We are once again looking for some awesome new moderators to help us out with keeping
the forum running and playing a crucial part in our Empire community! If
this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

Resource Production

I think one of the things that perhaps should now be reviewed from the perspective of balancing the game is resource production.  For me this is another example of a disconnect that has arisen in game logic.  Essentially if you take a tour of the castles of top players in EN1 very few currently have more than a few resource production buildings some have none at all.  They have chosen instead to fill their castles with high level PO items which essentially are out of the reach of most players which means either their base production exceeds what most players can produce with resource buildings or they simply loot so much that they no longer need resource production.  

I have always liked the resource production element of the game and I actually think the set up is pretty good with grades of building, two levels of building type, research to introduce improved efficiency, crafting to introduce enhanced techniques/  Historically feels comfortably accurate and from a game context it rewards hard work and commitment over time.  It sad to see an important part of the game viewed as just irrelevant by an increasing number of players.  There has always been a split on this in terms of differing approaches but given the way the book quests are structured it feels like to have no resource facilities when 4 seem to be the recommended minimum should be more of a disadvantage.  Things like the banner achievements also seem a bit redundant which seems a shame.  

I'd say looking at contests like the colossus that the looters have a huge advantage over more developed builders at present and I was just curious to know what other players and the designers thought.  

My personal preference would be for a new event whereby the Kingdom goes to war and the King requires alliances to provide a range of resources / materials for the war effort.  The alliance which produces most resources none of which are looted or won through events during the event wins.  I understand the mechanics of that might be difficult but the economic power of an alliance in terms of raw material production and being able to turn the raw materials looted into something usable make sense.  It does seem a bit daft that we currently have a situation where players can loot vast amounts of raw materials but lack the production facilities to do anything with them.  Whilst I hesitate to suggest a penalty I don't think they should be able to build at the same rate as someone with all the facilities available.  

    
Batten @ en 1
«1

Comments

  • DainBread (US1)DainBread (US1) Posts: 307
    edited 06.03.2017
    I think one of the things that perhaps should now be reviewed from the perspective of balancing the game is resource production.  For me this is another example of a disconnect that has arisen in game logic.  Essentially if you take a tour of the castles of top players in EN1 very few currently have more than a few resource production buildings some have none at all.  They have chosen instead to fill their castles with high level PO items which essentially are out of the reach of most players which means either their base production exceeds what most players can produce with resource buildings or they simply loot so much that they no longer need resource production.  

    I have always liked the resource production element of the game and I actually think the set up is pretty good with grades of building, two levels of building type, research to introduce improved efficiency, crafting to introduce enhanced techniques/  Historically feels comfortably accurate and from a game context it rewards hard work and commitment over time.  It sad to see an important part of the game viewed as just irrelevant by an increasing number of players.  There has always been a split on this in terms of differing approaches but given the way the book quests are structured it feels like to have no resource facilities when 4 seem to be the recommended minimum should be more of a disadvantage.  Things like the banner achievements also seem a bit redundant which seems a shame.  

    I'd say looking at contests like the colossus that the looters have a huge advantage over more developed builders at present and I was just curious to know what other players and the designers thought.  

    My personal preference would be for a new event whereby the Kingdom goes to war and the King requires alliances to provide a range of resources / materials for the war effort.  The alliance which produces most resources none of which are looted or won through events during the event wins.  I understand the mechanics of that might be difficult but the economic power of an alliance in terms of raw material production and being able to turn the raw materials looted into something usable make sense.  It does seem a bit daft that we currently have a situation where players can loot vast amounts of raw materials but lack the production facilities to do anything with them.  Whilst I hesitate to suggest a penalty I don't think they should be able to build at the same rate as someone with all the facilities available.  

    ----------------------------------------------------

    Something tells me you're a less active player. Those who rely on production will always be weaker than looters, for they can only produce so many tools a week and only hold so many troops.

    Your event suggestion will probably not be implemented, the only way to keep looted resources separate from produced resources would be to completely overhaul the current storage system, you would have to have 81k storage for each type of produced resources and 81k storage for each type of looted resources, which comes out to 162k storage for resources without build items.

    Looting/Active players are supposed to have advantages over Production/Inactive players, that's how the game has been designed.

    -DB


    Post edited by DainBread (US1) on
    STICKERSTICKERSTICKERSTICKER

    Yes, they're parrots. Deal with it.^
  • dreamtree (US1)dreamtree (US1) Posts: 1,366US1
    LOL, next you'll want dwelling/housing to relevant again. Some aspects of the game need to be greatly improved for players to actually want them.
    Lv 70 dreamtree @ usa 1! This account is best described as a tree in a large forest...
    @ international 1! @ international 2! @ English 1! Those accounts are retired.
    http://prntscr.com/53jb2i
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    http://prntscr.com/61r5kl
    500k might points. I know. A lot of people have higher. Wow, now I have have over 700k... 
    http://prntscr.com/ek3c51

    http://prntscr.com/gers7n
    Yay! A nice reward!


  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    In terms of activity I have rated in the top twenty and top ten of recent events.  I rate in top 150 for loot on my server this week with limited time.  I play in an alliance just outside of the top twenty who with less players can now rate in the top twenty.  I have won events and nobilities in the past and I won Berimond when it was a PVP.  So not sure how you would define activity.  I have played within the rules so I guess that would put me at a disadvantage but I prefer it that way.  

