Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 313

Thread: RE: Age 1 Bug fix on 2/11/2011

  1. #21

    Default

    I am reposting this in this thread because I think its a very important issue and it might not be seen in the gigantic complaining thread :-)

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi Dave

    I haven't seen the biggest problem this fix has created addressed yet. The fact that it has changed defence in a major way. The ability to move troops out when under attack and online to defend is a crucial part of gameplay.

    Previously... when under attack... a player could move troops out and set up a proper defence to have a long and drawn out battle (this is a war game yes?) Now... if a player has 2 mill cav and 500k phracts in their city and is under attack, they will have to truce, port, holiday or stay with gates closed to save their troops because they can't be moved out. Where's the fun in that for anyone? If they want to set up mech defence... it is now virtually impossible unless they have another city within a few miles of the one being attacked.

    If they want to save any troops at all and store them in a valley... they can only save 1 million ( a very VERY small number by today's standards) and then lose all ability to stage a counter attack because all rally spots are full.

    This change has completely changed the way defence works in this game... and not for the better.

    Why can't the exploits have been fixed by just asigning the correct times and food consumption to travel times between valleys? Instead of crippling defence?

    People will get used to not having the exploits but the defence issue is going to be very very hard to get around.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Zebastian
    Server 66
    Invictus
    Host

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    In heart of my darling
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thantium View Post
    Trust me on this inactives and multi-accounts are top on the list of things to be addressed, really to be honest there is no snap of the finger fix that does not cause more issues when dealing with these. We have some ideas, but almost every idea we suggest or run by players to remove multi-accounts everyone says no. So either way everyone hates us on this.
    i don't know about multi account suggestions but there have been few good suggestions for inactive accounts and as far i know none of them have been implemented or evony giving any thought to it. For example:
    If a player doesn't login after X amount of days and/or has only 1 city and 0 pop, then flag him as inactive then either 1) put him in another state, or 2) remove him from map.

    Honestly, as I developer, I can tell you that's not load of changes in code. All you need is a new state, where only inactives can reside, few extra checks and couple of more columns in your database. If you guys don't have time or enough resources than I'm willing to help you with this for FREE.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thantium View Post
    I'm not saying this to be mean or prove a point, I am honest about this, if you have experience in the gaming industry and you think you have some great ideas and know how read data and to make metric based decisions, we are hiring. http://evony.net/index.php?option=co...d=61&Itemid=57 We are looking for Game Designers as well as Producers, please keep in mind that we most of us that work on Evony have lots of experience. Dave Mata has amazing experience, and Phil Maurer (CS Manager)my Boss has been a Producer on other online Free to Play MMORPG's, and these are just the guys that you already know about. The team we have here has a lot of experience, and we care much more then you know about this game.
    I wasn't implying that evony doesn't have skilled staff or what not. And your justification is indirectly built upon that straw-man. Thanks for posting job hiring page but I'm sorry i'm not interested. I'm still a student and don't have industry experience.

    What i was trying to say is that i find it quite ironic and odd that you guys can fix this kinda of stuff pretty quickly while rest of the small issues, which would take pretty much same amount of time and effort, are still outstanding. I am questioning evony's ethical and customer relations approach here and not evony staff's personal skills.
    Last edited by SaluBadsha; 02-11-2011 at 03:59 PM.


    *How much I love you I do not know;
    but I do know I cannot live without you*

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by very deadly View Post
    I don't honestly believe you think s129 is not in a position that needs merging. Our point has been made on this and that is now really something you can't just sweep under the carpet and hope it will go away.
    As Thantium said, we track a few statistics also know as key performance indicators, when they hit a certain level we look to merge like servers. Once we find server candidates we do make the decision to merge relatively quickly, as we have the benefit of historical data.

    One indicator that we look at is also interest, ss129 has a lot of interest for merging, and because of that we are watching it closely.

  4. #24

    Default

    Any idea when you are gonna remove few 100k dead accounts ( throughout the servers), ban botters and remove bot made cities? Week, months, years?

    I am kinda tired watching dead cities that are over a year old...

    Oh hell why am I asking this. You dont give a f**k about that...

    You are to busy "fixing glitches", making this game "perfect". Cary on.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    24

    Default

    so you need over a 100 peole to say some thing before some thing is done then i think we just got what we wanted for this glitch fix... how many have replied there concerns?

  6. #26

    Default

    Dont forget 131 we have alot interest in merger

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davemata View Post
    Evony is a constantly evolving and changing game. Games mechanics are adjusted to keep the game fresh and balanced, as well as to allow us to fix exploits and to prevent other wide spread issues. In this case today we closed an exploit that allowed a small percentage of players to play the game outside the intended mechanic. We have identified this as being unhealthy to the long term fitness of the servers by analyzing player data and trends. The player data includes how people play the game, and the overall effects on each server. We determined that this exploit was used to an extent where it was trending servers towards a collapse.

