It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:30 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 222 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:04 am 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:06 pm
Posts: 670
everyone keeps saying "The most squads wins" well i call BS on that. Just a few days ago on f6, my alliance GOO went up against the rival alliance DSNY, they had 179 ships, pure INF anti CALV, we had 229 ships, all of which, were calvs.

We lost the fight, because they knew what we had, and prepared to fight us. They didn't have a lot of ships walking away either, but that alone proves, a smaller force can kill a significantly larger force.

(and before you say we had bad builds or whatever, i can ensure you, we had a good build, as well many of our units had max EXP, while DSNY's were almost new)

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 12:36 pm 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2760
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
Well in a recent era, we had 400 squads of Tanks. The enemy had 300 squads of Vehicles and 400 squads of tanks. Clearly, we cant war them. Our build was Anti tank and Anti vehicle alright, but we would have still lost.

The largest squads always wins. But you lost the battle because you went to war with Vehicles and faced Beam inf. That was first of all an even battle, and you didn't probably have enough anti inf anyway. So that battle shouldnt have happened imo.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 12:55 pm 
Lieutenant Major
Lieutenant Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 7:18 pm
Posts: 1410
Location: Georgia Tech
Gender: male
Well Allen... largest army doesn't always win. How many squads did NO lose and how many did GIFT lose through-out the war? I don't think overall numbers had much to do with that.

_________________
Kane - GLA - LoM - UBL - TdCt - Simp
--------------
Beware the wrath of Ovaltine Jenkins, for he shall show no mercy.

Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:07 pm 
Major
Major
User avatar
 YIM  Profile

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:21 am
Posts: 2760
Location: Bangalore, India
Gender: male
Well, if you have a proper build to counter your enemy then yes army size does matter, but not that much. I am just speaking in general terms without considering builds. But NO and GIFT never fought, though head on, GIFT would have won no doubt.

_________________
Deadman - SYN
----------------
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:22 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:51 pm
Posts: 871
Location: NOT In the snack cabinet >.>
Gender: male
It really depends on what is in the squads. If you have bigger squads, you might have the advantage of numbers, but like Code said, a smaller force could kill a bigger force, if it's the worst possible chassis and unit for the bigger force.

_________________
IGN: ninja0
Skype: fackninja0

Image
Image
Ruff Ruff
I'm Back!


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:32 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:06 pm
Posts: 670
i agree Mfreak, that battle never would even have happened if not for one of the players in the gate our ships were sitting on, had logged off for the night, DSNY had made a push, and so instead of leaving him to die, we made a stand. a rather unfortunate loss in units, but it was a vary fun battle none the less :mrgreen:

But, i made my point, back on topic.

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 2:56 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:23 pm
Posts: 927
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: male
Ok this post may not have quotes in order due to the way my tabs got organized :D, but here's some answers to the questions and arguments raised:

gino948 wrote:
i suggest we also raise the Power Requirements to get Blues in Referrals. i find it that most players do made some colony in a server that has 6k metal boost by using their referral link and then make units until the colony got 20 powers and Magic 200 Blues out of nowhere.
i know some people who do that but i won't call a name.

Currently the referral system is only giving out tokens for players who refer someone who purchases tokens. We're going to be revamping the referral system and this abuse is something we're aware of in the current one, we're going to be looking at ways to address it in the revamp.


ads126 wrote:
first of all don't shout at me for this


why not put a limit on resource trading such 3000 for metal/oil per 12/24 ticks

This will easily solve the problem and also you can say

sorry you can not send resources to this player as he has already recieved maximum resources by trade (3000 metal/oil)

please wait 12/24 more ticks for example

This will then stop token farming as the metal boost is 6000 this means on earth it will take a minimum of 312/624 ticks to do someting which is often done in a couple of ticks

in my opinion problem solved and if you want me to explain something in more depth pm me or reply

This kind of a hard limit is something we try to avoid, ultimately you need some hard limits but this is something we're not wanting to limit.


mfreak wrote:
Yeah current system is fine as is. Only thing, remove that stupid rule that says its a violation.

And ads resources trading limitation is not a good idea. Remember its a team game. Resources are shared. Thats how good teams play. So no restriction should be put on them either.

And apollo I like your idea. I have actually thought about it many times. Why not make the player register, show a screen where he can check a box saying Accept the stupid ToS :P and then go on to choose a world he can play?

There are some balance issues caused by boosts as they add artifical resources into the game. The issue with token farming like this is it puts a lot of resources in the hands of a single person in an extremely short amount of time. We had the cooldowns added for a reason because in the old client we had players who would drop hundreds of dollars on their colony in the first tick or buying back an entire army in a day as there was no cooldown on buying silver and bronze packages(For those that remember them :ugeek:). This kind of burst of resources was the reason for cooldowns on all boosts.


ttotheoma wrote:
i think that maybe u should't care too much about these people giving tokens so they can send resources it's not too big of a deal. the big deal is people asking there friends on BD to place colonys just for them to conquer. now this is what id like to call cheating not people giving resources so they can move there army at times cause i knw how much it costs to move alot of squads all over the place and how much it costs per unit ith 200%+ overcome

Yes, farming is a big issue that we are aware of. The issue is that there is a lot of grey area in this. If a player wants to contribute by allowing themselves to be conquered then that's fine. If a player joins a world solely to be a farm and isn't actively playing then that is against the rules. It's a fine line and the admins have to make judgment calls on what is too far. Because of this grey area enforcing this rule ends up being a mess. For this reason I have been toying with the balance idea of nearly removing all resources from conquers or perhaps entirely and adding more from resource outposts and crystals. This is something that we'll be visiting at some point in the near future and when we do we'll be taking your feedback on it but for now let's stick to the issues brought up in the first post of the thread.


CodeoftheSith wrote:
2. I disagree with Celine, i don't think you should make it so that you cannot send reds, i've gotten tons of help from friends over the eras with them sending me reds. From a single friend over the course of the era, i was given over 2k reds, as well as another 1k from another player in my alliance, so I'm completely with sending reds to your friends.
We agree, this is why we're looking to fix/balance this specific issue while still allowing users to trade red tokens. We like giving players the ability to "share the wealth" and reward/help their teammates and allies.

3. This topic is about donators trying to bypass the cooldown system, its set the way it is, for a reason. If there was no cooldown system, one could just boost up to like 150 power before tick 1 even passes. It would just make the game completely unfair. And the sending tokens to your teammates, and having them boost then send it to you, will just allow you to do the same thing, albeit not quite to power 150.
Due to the trading limitations of 100 ticks after you join an alliance you cannot trade for the first 100 ticks.

4. If BD is so desperate for money, then lower the number of servers, it will increase competition, which in turn will increases your boosting, not to mention all the other benefits that other forumers mentioned.
This is something we're looking at, population levels were rising but have tapered off so we're going to look at consolidating some worlds.

5. Personally, the way i see it, BD is just plain and simple, to hidden. Its not well known, and we need to fix that. BD is an amazing game, but its not well known at all. If we could get BD more public, I'm sure it would produce a far larger income. So i suggest, find some way to make it more well known.
This is something we're looking into, we've been putting more money into advertising this year which has led to some growth. We're looking at getting a deal with a major gamesite similar to Kong but with a playerbase that is more into more persistent MMO type games. An announcement will be made on this once we're closer to launch.

I cut out some of your post and addressed specifically 3 points above in the quote, the green text is mine :).


aviturg wrote:
i think that BD's main problem is that for a strategy game, it doesnt offer much of strategy (it got much worse in the new worlds). therefore you have 2 keys in order to win:

1 - activity
2 - money

Money helps for sure but it doesn't guarantee a victory. This is one thing that I have been bringing up the the team a lot is that we need to have more tactical options to allow for more strategy to take place. Because units cannot be micromanaged during a battle there needs to be other factors.

Nukes are easy to dodge and are not as destructive as they once were, even getting hit they only usually hurt a few units in the blast and rarely get an actual direct hit on squads, ion cannons are too expensive to be used on a large force and spies are too limited due to the single spy. We have planned a revamp of the spy system that will see it become a sort of hybrid between the old client and new client system. Ion cannon won't be changing most likely as it fulfills it's purpose and is powerful enough in the right situations but Missiles/Nukes/Dragons may have some balancing done on them as well I expect. Discussion around these will open up in the future when we get to these features.



trevor1601 wrote:
maybe only allow these mass boosters on there own server. i mean they think it only takes money to win this game. put them all on one server so they can spend there 2k per round.

Keep mass boosting(cheating) off my serious servers or you will lose my $150 per round. That I use and follow the rules and wait for my cool downs to be over with.

I can see ALL the admins wanting to take those worlds :lol:. We've been thinking of doing a world that would require X number of red tokens to create a colony on and disabling all boosts. A "premium only" world if you will. Once we get a few tasks out of the way and revisit this idea seriously we'll open up discussion with the community on it.


SoF wrote:
read my proposals and request...if its rejected? i dont mind...is it prohibited to share ideas too?? will i get ban for it?? :cry: :cry:

No of course you won't get banned for it, we value all feedback!


mfreak wrote:
You guys must have no clue about what you are discussing or what "solutions" you think you are arriving at. This is probably the dumbest update that I have seen on BD. Shame on you all. For all I care, you admins should get fired. I would if I was Michael. You guys show a complete disconnect about the status of things ingame, how the game generally works and what is needed for a win. You have updated this game numerous times and shaped it into a - Who has the largest squads, wins the game contest. And now you wanna deny the advantage that boosters have over non boosters, EVEN if they spend tons of cash on this game.
Supporters have the advantage of red token boosts that give more return than the light boosts. We're not denying the advantage that boosters have over non, we're balancing it so that boosting gives an advantage but not one that is overpowered and gives too much advantage in a short time. Being able to get 10x or more than you should by bypassing the cooldowns is a huge power advantage for a single player to have.

I dont care about the 40 power thing. But what you are telling me is that I dont have any advantage even if I use money. Hope you figured out an alternate way to earn money.
How have we said that you don't have any advantage by using money? You can continually buy boosts if you keep buying tokens and if you bought a light and a large metal or oil boost every time it was off cooldown you could purchase 1,500,000 metal and oil over the course of a 3000 tick round, that doesn't include what you would earn from production, conquers, ufos, etc. Is that not enough advantage for those with money?

Anyways, like I said before, until you get over your stupidity and come up with something constructive, I am done for good, just like many others. Not one more dime will be spent on this stupid game run by jaded idiots.

Replied to the quote above are in green.


mfreak wrote:
Spyda the problem here is:

People sent tokens to their team mates, in order to use their boosts. This apparently is wrong and against the rules (Which is a stupid rule btw). So now the admins have come forward to enforce this rule.

The reason it is wrong is because, it will result in less spending which is not good for BD.

Now, lets get real for a moment. What skill are you really talking about? You have played this game for what 3 eras now? Ill tell you something. This game requires ZERO skills. This game is ALL about activity and Money. That is all there is to it. This is no rocket science. This game does not have any element of strategy or skill to it.

Now there are people, who are older (around 30 yrs of age or above) who have lots of disposable income. They spend enormous amounts of money on the game just because they can. Now they always win. Is BD gonna tell these people to just leave by enforcing this rule? That does no good.

There is a clear disconnect between the status of the game and the admins perception of it. Today BD is a "who has the largest squads wins the game" contest. Large squads with all the upkeep is only possible with boosting. Trust me without Reds you CANT win.

Now what cosmin said - Its the players who win round after round - who are mostly mass supporters that have played this game for a long time. The ones complaining are people that dont spend a lot and therefore lose eras. So they are naturally against it. But who are the ones responsible for BDs income? Its the ones that win and mass support. Enforcing this rule only alienates the mass supporters and they will obviously quit hurting BD a lot.

So you have to understand, this isnt a question of skill or strategy. This is about what it takes to win an era and about how a stupid rule can both drive people away and render BD bankrupt by driving away those people that have both played for a long time and spent a lot, for a long time.

This is an issue with the game balance that we're trying to correct, the game needs to have more of a tactical/strategy component and to have loopholes like this that allow for a power booster to take a huge advantage removed. A properly balanced game for activity and skill attracts more players which brings more competition and ultimately more supporting. If a supporter feels that their 3,000 tokens spent in a round cannot compete against someone who dumps 30,000 tokens into a round then that means they probably won't. They don't want to have a "wallet" war with someone else and I don't blame them. That is why this loophole needs to be addressed.

I'm going to suggest we hold off on the update for this loophole until the discussion is more complete.



Twilightmask wrote:
Awesome changes! I especially like the Power Level 40 requirement. The 20 power just happens before any actual POWER is obtained.

How is build time going to be affected on the faster worlds though? 40 minutes is long enough in a single tick world. In a 4 tick world it would be 3-4 ticks to have that structure built. Extending that would make things even harder. Maybe I'm not right on this, I don't play fast worlds very often.

This is something we need to look at for game balance to add a modifier for world speed to keep building speed on par with tick speed.


slayersall wrote:
This is the best update out there? To ruin the game is the way the game will go? Except the power being set to 40 the rest is ridiculous.
Boosters have advantage no matter what. Game is never fair if u allow any boosting at all. If someone wants to hog the resources from his alliance he already has to pay extra upkeep as his army gets larger. The only time it is abused is if they leave their alliance and join another alliance. Having just used x amount of other players to boost himself up so he can then join the main alliance.
That is easily seen by admin and should be dealt with. This is probably why John Doe was banned on E4 but I don't know for sure. If he was using their boosts he should of had to stay in the alliance and not left it. Increase the cool time and increase the tick required to start sending off resources. If u think boosting is causing problems. But lets start using our heads on updates.

Admins have thousands of accounts in worlds to monitor, we can't be everywhere and checking events of everyone all the time. Admin monitoring leads to situations being missed, we need to prevent abuse through game mechanics as much as possible.


skwrel wrote:
Well then if this will be a debate topic, then lets put a poll on this thing and see if we can get some votes going. Lets see the numbers, they can't lie. Any mods/ admins think they can put options up on here based on the things mentioned?

Once the discussion culminates into a few clear options we'll see about a poll.


targoon wrote:
wigamer wrote:
This si the best pending update for a long time. 100% in agreement. :)

The only update in a long time....

Now, Andrew, I'm not only happy, but shocked that you guys are actually making an UPDATE! Holy hell, how long has it been? The keyboard a bit dusty? ;) jk.
I refuse to answer any questions about the level of dust on my "update" keyboard ;).

I dont see a problem with these updates guys, (prepare for rage because I cannot stand incompetent people) If you can read on a second grade level you'll notice you can still trade red tokens. You just cant trade the resources from them. The guys complaining are utter morons who are probably still in first grade.

This doesnt hurt boosters. Doesnt help newbies. All it does is prevent abuse, and if you are still against this update then you obviously are for abuse and should leave.

I agree with psg, though. Crystals should provide more benefits since they wont be so abundant. However, psg, i believe they'll add some kind off new resource like "booster metals". They will be used first in production, and cannot be traded.
This is something I'd like to see more as well, crystals being more valuable to go after than conquers. This is something that will be revisited as well in the near future, resource income sources and rebalancing.

Now, in all seriousness, you are ruining the game. Not because of this, though, I support this update. I will defend this update. However, Andrew, at your next meeting bring this up:
Why the hell do you have so much godamn worlds? Is it necessary to have 7+ worlds for each theme? It is a WASTE of not only money, but time. Youre staff is overextended and if you hire more people your finances would suffer horribly.

If you cut back on your worlds, you will have more money. People wont leave because they have a few less worlds. I'd much rather see more focus in updates then in worlds. Until I see that, no money is to be made from me.

As Michael said one of the things we are also looking at is consolidating a few worlds to spur more competition and have more players per round.

That's all for now, I'll be in to reply to more later, got a birthday party to go to :)

Have a great weekend all!
-Andrew

_________________
Ex-Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 3:05 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:51 pm
Posts: 871
Location: NOT In the snack cabinet >.>
Gender: male
Wow that's a lot, I only read the first half of it. But good job admin, for finding the time to do this.

I know you're busy but...
Andrew wrote:
That's all for now, I'll be in to reply to more later, got a birthday party to go to :)

Have a great weekend all!
-Andrew


A birthday party? I understand that admins are busy, and they have a real life :o but odd they would spend your time out of your busy Battledawn work to go to birthday parties. Just sayin' :D. Maybe this one is special :)

_________________
IGN: ninja0
Skype: fackninja0

Image
Image
Ruff Ruff
I'm Back!


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 3:13 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:06 pm
Posts: 670
nice, thank you andrew!

Btw, for the whole reduction in the # of worlds idea, i suggest we just make 1 world of each speed for every type. so 9 worlds in all,

1 mars world at a 1tick/hour rate
1 mars world at a 2tick/hour rate
1 mars world at a 3tick/hour rate

1 earth world at a 1tick/hour rate
1 earth world at a 2tick/hour rate
1 earth world at a 3tick/hour rate

1 fantasy world at a 1tick/hour rate
1 fantasy world at a 2tick/hour rate
1 fantasy world at a 3tick/hour rate

That way, every player has at least 1 world they can enjoy, each type of world, has 1 of every game speed.

_________________
Image


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: ToS clarifications and update planned for this weekend!
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 3:27 pm 
Captain
Captain
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:51 pm
Posts: 871
Location: NOT In the snack cabinet >.>
Gender: male
true, but what if they are too late for a good start on that world? (especially if it's 1 tick), or they got conquered and can't really move on anymore?

Don't forget

1 galaxy world at a 1 tick/hour rate
1 galaxy world at a 2 tick/hour rate
1 galaxy world at a 3 tick/hour rate


and the es worlds.

_________________
IGN: ninja0
Skype: fackninja0

Image
Image
Ruff Ruff
I'm Back!


Top
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 222 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 23  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
WarLingo Android Mobile Game

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Copyright Tacticsoft Ltd. 2008   
Updated By phpBBservice.nl