    In terms of progress of some players on our server who suddenly leaapt forward in terms of performance that based on what players who played with them have suggested is due not to ability or greater activity but to use of bots and shell accounts.  And where that isn't the case strength has also be bought in terms of extra XP to level up faster, extra tools bought, extra bags for construction etc...so not necessarily linked to activity.  A player with a level 100 glory tower isn't going to need nearly as many hits so I not sure the level of activity of a player is really that relevant anymore.  The most active player I know who has 50 rb's in green above level 50 is a long way from top spot.  

    Relentlessly performing the same action certainly has value in training to use a sword, but in terms of training for strategy it isn't as helpful.  In a war success is based on an ability to adapt to unexpected and changing circumstances, you hope to control your opponents response and reaction but the reality is you rarely can and how you adapt and how quickly you adapt are key.  That is what makes PVP more interesting than a steady stream of tower hits.  

    No population could support endless looting on the scale we have currently they would starve or relocate as refugees, it's like overfishing you keep doing it not only do the local predators die out you do as well or you have to start developing some of the skills of those you are preying on.  Classic foxes and rabbits for those of you who remember that far back.  Without builders there wouldn't be resources for maruaders it's a question of what the system can support.  So without stronger builders and resource players the game becomes less interesting and less sustainable for marauding players.  

    There are different ways of building an empire but the majority of marauding civilizations didn't last and those that did settled and extended their dominance through technological advance.  Stripping out all your production facilities and having only a small fraction of players ramp up their PO based on prizes only they can now realistically win doesn't entirely seem what was intended given the initial effort and subsequent effort put in to resource production.    
    Batten @ en 1
  • dreamtree (US1)dreamtree (US1) Posts: 1,366US1
    Goodgame Empire isn't exactly based on logic. Soldiers are an infinite supply and enemies produce all sorts of loot...
    Maybe some buildings are best used by low level players... I have resource production buildings because the difference in PO isn't worth it to me.
    Lv 70 dreamtree @ usa 1! This account is best described as a tree in a large forest...
    @ international 1! @ international 2! @ English 1! Those accounts are retired.
    http://prntscr.com/53jb2i
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    http://prntscr.com/61r5kl
    500k might points. I know. A lot of people have higher. Wow, now I have have over 700k... 
    http://prntscr.com/ek3c51

    http://prntscr.com/gers7n
    Yay! A nice reward!


  • Venom (ASIA1)Venom (ASIA1) Posts: 2,232ASIA1
    Goodgame Empire isn't exactly based on logic. Soldiers are an infinite supply and enemies produce all sorts of loot...
    Maybe some buildings are best used by low level players... I have resource production buildings because the difference in PO isn't worth it to me.
    1600 PO seems like a lot to me.
    Venom @ Asia - Member for Drunken Fist
    Venom @ Australia - War Marshal for Shadow Lords!!

    Best player on the test server B)

  • dreamtree (US1)dreamtree (US1) Posts: 1,366US1
    Goodgame Empire isn't exactly based on logic. Soldiers are an infinite supply and enemies produce all sorts of loot...
    Maybe some buildings are best used by low level players... I have resource production buildings because the difference in PO isn't worth it to me.
    1600 PO seems like a lot to me.
    Let's say you have eight stone works in your outpost. You could have four fountains instead for 880 PO. That would increase my my Public Order to about what 306% from 304%? How do get 1600 difference? What PO item?
    Lv 70 dreamtree @ usa 1! This account is best described as a tree in a large forest...
    @ international 1! @ international 2! @ English 1! Those accounts are retired.
    http://prntscr.com/53jb2i
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    http://prntscr.com/61r5kl
    500k might points. I know. A lot of people have higher. Wow, now I have have over 700k... 
    http://prntscr.com/ek3c51

    http://prntscr.com/gers7n
    Yay! A nice reward!


  • Venom (ASIA1)Venom (ASIA1) Posts: 2,232ASIA1
    Goodgame Empire isn't exactly based on logic. Soldiers are an infinite supply and enemies produce all sorts of loot...
    Maybe some buildings are best used by low level players... I have resource production buildings because the difference in PO isn't worth it to me.
    1600 PO seems like a lot to me.
    Let's say you have eight stone works in your outpost. You could have four fountains instead for 880 PO. That would increase my my Public Order to about what 306% from 304%? How do get 1600 difference? What PO item?
    Main castle.... Kingdoms.... If you were talking about an OP would be just under 900. And I just took out 4 fountains and I lost over 160 food per hour and I don't have fully upgraded farmhouses. I am fairly sure you know that having resource buildings is a waste and won't bother carrying on :P
    Venom @ Asia - Member for Drunken Fist
    Venom @ Australia - War Marshal for Shadow Lords!!

    Best player on the test server B)

  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    Depending on when you stop building resource buildings and whether you stop before you've gained the achievements from amount of resources produced then if you remove your production facilities too early you could struggle to gain the banner which increases your food production at 30% - there might be one higher than that I haven't quite got that far yet. But I'd say a 30% food increase is worth having.  