    We are constantly monitoring the status of all servers and we will most likely be tweaking other mechanics over the next few weeks and months to support game balance and we will keep you guys in the loop.
    I understand that this whatever data says that it's ruining servers cool whatever sure fine. Im sure you all have your super secret power ranger ways of getting your info. Cool.

    My issue is that you are focusing on things that it would seem are pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things when you compare the issue of these people using the exploit vs the number for those who bot. If evony is all about the players happyness like it claims to be, why are you focusing on things then are less harmful then the immediate issues at hand? If you have special ways to get this information, why are you ignoring the massive problem that botting truly is? If anything takes advantage and manipulates mechanics, then its a program that runs your account for you in both farming/hitting/defending/and even moving heros around to que troops. Programs that pray for you and set truces.

    Sorry if someone else said this i cant bring myself to read the same ef you evony blah blah blah crap.


  8. #28

    Default

    No comments on how this fix changes defence in this game?
    Zebastian
    Server 66
    Invictus
    Host

  9. #29

    Default

    I guess my only question for the devs would be...

    What is it going to take before you admit to your customer base and yourselves that this game has grown far beyond what it was originally intended to be?

    Your players want more and IMO, they deserve more from the game that you are providing and we're paying for. We're hearing the same things out of the moderators about this issue as we've heard in the past. "I'm a player too and I don't use x,y,z glitch."

    I see this as being in the same vein of arguments as Evony's lawsuit against <EDITED BY DAVE>. (Wow, you guys censored the name. That's just sad.) Anything that makes this game more interesting, more competitive, more fun, or cuts into their profit margins is called an "unfair advantage" or a "glitch". And I think it's safe to say that a large majority of Evony's customers are less than pleased especially considering that the other methods of suspending troops without upkeep have not been addressed.

    If I could wave a magic wand, either the valley movement process needs to be reinstated.

    -Or-

    Troop Upkeep needs to be reduced by a fairly drastic percentage like 75%.

    -Or-

    One hour regens for our barbs needs to be reinstated without them being deleted every two weeks. Even though I think this would help considerably, I'm not a big fan of this idea because it still brings us back to being farmers instead of playing this "war" game.

    Just my .02.

    -AJ
    Last edited by davemata; 02-11-2011 at 04:35 PM. Reason: Don't circumvent the filters.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaluBadsha View Post
    If a player doesn't login after X amount of days and/or has only 1 city and 0 pop, then flag him as inactive then either 1) put him in another state, or 2) remove him from map.
    That's a good idea. It's one of the ideas on the table to handle the inactives, I have a meeting scheduled start of next week pertaining directly to inactives and botters.

    I wasn't implying that evony doesn't have skilled staff or what not.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he wasn't going that direction with his statement. We have some great developers who have a passion for war games, in fact one of our designers is directly from this community. He's by far one of the best analytical designers I've worked with so far. He also has a passion for the game, which I think is where Thantium was coming from - our players are engaged and passionate, that will in turn translate to an engaged developer/ advocate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zebastian View Post
    I am reposting this in this thread because I think its a very important issue and it might not be seen in the gigantic complaining thread :-)

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi Dave

    I haven't seen the biggest problem this fix has created addressed yet. The fact that it has changed defence in a major way. The ability to move troops out when under attack and online to defend is a crucial part of gameplay.

    Previously... when under attack... a player could move troops out and set up a proper defence to have a long and drawn out battle (this is a war game yes?) Now... if a player has 2 mill cav and 500k phracts in their city and is under attack, they will have to truce, port, holiday or stay with gates closed to save their troops because they can't be moved out. Where's the fun in that for anyone? If they want to set up mech defence... it is now virtually impossible unless they have another city within a few miles of the one being attacked.

    If they want to save any troops at all and store them in a valley... they can only save 1 million ( a very VERY small number by today's standards) and then lose all ability to stage a counter attack because all rally spots are full.

    This change has completely changed the way defence works in this game... and not for the better.

    Why can't the exploits have been fixed by just asigning the correct times and food consumption to travel times between valleys? Instead of crippling defence?

    People will get used to not having the exploits but the defence issue is going to be very very hard to get around.
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Good call, I missed it.

    You mentioned, "virtually impossible unless..." fixing this exploit does mean some previously established strategies will have to change. In high school I was taught naval strategy in WW2 - no longer relevant due to changes. This is a comparable situation, you know a strategy which is now obsolete, and a new one will rise in its stead.

    Defense was not crippled. One strategy is now obsolete because we fixed a bug. Initially we had intended for valleys to be hot spots where wars played out before an attacker got to a defender's city. Now in the current status quo a player will send an attack directly to another's city, where the defender will open gates, and it starts a troop v. troop war. It becomes more difficult to self reinforce, but it doesn't change the fundamentals of defense - the city's garrison defends from attack.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •