'll continue to support RoC, it should not be the primary focus. Growth has been negative for a few years now, and no amount of new features will bring new players in, especially since major changes tend to alienate existing players leading to no net change at best. There's a few things I want to shore up with RoC, notably an event that luckily hasn't happened this age, a few inbox features (like deleting), and obviously display issues like with Scavengers. With that being said, as focus has shifted elsewhere, I'm not giving a timeframe on any of those things. I'd love to quit my job and just code 24/7 and things would get done really quickly, but that's not in the foreseeable future.

Also, due to real life stress, I've been finding a little more time to do stuff like playing Skyrim to unwind. I'm a "me first" kind of guy.

FallenOne
23rd January 2015, 03:17 PM
It's working, it's just not exactly telling you how much was added (yet). I'll add that message tonight, and you'll be able to see what you've gotten in the past, too. I set that event up to track the extra gold, so it shouldn't be hard.

I kind of retired this past age, without telling most people. A decision was made amongst the Gamefiar staff that while we'll continue to support RoC, it should not be the primary focus. Growth has been negative for a few years now, and no amount of new features will bring new players in, especially since major changes tend to alienate existing players leading to no net change at best. There's a few things I want to shore up with RoC, notably an event that luckily hasn't happened this age, a few inbox features (like deleting), and obviously display issues like with Scavengers. With that being said, as focus has shifted elsewhere, I'm not giving a timeframe on any of those things. I'd love to quit my job and just code 24/7 and things would get done really quickly, but that's not in the foreseeable future.

Also, due to real life stress, I've been finding a little more time to do stuff like playing Skyrim to unwind. I'm a "me first" kind of guy.

ooh could it be the 'everyone's grudge' event?

HungryMan
9th February 2015, 05:24 AM
An event where all weapons that get sabbed are automatically broken. This would make bankers vulnerable to sabbs as well. Say goodbye to those 5,000,000 daggers!

I think this would be awesome!

HungryMan
10th February 2015, 07:11 PM
I love that the armory does the math for you so you don't have to figure out how much you can buy of one thing.

I think it would be an awesome and easy to implement addition that allows you to set it to auto-fill the max for one specific type of weapon/tool.

You are trying to get your spy up you set it to auto-fill you choice spy weapon then you load the armory and press the captcha.

Great for if you are on a slay spree or are catching a sell.

****sorry for the double post i just really like this idea and i now someone could knock out a code todo this in a few hours at most.

andyt683
10th February 2015, 08:05 PM
I like that event idea!

As for auto-filling one specific weapon, that'd actually be a few hours, since I'd need to store what you like in the database, and we don't really have a general use table for stuff like that. We ought to, since someone else complained that the number of spies per recon is only stored per session.

HungryMan
11th February 2015, 09:40 AM
thanks that event i think would add excitement.

but a few hours for the code for the other idea couldn't be that hard you already have it do the math to know how many of each it can buy now just tell it to let you set what weapon to autofill

FallenOne
11th February 2015, 12:22 PM
yeh i think having a pre-set option available would be good; makes it that bit quicker.

MFnBonsai
11th February 2015, 10:11 PM
In all the time I have played I have never lost a sell or had one stolen when given to someone else. If you lose it then you are doing something wrong....

It is already too easy to not lose a sell.... No way do we need to make it easier to keep it....

Lodewijk
15th February 2015, 07:23 PM
It's a good idea, they're having this option for some time on koc already.

_RoGuEsHaDoW_
22nd February 2015, 03:28 PM
In all the time I have played I have never lost a sell or had one stolen when given to someone else. If you lose it then you are doing something wrong....

It is already too easy to not lose a sell.... No way do we need to make it easier to keep it....

technically this is not true....
towards the end of ages you sell off, and just let who ever take it :P

SonicRage
17th March 2015, 04:01 PM
Can we bring back swiper an age for shits and giggles? 😊

Wasian
17th March 2015, 09:38 PM
Can we bring back swiper an age for shits and giggles? 

Would have to be public, but I think it'd be a fun change!

SonicRage
18th March 2015, 12:27 AM
Yes it might make things a bit more interesting people you didn't know could click could actually keep up.
Just remove the click bonus from the swiper or something.

OTG
21st March 2015, 05:46 PM
In all the time I have played I have never lost a sell or had one stolen when given to someone else. If you lose it then you are doing something wrong....

It is already too easy to not lose a sell.... No way do we need to make it easier to keep it....

I agree with you Bon until this happend to me today.

http://www.giveupalready.com/showthread.php?97261-ip-Error-message