    The game design if you look at the book log provides rewards for production of 1 3 and 4 resource buildings of a particular type so I guess that is the recommended amount.  We always tended to have 16 food production facilities in ops though less necessary with level of PO achievable at the top end.  The difficulty is events are effectively locked by top couple of alliances and players so to get PO items you have to join them which weakens the alliance system to accommodate individuals.  I guess that might be a realistic representation of how alliances and business relationships work.

    There was a value in building out your castle over a long period of time and I can understand the desire to speed up the game to retain new players and allow them to progress to be competitive more quickly.  I agree that players who work harder or smarter being rewarded for that extra effort or skill I'm just not entirely convinced with bots and shells that that is what's happening.  I think perhaps the issue is the amount of loot that some players can draw down compared to what can be produced by a more balanced strategy.  At a low level you can produce what 3 to 5 K of a resource per hour so over a day across 7 castles about 500K the loot by comparisson for a week for a top player can be 150 million plus.  300 x more.  Within a system is that a realistic ratio.  I'm guessing that why production facilities were upped a bit because whilst that ratio could be improved by level 30 facilities and level 7 production effects it probably isn't by that much and wouldn't be close.  

    I'd don't want to see loot changed I'd just like to see production strengthened a bit more.  Production helps less active players who don't have hours to spend but still contribute to the game in a positive way and are possibly more likely to pay to play to keep up.  

    I think looting is too easy and actually is a greater disincentive to PVP.  Would be really interesting to see weekly loot broken down further into attacks on live players, attacks on dead accounts, attacks on NPC's.  Might give a clearer picture on who actually deserves a top glory rating.  
      .  
    Batten @ en 1
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    Just to add to this if you look at the Colossus an event which in theory is about resource production and you look at the top ten of En1 as an example very few of the players in the top ten actually have any resource buildings.  Some have four which is fair enough but the majority are building their colossi with other people's resources not their own.  To have no resource production and be top five in that event does really bring home the imbalance and it's great to see the roadmap is taking that onboard.  It is after all an Empire Building game not just a war game.   
    Batten @ en 1
  • Perryl (AU1)Perryl (AU1) Posts: 1,234
    Just to add to this if you look at the Colossus an event which in theory is about resource production and you look at the top ten of En1 as an example very few of the players in the top ten actually have any resource buildings.  Some have four which is fair enough but the majority are building their colossi with other people's resources not their own.  To have no resource production and be top five in that event does really bring home the imbalance and it's great to see the roadmap is taking that onboard.  It is after all an Empire Building game not just a war game.   
    They just loot it... lol. Sure, we send res to a player if they MM and ask for res for colossus because most of us also don't need res. Usually, we would end up sending stone because that's what's usually overflowing anyways. The fact is that most experienced players are well-aware that you can loot more than you can produce. You're not likely to see inexperienced players at the top of colossus because they produce resources and can't hold as many troops. You'd have to produce more than 100k per hour to ever match up to looting. 

    http://prntscr.com/eizgxz

    http://prntscr.com/eizh6p

    http://prntscr.com/eizhei

    http://prntscr.com/eizhlb

    I'm sure if you look on UK it's the same... oh wait, I can do that. 

    Ang is 1st, lol. Insert conspiracy theory here. 

    http://prntscr.com/eizi05

    http://prntscr.com/eizi79

    Doesn't look like alliance is responsible, though. lol. Impressive loot @BM ang1243

    For good measure, here's the guy in 2nd place; http://prntscr.com/eiziqi

    It's pretty obvious to me that the people at the top in the colossus event are the people that loot, not wait for production. I'm sure it has something to do with a single robber baron giving me more wood/stone/food than I can make in an hour, maybe. Or maybe my alliance is sending resource loads of 20-35k to my 81k max storage and I'm adding them to colossus every 10 seconds. Yeah, that's it. Totally makes sense when a single NPC will give me more resources than a cart load does. lol 

    If you had time to look at if they have resource buildings or not then maybe you should have checked their loot? Surely someone with 260 million loot doesn't need people to send them resources for them to succeed in that event. 

    Not sure why anyone would, anyways. If it's not 300+ PO it's not worth my effort. 
    perryl @ USA1 
    Perryl @ UK1 and AU1 

    @ me or don't expect a response. 

    Chasing the goalpost since 2014. I discovered GGE through a Dogecoin faucet rotator. Don't know what that is? No big deal, those are gone in 2018. A long break was good. Highly recommended. I got too drunk and forgot why I hated GGE and took a break in the first place. So, here I am again. 
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    I might be wrong but last time I looked as an inexperienced player I was 8th in the Colossus event with no support from my alliance in terms of sending resources and without needing to loot resources from any other player.  I am only level 300 so I'm giving up about 500 levels to some of the players above me though in the case of Ang it's only 200 or so.  I haven't really maximised my production potential yet but as I get my production and PO up I guess I will become vaguely competitive.  

    I can produce over 3K an hour from one resource so with three types of resource production per castle across 7 castles that will shortly be 63K per hour and at a higher level with the likely upgrades to be introduced.  There is a gap to the top looters but  if they are drawing down 100K per hour but I only need to loot 37K to achieve the same amount of resources which given I have less playing time seemed to me to make sense.  I also don't end up needing to strip resources from friends and neighbours to fuel my development and I have the scope to contribute to other players development rather than slowing it up.  

