erik41141
06-06-2012, 06:01 PM
The purpose of this thread is to propose ideas & concepts to Funzio for game inprovements, which appears to be extremely necessary after these 2 detestable events. Detestable probably isnt a strong enough word to describe the event yet i divulge the purpose of this thread is NOT complaining (even though at some times it may appear so). We are all players and want to see improvements in this game as much as Funzio wants to see more profits, so lets work together and see both accomplished.
1. Fix the friggin battle list- Seriously, i have 29 allies and every time i log to battle i only have 120+ untill i restart the game...wtf mates? I love the idea of the battle list being random as to minimize the extreme harassment you can unleash in this game, but it needs to be more organized. There should be battle blocks for each 5 levels and an increment of like +- 15 allies, and these values should be concrete. So if i have 50 allies and am doing poorly in my bracket, i can drop down to 30 allies and be in that bracket. This would minimize the HUGE gaps in alliance size currently evident in the current battle system.
2. Event Diversity- I think its fair to say that there are hardly any players that enjoyed this event. For a multitude of reasons this could be true, the main being no immediate rewards. Making gems harder at 8.9. and 10 is a great idea so that not everyone gets it but dont make it impossible to do without gems. I can attest i opened 13+ boxes each day and used 120 gems to open some 100% and ONLY GOT TO 8 GEMS. Events should be enjoyed by all and not just the people who spend thousands of gems.
In addition to this, there should be an opportunity to trade in unused rune boxes for lesser prizes, so that the players who didnt get the 10 gem reward can still get some benefit from farming. Even trading rune boxes for honor or gold would be acceptable by most players.
In addition to this event it should be posted on the fourms a week before going live so people can understand the rules and such before it happens, such as the problem with the current gold per hour event.
3. Rankings- Why dont we have these yet? I have no idea the standing of any other players other than the ones who put it in the comments, LET IT BE KNOWN!!! Whats the motivation for getting high level and army if no one sees it? Everyone likes to see their name at the top of the list plus it gives players something to aspire to. Ranking lists shouldn't even be that hard for the devs, but i think we would all much rather the core problems be fixed before this is added.
4. ORGANIZED WEAPONS AND ARMOR PAGES- WHY IS IT ALL RANDOMS??? Seriously when i find a sick sounding drop and try to find it, its like finding a needle in a giant haystack. Filtering the armor/weapons page into most attk / most def shouldnt be hard at all. Also would give players a sense of how well they are farming certain items and what they need to improve on.
5. WHAT UNITS/ARMOR/WEAPONS AM I USING IN BATTLE???- The game knows what aspects are taken into account when attacking/defending players why shouldnt we? Seriously there is already a page which tells us if we are using the most units/weapons/armor for our alliance level, why isnt there a tab to show exactly what units/weapons/armor are actually being used? This would allow players to MUCH more strategically plan their armies, im seriously just guesstimating what units are being used and it is really not efficient. This is also an addition that really wouldnt be that hard for the devs...
6. Classes
Ok heres where **** starts to get hard for funzio, so im not expecting these changes to be implemented anytime soon (the others i do, seriously guys those additions arent even hard to accomplish)
Instead of having warrior/mage/rogue classes and such there should be attributes that you can pick for your character. For example, warlord would give +5% more atk and 15% more honor whereas economist would get +10% more gold from buildings and -10% construction/upgrading time. To change your attribute you should have to pay gems since attribute switching would be too common if it were otherwise. This would add some diversity to a game which seriously needs some more appealing characteristics.
6. Tech Trees
Since the battle lists are already based on levels adding tech trees seperate from skill points would not utterly unbalance the game, rather it would diversify the playing styles which is always positive for multiplayer games. Having tech trees based on armies attack/def, building def, economy, building/upgrading time, and monster killing would be examples of the types of elements that should be included in these trees. Ofcourse similar to attributes, resetting your tech tree should cost gems as well for obvious reasons. This would further diversify playing styles and lead to an increase in play style customization. This would also encourage players to level up to achieve certain (awesome) techs.
FOR IDEA 5 & 6 The points for these should be DIFFERENT than skill points, i already dont agree with army atk/def and stam/hero strength using the same skill points, but i guess that is funzio's decision. The reality is that as players level there isnt really any motivational aspect, sure you get accouple skill points but what if your next level gave -10% casualties in your given tech tree?Now that would encourage motivation.
Finally, i think that guilds would be a good idea later down the road where players can donate $ and gems to the guild and they could potentially own a shared kingdom where guild leaders & head positions could construct guild buildings to benefit all members. The ideas branching from here would be tremendous, and it would also not only add a greater sense of community but also the prevalence of community goals. Lets say for example you could build a guild building that increases machine atk power by 5%, but it costed 1,000,000. Players from the guild could as a community donate to the construction of such a building and as such achieve greater standing and power by working together. Just the concept of community goals is enough to keep players interested in playing. Interest and goals is what keeps most of the players playing, so ADDRESSING CONCEPTS SUCH AS INCREASED INTEREST AND GOAL ACHIEVEMENT WOULD STIMULATE PLAYER ACTIVITY MUCH MORE THAN UNORGANIZED EVENTS THAT THOUGH ARE WELL INTENDED CAUSE PLAYER DISMAY.