    So potentially one facility quietly without needing attention or action produces 3K per hour x 24 hours 72K per day.  72K x 21 facilities = 1.5 million per day.  10.5 million per week.  And then for a moderate looter with limited activity add on 10 million looting per week 20 million for a fraction of the effort and less expense than spending a small fortune on siege walls or iron mantlets.  As I crawl to a higher level I will increase my production exponentially.  So whilst I'm comparatively not that active or effective and though I won't be winning any contests any time soon I do have a way to strengthen my PO slowly without needing to win events.  My PO is less than 300 everywhere so interesting to see what happens as that rises.  

    What I'm saying is that it is possible to produce more than 100K per hour through production and I suspect that is already the case for some players.  Ultimately we aren't far off that being exceeded by some of the top resource players.  Of course you then need to be able to spend it quickly to protect it but we have generally learnt to do that.  And in an attack being able to dump on masse in the alliance fund is a helpful denial of service tactic.  With limits on numbers of attacks resource players can be hurt but depending on where looters resources come from an organised denial of service across a server targeting players or alliances (sanctions for poor behaviour or just for fun) could feasibly hurt them and cut off their supply forcing them into the exciting world of just hitting towers hour after hour.  

    Sadly in the current environment any score at the very top end mine included will be questioned given the admitted use of bots, shell accounts and multi accounts.  Any player with the achievement you've presented should be congratulated for genuine effort. But regrettably given past misdemeanors and exploits a certain skepticism will remain which will overshadow these results.  It is however positive to note that GGE are looking at it seriously now it isn't an easy ask to address but will be interesting to see how the scoreboards change as they start to review scores and analyse them more closely.  Personally I welcome that transparency and would have no problem volunteering to have a sample of my score tested.  If you haven't done anything wrong then there is nothing to worry about.  

    If resource production is boosted I doubt it will be a problem for the top guys to add back or just buy back the resource facilities they were advised to give up but certainly it would represent an added element of complexity.  Forcing your players to work harder than they need to achieve something they could manage with less effort and less time seems pretty hard on them and presumably burns a few out which would explain the turnover and pressure to creatively interpret the rules.  Time will tell.  PVP in the way we played when I started had less to do with resources and more to do with pride, honour and the glory of competing against an equally matched opponent and reducing great players to little more than storehouses to be plundered at will simply because haven't developed as quickly has little to do with PVP and a lot to do with controlling an outcome.  Being stronger whether as a player or an alliance allows you to control the flow of resources if as through war or internal discord that flow is disrupted players who primarily loot to develop will move on whereas recruiting a resource player in general means you are recruiting players who are more independent and more likely to stay.  
    I understand the balance favours looting right now but I think there is potential for that to change, resource players are likely still at a disadvantage but if the gap closes still further things could get very interesting very quickly.      
    Batten @ en 1
  • Perryl (AU1)Perryl (AU1) Posts: 1,234
    I might be wrong but last time I looked as an inexperienced player I was 8th in the Colossus event with no support from my alliance in terms of sending resources and without needing to loot resources from any other player.  I am only level 300 so I'm giving up about 500 levels to some of the players above me though in the case of Ang it's only 200 or so.  I haven't really maximised my production potential yet but as I get my production and PO up I guess I will become vaguely competitive.  

    I can produce over 3K an hour from one resource so with three types of resource production per castle across 7 castles that will shortly be 63K per hour and at a higher level with the likely upgrades to be introduced.  There is a gap to the top looters but  if they are drawing down 100K per hour but I only need to loot 37K to achieve the same amount of resources which given I have less playing time seemed to me to make sense.  I also don't end up needing to strip resources from friends and neighbours to fuel my development and I have the scope to contribute to other players development rather than slowing it up.  

    So potentially one facility quietly without needing attention or action produces 3K per hour x 24 hours 72K per day.  72K x 21 facilities = 1.5 million per day.  10.5 million per week.  And then for a moderate looter with limited activity add on 10 million looting per week 20 million for a fraction of the effort and less expense than spending a small fortune on siege walls or iron mantlets.  As I crawl to a higher level I will increase my production exponentially.  So whilst I'm comparatively not that active or effective and though I won't be winning any contests any time soon I do have a way to strengthen my PO slowly without needing to win events.  My PO is less than 300 everywhere so interesting to see what happens as that rises.  

    What I'm saying is that it is possible to produce more than 100K per hour through production and I suspect that is already the case for some players.  Ultimately we aren't far off that being exceeded by some of the top resource players.  Of course you then need to be able to spend it quickly to protect it but we have generally learnt to do that.  And in an attack being able to dump on masse in the alliance fund is a helpful denial of service tactic.  With limits on numbers of attacks resource players can be hurt but depending on where looters resources come from an organised denial of service across a server targeting players or alliances (sanctions for poor behaviour or just for fun) could feasibly hurt them and cut off their supply forcing them into the exciting world of just hitting towers hour after hour.  

    Sadly in the current environment any score at the very top end mine included will be questioned given the admitted use of bots, shell accounts and multi accounts.  Any player with the achievement you've presented should be congratulated for genuine effort. But regrettably given past misdemeanors and exploits a certain skepticism will remain which will overshadow these results.  It is however positive to note that GGE are looking at it seriously now it isn't an easy ask to address but will be interesting to see how the scoreboards change as they start to review scores and analyse them more closely.  Personally I welcome that transparency and would have no problem volunteering to have a sample of my score tested.  If you haven't done anything wrong then there is nothing to worry about.  

    If resource production is boosted I doubt it will be a problem for the top guys to add back or just buy back the resource facilities they were advised to give up but certainly it would represent an added element of complexity.  Forcing your players to work harder than they need to achieve something they could manage with less effort and less time seems pretty hard on them and presumably burns a few out which would explain the turnover and pressure to creatively interpret the rules.  Time will tell.  PVP in the way we played when I started had less to do with resources and more to do with pride, honour and the glory of competing against an equally matched opponent and reducing great players to little more than storehouses to be plundered at will simply because haven't developed as quickly has little to do with PVP and a lot to do with controlling an outcome.  Being stronger whether as a player or an alliance allows you to control the flow of resources if as through war or internal discord that flow is disrupted players who primarily loot to develop will move on whereas recruiting a resource player in general means you are recruiting players who are more independent and more likely to stay.  
    I understand the balance favours looting right now but I think there is potential for that to change, resource players are likely still at a disadvantage but if the gap closes still further things could get very interesting very quickly.      
    Looting isn't only from players. It's from NPCs too. Are you referring to the current colossus event? You're 9th with just under 600k loot. Which is a good rank, I'm not disputing that at all. I'm saying you would be better off looting those resources than waiting for production. That's why you see most higher level players without production. I have production still on USA1, because I want to complete quests. I know how much a person can produce. I destroyed all production on AU1, Food is king. Level 300 is enough to easily win the event. By level 800 you would have no use for production, in fact, even OPs are pretty useless. Especially if you loot. Max out some casts and comms and you don't even have much need for looting anymore. A level 70(1) could just as easily win the event. It all comes down to time. 

    I used 100k as a minimum placeholder, and was referring to one type of resource in one castle. I'm also referring to NPC looting, specifically robber baron castles in the great empire. 

    Allow me to break it down for you. This RBC I am hitting is a level 54 RBC. I have 15 of them. I have another 35 that are level 30. The cooldown from hitting one is normally 3 hours. Using a commander developed from looted pieces and a loot hero that was looted. It took me 2 minutes to attack this RBC. http://prntscr.com/ej19lg 
    The resulting loot is more than you will produce at one castle in the next hour. I send 2 waves of dummies because RBC after level 50 have 2 waves of tools. So my losses were really 3 melee horrors. MELEE. lol. I can now do 14 more of these in about 15 mins, if that. I would produce more than you would in 2 hours between all castles. I can do this every 3 hours. This is just looting my main 15 RBC. This is not including the current event, Ice, Sand, or Fire, and of course PvP. So yeah, you can produce 63k if you figure out how to produce wood at stone ops and vice versa, and if you have the right development completed. Sure. However, I'm looting like 15k per hit from NPCs, not even maxed ones. It doesn't take a math genius to figure out who can bring in more resources. Keep RBCs at the same level and use presets. It takes like 2 minutes to set up all of the attacks. The bigger problem becomes remembering to donate the resources before hitting the cap. lol. 

    Your math sucks here. You're not producing a universal 3k per castle of every resource. To produce that you would, first of all, need to be able to produce 3k wood at a stone/food OP or vice versa. Second, you would need to have the development in all castles, third you would need to have troop levels that balance out to 3k food per castle. Something that is near impossible without being farmed, lol. Even in protection with no defense and no ability to train offense I still can't get up to 3k food per castle in production. You can't be a moderate looter if you don't have troops. If you're producing 3k of each resource in every castle then you simply don't have the troops to loot moderately. Unless you have some magical food production secrets I'm unaware of. 10.5 mil looting is also nothing for anyone that knows how to loot. I can loot that in a couple of hours without issue. Less if Nomads or Samurais was on. Just why would I? lol. You'll see me loot like that when smashing an event for the alliance. Then I generally loot around 20 mil in a couple hours using 18 commanders at the same time, 21 on USA, and these are usually one wave attacks that have been autofilled too. Winner of colossus should get a 300+ deco. 

    I can already tell you what it looks like. 4 level 20 forest lodges produces 2500 wood per hour in the main castle without overseer, but with level 10 VIP. Production is a bit higher in outers if you have the RVs. Still nowhere near what you can get by looting for an hour. You're using tools on towers? Stop doing that. lol. I only use tools on Samurais, Nomads, Berimond camps, PvP, and FL/BC targets. I don't waste my time on dragons, more rubies from robber barons if you level them up, but if I did I would use wood tools on them. I use only wood tools on Samurais, Nomads, Berimond camps, and most FL/BC targets. I use armourer tools in PvP. I stopped buying iron mantlets when they added endless training, but I keep them for stronger FL/BC targets or maybe weaker PvP targets. Or I just waste them autofilling because they keep giving us more anyways. 

    Whoa, that's a stretch now. Producing more than 100k per hour? Maybe with no troops and pure food-based maxed out players with the right build items. I know of some that produce some serious food. I think I've heard of 6k wood at an OP before, that's sweet and all, but that's only 1 or 2 hits per hour... Not worth it because that person has lower food production because of it. Food is king.. I said that already, though. Even still, for the production focused player that's also moderately looting to be compared to the looting focused player that is moderately looting is inaccurate. The looting focused player has higher food production and therefore will have the capacity to loot more castles at one time. Effectively resulting in less time spent actually clicking buttons to loot. Moderate looting for this player is higher than moderate looting for the player with less troops and that has performed less looting and therefore has less good commanders. Nobody I know is looking at the loot from a player castle and crying about it. If they hit you it was for glory, honor, or simply just to kill your troops. They don't care about your resources. Everyone loots from events now. They are more effective and can't waste your tools... except maybe FLs. lol 

    Well, 260 mil loot is the highest I've seen so far. I can't justify spending the time to loot that much. I have no idea who does or doesn't use bots, but there are some people with consistent 50 mil+ scores that are quite curious. I know I don't have the energy for that week after week. As evidenced by me being in protection right now. As someone who does every click manually, I know how much work goes into looting 100k nomad tabs or looting 10 mil+ per hour. That's what I do. I can't imagine doing that every day, but I plan to try it out after this break. I'd like to see how much I can loot in a week if I try my best. I've tried it once before and held 1st for a day but got tired. I don't know people do it without hurting their wrists, lol. 

    I'm not opposed to the resource production change. It doesn't affect me or anyone above me, really. It just allows others a chance to catch up, or at least a chance to produce more resources for PvPing for resources to become something people are interested in. I don't know how much of a change so I don't know how I would treat it, but more resources doesn't bother me in the least. That said, it sounds like another change that would make the game less competitive because new players can catch up to old players that much easier. That's not necessarily a good thing. If they keep making changes that make the game easier then people are certain to quit and find something more challenging. 


    perryl @ USA1 
    Perryl @ UK1 and AU1 

    @ me or don't expect a response. 

    Chasing the goalpost since 2014. I discovered GGE through a Dogecoin faucet rotator. Don't know what that is? No big deal, those are gone in 2018. A long break was good. Highly recommended. I got too drunk and forgot why I hated GGE and took a break in the first place. So, here I am again. 
  • maverique (GB1)maverique (GB1) Posts: 126GB1
    Hi batten.

    On the po side I completely disagree with you.

    It takes 1 day to do an entire castle with sams po and this is pretty top po....so on this basis nope...none ruby can have this....and any nomads,sams,fls win po is prestige of alliance so goodluck to cg and prae...I aint jealous I will just try harder to compete as will odins.

    On the stone and wood why???????/.....you shouldnt get high end reward having buildings like that imo...if you craft tho and choose to go resources over food then I respect that but you wont feed a spider let alone an army.

    Players have a 2 way choice.......high food or low food....and those saying low food are simply stupid and thick...this is not to question each on intelligence but logic tells you in a wargame if you have castles stone and wood unable to be competitive on numbers then you are both in the wrong game and setting players under a very very bad example.

    Each to own...I never used a bot....on shells I take your point but anyone in an alliance I was in promoted stone or wood and I was recruiting they would be out on ear....I dont take kindly to players needing and builds like that stop the food produce which in turn highlights poor in game growth...

    On the numbers and what is made I wont share my logics as they are simply legendary....

    maverique the octopus of gge

    maverique @ en 1
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    "Goodgame Empire is a medieval strategy browser game. Build you own castle, create a powerful army and fight epic PvP battles."

    "Build your empire from scratch and see it thrive."

    "In Goodgame Empire you create your own medieval kingdom! Fight PvP battles against other players or form alliances to become the most powerful ruler"  

    I think there is a misunderstanding the game publicity doesn't define it as a war game.  It's described as a medieval strategy game.  Build your castle and build your empire are prominent in the blurbs.  Where does it say Total War?  War is one aspect of the strategy required not the only one.  But the publicity balances the building with the warcraft and many earlier players enjoy trying to strike that balance.  You can have as many armies as you want but against a gate open because of breaches of fairplay they are worthless.  

    Some alliances choose to play GGE as a war game but they look to be having to create their own competition judging by the constant instability fractures and splits.  The majority of those who choose to major on that approach lie in ruins and have consistently struggled with internal conflict and player loyalty.  Longer term the war game approach is expensive and doesn't appear to give you that much of an advantage.  If at level 300 I can place in top twenty then I'm not entirely convinced that players at level 800 with these huge armies have that much of an advantage and maybe just maybe they've bought into a way of playing that isn't all it's cracked up to be.  I can pass the PO from Sam's PO item with two days or so to go now in the Colossus so that advantage is quicker maybe but over time can be bettered.  I can also get the Sams items when I choose so can do both and not be overly disadvantaged.  You'll have the items sooner but there are only so many castles that can be filled with them and so much space.   Constant attacking is intensive in terms of time and money, it is a high risk strategy for you and your alliance if you hit the wrong player playing from a low account.  It just isn't going to work for the majority of players who worked, 

    I don't need a big army with my strategy.  And it seemingly doesn't really hurt me in terms of being competitive when I tried in BC yesterday I managed to reach 30 or so then stopped to focus on other things.  I won't win events but very few players can now given the level of spend so why focus energy there as opposed to things were I can compete?  Wars are largely over in one wave these days with massive mass attacks that few alliances can handle other than Praetorians maybe everybody else will open and wait it out then continue to build.  The wars these days aren't really wars are they are it's just one alliance asserting it's dominance.  The actual conflict is minimal compared to the battles we used to fight between more equally matched alliances.  And given players have been buying huge armies to kill off in the first wave or second wave it's not like you need a lot of food long term.  You can only send a finite amount of attacks if you are playing within the rules four nomad camps, 10 FI camps, 4 samurai camps, why fast develop food production when you only really need a huge amount of food in the top two or three total war alliances.  

    A lot of us are happy with small achievements and incremental gains and growing at a pace that suits our circumstances and which we can contain.  We've seen guys drop down from Top two or three alliances they really struggle to adapt.  There is more than one strategy and more than one way of playing and for smaller alliances until they grow defence is more important.  Odins in the past without question was player for player the most effective attacking alliance and doubtless they will be so again but to what purpose.  How long before they divide again and end up with one player drifting out there someone alone in the empire.  

    There are always more than 2 choices and players need to make the best choice for them based on their circumstances and situations, good mid and lower level alliances understand this and adapt to rather than burning out players by forcing them to overspend or overextend themselves trying to meet the demands of someone else's model.  That's always been the joy of the game as Phil and Mike mentioned in their feedback on another thread, diversity and creativity, innvoation are born of difference not uniformity of approach.  Everybody playing in the same way is a mechanism of control and derives from insecurity not strong leadership.  You learn more from multiple approaches than you do from just one. There is always a better approach.  I'm not claiming to have the answer I just wanted to share what has worked for me.   
     
    Batten @ en 1
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    I take your point in terms of my maths Perryl it is out by more than a bit in terms of ops two resource max for now clearly.  But I would still potentially outproduce you overnight and during working hours or school / college time.  My highest resource facility is level 9 so on that basis if my production doubles by level 20 then I could be a bit ahead of your player.  I held the 10th loot record briefly at 70K a while back which I pretty sure Daefis smashed, though in the context of current scores I guess that isn't much cop these days.  But if you combine that with decent production then from my perspective that isn't to bad.  I do probably need to focus more on my sums though...

    At the point at which I can hit level 700-800's I might see so value in ramping up food production but with limited time why would I sacrifice something that works for me that I might later need if the game changes direction.  Having big armies speeds up your development certainly but to what end.  Seems to me a lot of level 800's have now traveled so far they've left themselves with no-one to hit.  Being first is great don't get me wrong but it doesn't really leave you with anywhere left to go.    
    Batten @ en 1
  • The one thought that comes to my mind when reading this thread is: This isn't Goodgame Bigfarm. 

    -DB
    STICKERSTICKERSTICKERSTICKER

    Yes, they're parrots. Deal with it.^
  • Perryl (AU1)Perryl (AU1) Posts: 1,234
    I take your point in terms of my maths Perryl it is out by more than a bit in terms of ops two resource max for now clearly.  But I would still potentially outproduce you overnight and during working hours or school / college time.  My highest resource facility is level 9 so on that basis if my production doubles by level 20 then I could be a bit ahead of your player.  I held the 10th loot record briefly at 70K a while back which I pretty sure Daefis smashed, though in the context of current scores I guess that isn't much cop these days.  But if you combine that with decent production then from my perspective that isn't to bad.  I do probably need to focus more on my sums though...

    At the point at which I can hit level 700-800's I might see so value in ramping up food production but with limited time why would I sacrifice something that works for me that I might later need if the game changes direction.  Having big armies speeds up your development certainly but to what end.  Seems to me a lot of level 800's have now traveled so far they've left themselves with no-one to hit.  Being first is great don't get me wrong but it doesn't really leave you with anywhere left to go.    
    I agree. It ends up being exhausting. That's why I'm taking a break from all servers right now. Ramping up food production is my main priority right now because I can't feed the amount of troops I want to be able to hold. A reasonable amount, in my opinion. I'm close, though. With some upgrades to my food production, I'll be there. 

    My point was simply that the people who are winning the colossus are usually doing it because they loot a lot. Not by being fed resources by their alliance as you had suggested before. You'd never outproduce a heavy looter. Ang just did 6 months of your production in looting this week, if not more. 

    Production definitely works for some people, but those people are always going to be at a disadvantage to the people who are food-focused and loot regularly. Looting will always be more efficient than production. I think it should be too. Based on your original comment it sounds like you want to be able to bring in as much resources while you sleep as someone who is actively looting. That doesn't make sense to me. Why would anyone loot or be active then? 

    You made the assumption that those people are being fed resources without even considering that they have all looted more this week than you have produced in the last 3 or more, and you yourself are ranked top 10 with barely any loot. Why is it a stretch to believe that someone with 260 million loot could have twice the points as someone with 550k loot without being fed resources by their alliance? You said you weren't fed resources so I don't understand why this would be surprising. If anything, I'm surprised they don't have even more points. 
    perryl @ USA1 
    Perryl @ UK1 and AU1 

    @ me or don't expect a response. 

    Chasing the goalpost since 2014. I discovered GGE through a Dogecoin faucet rotator. Don't know what that is? No big deal, those are gone in 2018. A long break was good. Highly recommended. I got too drunk and forgot why I hated GGE and took a break in the first place. So, here I am again. 
  • There are two avenues for players to take in this game.  The first is play it like Big Farm, sit back and collect resources as they accumulate and build a shiny keep full of resource production buildings to support a small army.  They make wonderful farms.

    The good news is that this is a war game, so really, food and armies are the key.  Maximizing your PO allows you to feed more troops, have more armies, and loot more.  A single nomad hit will return more loot than half a day worth of production.  Hitting a real player with a loot commander will return days worth of production.  Why would I ever want to just sit in game and wait for things to accumulate?

    The fancy PO items are "out of reach" because you aren't hitting anything because you don't have enough troops because your keeps are full of dwellings and stone quarries.  This limits you to getting a few thousand samurai tokens per event, So it'll take years for you to fill with fountains. 

    Players that don't have time to play much may take the first approach and hit an event hard every few months after slowly making mantlets and ladders.  Which is fine.  But being a war game, I prefer to loot what I need.  It works much better than waiting 7 months for enough iron ore to upgrade my hall of legends.
    IronBeagle @ usa 1
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) Posts: 1,120GB1
    Life is certainly simpler if you reduce it to binary opposition, black or white, a cat is a cat because it isn't a dog, its how language developed and it's how we came to understand the world.  Narrative or narratology is a mechanism of control designed in general terms for the benefit of civilisation to provide a set off rules by which a community collective agrees to live.  Vladimir Propp, Levi Strauss, Classic Mythology, Fake News, TV Commercials all designed to throw out a hook baited with a call to action.  In this case be stupid enough to attack me whilst at your a disadvantage so I and my alliance can happily reduce you to rubble.  "It's a war game" is the narrative of attacking players and they have successively and successfully sought to defuse and weaken alternative strategies of choices.  It's a conflict of multiple conflicting narratives in which players accept training which limits and controls the way in which they play the game in exchange for protection, prizes and their silence about how that success is achieved, quietly compromising themselves and their style of play, .  

    It's a war game.  How are you defining a war? An attack on one player, an attack on one alliance by a handful of active players.  The median average for a war is in the region of 10.4 years dependent on your sample.  The mean is about 2 years.  US troops have been in Afghanistan for over 12 years that would be a war.  And that isn't a game.  Billions of pounds, thousands of lives.  Do you mean a conflict where one side sends 600 attacks and the other opens their gates whilst barely breaking pace in sending their attackers out to continue hitting NPC towers.  What we do these days is little more than skirmish or have local disagreements.  If you really believed it was a war game then shouldn't there be ...well actually more wars.  The War Correspondents gave up and left the forum war thread returning home to report on anti-social behaviour in public parks there were so few actual wars to report on.  The last time the real world managed no actual wars was 597 AD.  So collectively as a player base determined to play a war game we are seemingly unintentional brilliant at creating peace.  Always interesting that the players who seem to use the narrative "It's a War Game" seem to be the one's who sit in the safest largest with the strongest players with the most defence and biggest accounts.  Any player using that phrase is in all probability The Man seeking to oppress you.  Don't think for yourself, don't try anything different, don't rock the boat, stick with the status quo is that how it should go?  

    Setting up shell accounts simply so you can reduce the risk of looting for them isn't what you'd expect in a war game.  It's a product of the game not being a war game but of control by vested interests seeking to retain their control of a system that works in their favour.  With safe hits of NPC towers that don't hit back, on weaker players who you know can't win before you send your attack and whose defence you force them to set by denying them the use of tactics the game allows, is that war.  War is a messy it's unpredictable how many unexpected results have you seen in the last year, how many times really have you sent an attacking expecting to win that you lost.  A lot of players are more robber baron than the robber baron these days.  Goodgame Bandit maybe more appropriate given the eclipse of every else in the pursuit of loot, predictable isn't what this game used to be.  If you continue to feature on the one feature you will miss out of the other great things the game can offer.  Why limit yourself and those around you.  Is it insecurity?  

    If you actually want to play the game you want to avoid getting to the top of the rankings who can those guys hit for glory a choice of what five targets or so. How many targets can a top alliances hit and get a rewarding experience against a strong and equal opponent tow or three.  Surely it's better not to have developed so quickly so you can play in the middle of the pack against fifty to a hundred plus targets and twenty to forty alliances at a similar level with roughly equal strengths.  The sad truth is when you travel so far nobody can challenge you you have achieve perfect peace not perfection in war. At that point is it still a war game? 

        
    Batten @ en 1
  • Cordial Warrior (US1)Cordial Warrior (US1) Posts: 59US1
    edited 23.05.2018
    I like to have a steady amount of resource production so I am not dependent upon looting. It's nice to log on and find storehouses full. 
    I have only been playing a year and a few months. But I like having the resources automatically produced. 
    Post edited by Cordial Warrior (US1) on
Sign In to comment.