Now time for discussion, if you took the time to read through this entire paragraph feel free to build on/improve upon any of my suggestions. As a final note i hope this thread serves as a guideline for improvements that the funzio dev team can aspire to work on. :cool:
1. Fix the friggin battle list- Seriously, i have 29 allies and every time i log to battle i only have 120+ untill i restart the game...wtf mates? I love the idea of the battle list being random as to minimize the extreme harassment you can unleash in this game, but it needs to be more organized. There should be battle blocks for each 5 levels and an increment of like +- 15 allies, and these values should be concrete. So if i have 50 allies and am doing poorly in my bracket, i can drop down to 30 allies and be in that bracket. This would minimize the HUGE gaps in alliance size currently evident in the current battle system.
2. Event Diversity- I think its fair to say that there are hardly any players that enjoyed this event. For a multitude of reasons this could be true, the main being no immediate rewards. Making gems harder at 8.9. and 10 is a great idea so that not everyone gets it but dont make it impossible to do without gems. I can attest i opened 13+ boxes each day and used 120 gems to open some 100% and ONLY GOT TO 8 GEMS. Events should be enjoyed by all and not just the people who spend thousands of gems.
In addition to this, there should be an opportunity to trade in unused rune boxes for lesser prizes, so that the players who didnt get the 10 gem reward can still get some benefit from farming. Even trading rune boxes for honor or gold would be acceptable by most players.
In addition to this event it should be posted on the fourms a week before going live so people can understand the rules and such before it happens, such as the problem with the current gold per hour event.
3. Rankings- Why dont we have these yet? I have no idea the standing of any other players other than the ones who put it in the comments, LET IT BE KNOWN!!! Whats the motivation for getting high level and army if no one sees it? Everyone likes to see their name at the top of the list plus it gives players something to aspire to. Ranking lists shouldn't even be that hard for the devs, but i think we would all much rather the core problems be fixed before this is added.
4. ORGANIZED WEAPONS AND ARMOR PAGES- WHY IS IT ALL RANDOMS??? Seriously when i find a sick sounding drop and try to find it, its like finding a needle in a giant haystack. Filtering the armor/weapons page into most attk / most def shouldnt be hard at all. Also would give players a sense of how well they are farming certain items and what they need to improve on.
5. WHAT UNITS/ARMOR/WEAPONS AM I USING IN BATTLE???- The game knows what aspects are taken into account when attacking/defending players why shouldnt we? Seriously there is already a page which tells us if we are using the most units/weapons/armor for our alliance level, why isnt there a tab to show exactly what units/weapons/armor are actually being used? This would allow players to MUCH more strategically plan their armies, im seriously just guesstimating what units are being used and it is really not efficient. This is also an addition that really wouldnt be that hard for the devs...
6. Classes
Ok heres where **** starts to get hard for funzio, so im not expecting these changes to be implemented anytime soon (the others i do, seriously guys those additions arent even hard to accomplish)
Instead of having warrior/mage/rogue classes and such there should be attributes that you can pick for your character. For example, warlord would give +5% more atk and 15% more honor whereas economist would get +10% more gold from buildings and -10% construction/upgrading time. To change your attribute you should have to pay gems since attribute switching would be too common if it were otherwise. This would add some diversity to a game which seriously needs some more appealing characteristics.
6. Tech Trees
Since the battle lists are already based on levels adding tech trees seperate from skill points would not utterly unbalance the game, rather it would diversify the playing styles which is always positive for multiplayer games. Having tech trees based on armies attack/def, building def, economy, building/upgrading time, and monster killing would be examples of the types of elements that should be included in these trees. Ofcourse similar to attributes, resetting your tech tree should cost gems as well for obvious reasons. This would further diversify playing styles and lead to an increase in play style customization. This would also encourage players to level up to achieve certain (awesome) techs.
FOR IDEA 5 & 6 The points for these should be DIFFERENT than skill points, i already dont agree with army atk/def and stam/hero strength using the same skill points, but i guess that is funzio's decision. The reality is that as players level there isnt really any motivational aspect, sure you get accouple skill points but what if your next level gave -10% casualties in your given tech tree?Now that would encourage motivation.
Finally, i think that guilds would be a good idea later down the road where players can donate $ and gems to the guild and they could potentially own a shared kingdom where guild leaders & head positions could construct guild buildings to benefit all members. The ideas branching from here would be tremendous, and it would also not only add a greater sense of community but also the prevalence of community goals. Lets say for example you could build a guild building that increases machine atk power by 5%, but it costed 1,000,000. Players from the guild could as a community donate to the construction of such a building and as such achieve greater standing and power by working together. Just the concept of community goals is enough to keep players interested in playing. Interest and goals is what keeps most of the players playing, so ADDRESSING CONCEPTS SUCH AS INCREASED INTEREST AND GOAL ACHIEVEMENT WOULD STIMULATE PLAYER ACTIVITY MUCH MORE THAN UNORGANIZED EVENTS THAT THOUGH ARE WELL INTENDED CAUSE PLAYER DISMAY.
Now time for discussion, if you took the time to read through this entire paragraph feel free to build on/improve upon any of my suggestions. As a final note i hope this thread serves as a guideline for improvements that the funzio dev team can aspire to work on. :cool: