We need new Moderators!
We are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.
If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE
Discussion Thread: Roadmap Q2+Q3 2017
Sign In to comment.
Comments
So they were going to destroy combos and reward sets. It's all been said. Briefly: a) lazy programming, b) boring equipment mechanics, c) reduced player creativity and control, leading to d) overly simplistic gaming
Possible solution: make hard caps behind the scenes that are what our current gems + hero can take us to. Then don't break these with new, super-powered equipment and gems. Balance the casts and coms, err on the side of defense so that weaker players don't get overwhelmed as long as they do the monthly events for casts.
Other games I enjoy are the ones which have large player-tuning possibilities. When devs of these games make a mistake, creating something OP (over powered), they "nerf" it, which is to reduce its power in accordance to everything else. The problem here, as I see it, is that the p2w (pay 2 win) element is coming back to haunt them - and rightfully so! What did they think would happen when selling OP equipment for lots of money? They somehow thought gamers would think "gosh, I better just concentrate on the sets than mix and match, because that would be unethical" ???
If they've identified that people are leaving because players are realizing that the p2w gear is way OP and they can't afford it, leading to a game that is not unfair because of skill and knowledge differences, but bank accounts, well that is how GGE has directed this game and for these reasons p2w games fail.
What do you think hacking is? How do you think it is done?
Brute force is one option. This is simply using a tool to try different passwords until you get through. For it to happen that quickly a person would need to choose a password like "hello1".
If your password is "word47" then it's probably compromised already, by default. As are pretty much any variation of password, 12345, 123456, etc. Words like "love", "hate", "superman", "princess", etc. Are all compromised already. The tool that's used to brute force knows multiple different hash variations of these words.
When a database is compromised the passwords hashes are compromised too. That's why a password like "t&%08YC4JG0s" is what you should be using. (Don't use that password, I just generated it and posted it publicly. It's not a good password anymore.)
Another method of hacking is via "RAT". A RAT is a Remote Access Trojan. These can hide on a system and watch things like your webcam and what you're browsing, but even worse they can steal your keystrokes and saved password list, compromising all of your accounts, including your email. They can even access IP restricted websites through your computer, such as banking, PayPal, SSH, etc.
If you use your browser's "saved passwords" feature then your password is stored in plaintext on your system. A RAT could easily take your password and the hacker could then use it as they want to.
If your friend decided to change their password from "password" to "password1" then even guessing would be sufficient to achieve hacking.
I can assure you that if hacking was as easy as you claim then Negan would have been hacked a long time ago, along with Lesky, Stu, Mikeshot, Phil, and anyone else you can think of that can break a million PP. They certainly wouldn't waste their efforts on weak accounts, no offense.
My password list was compromised in Aug. 2016. Through no fault of GGE, I could have been hacked but the person who hacked me either didn't know what GGE was or didn't care. Either way, I was able to change the password and I am as secure as ever.
I recommend Lastpass. You'll be more secure if you use it, in my opinion.
Does your friend have antivirus? Might be time to do a scan. Has he/she downloaded any files recently? Might be worth throwing those files into a Virustotal scan, your antivirus isn't guaranteed to detect an infection. The simple fact is that an antivirus will not detect a virus until that virus is added to the virus database of the respective antivirus program. Virustotal uses all of the databases, but you'll need to learn how to read false positives too. I, personally, do not use antivirus and I do not recommend it, along with many security researchers. Learning how to avoid a virus is significantly more useful.
Hope this helps somehow.
Perryl @ UK1 and AU1. Will be back on UK1 soon.
@ 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 2020. 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.
2020 - Not dead yet.
Multiaccounting cannot be stopped by tracking IP addresses for people in South America and most of Asia. Unfortunately, the amount of IP addresses available at some Internet Exchange points is too low for IPs not to overlap. Furthermore, dynamic IP addresses are common and false positives would cost them a lot of time.
That said, running the right query would allow them to see enough to be able to eliminate many multiaccounts, I do agree with that. Any decently smart multiaccounter could get away with it forever, at least until they made it completely bannable to use IPs that trace back to a proxy network or TOR exit node.
Perryl @ UK1 and AU1. Will be back on UK1 soon.
@ 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 2020. 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.
2020 - Not dead yet.
No doubt you have already realised that I cannot in any way be described as a computer nerd and freely admit to no real understanding of the behind the scenes complexities of computer programs.
What I do know however is that there are many corporations such as banks, IT companies and service providers as well as even government departments who are mostly able to protect their customers from malicious usage of their accounts.
That level of protection is clearly not on GGE's agenda
NR
100% disagree! Because i have 100 acc and when we are in war i join and set up the wall. Other way how we will def?
No website or antivirus program can protect a user from the main attack vector, the user. The #1 way a user gets compromised is by clicking "yes", "install", or "I agree" when they shouldn't have.
If you take a minute to Google it, you will find the that all information online is at risk. If you really want to keep your information safe, don't post it online at all. That said if you're going to use the internet. Familiarize yourself with backing up your data and safe browsing techniques. Consider using a password manager and avoid installing unnecessary programs.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/14/yahoo-hack-security-of-one-billion-accounts-breached
http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/money/savings-banking/best-and-worst-banks-for-online-security-revealed-11364106713846
Banks are actually one of the worst offenders of bad security practices.
Perryl @ UK1 and AU1. Will be back on UK1 soon.
@ 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 2020. 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.
2020 - Not dead yet.
I am also aware that GGE have in the past stated that they will no longer investigate multi accounts which is clearly an endorsement of the practice. As GGE are not the solution then I guess it is now up to the rest of us to continue driving multi account players out of the game
NR
But its wishfull thinking, as is the banning of bots. Its clear GGE are either unable or unwilling to shut these things down.
Bots would be a constant battle to keep changing things, as the bot makers are very fast at adapting to any changes made to the game. WAY WAY faster than GGE are at making the changes thats for sure. But that doesnt mean that they shouldnt do it, make the bans Massive, go to a 3 strikes you out system, get caught 3 times get a perminant ban. Ban the most high profile botters first, perminantly. You know the ones that are VERY obvious and all the server know who they are. Start banning high profile players and word will soon get around. and the practice will soon slow right down. The same would be true for multis, just needs balls to do it. Multi's have only grown so massive because nothing has ever been done about them, had this issue been dealt with years ago and a precedent set, You would not have the issues you have now, yet you still procrastinate over should we shouldnt we.
If you know about black market trading, and you do as its been reported god knows how many times, why on earth has it not been shut down already?????? why to you need a roadmap for that one, you dont need a roadmap to tell you if your server crashes you need to fix it damn quick. There are some changes that need making as a priority. And surely thats one. Loads of quick easy fixes can be made to massivly restrict that practice. And a few things that need changing in how the game works to shut it down completly. However adressing the multi issue would solve most of your problems. But that seems to be the one issue you are not prepared to tackle.
Why not change the way the 200% offer works?? As has been suggested 1000 times? instead of offering it to people that do not buy for a couple of months, why not offer it to players that reach a certain level of activity over a couple of months for example?
Why do you not restrict the movement of tools between accounts? why would anyone actually need to tranfer thousands of tools between accounts? Its an exploit begging to be abused. And its getting hugely exploited by some people.
Why not restrict gifting so you can only recive one gift in per gift you send out. to stop certain players getting gifts from 10 accounts? for example The vast number of players i know have gift buddies. And they just send each other all their gifts.
Loads of simple practical 2 second programming changes could be made to stop this in its tracks, yet its been happenign for years. Why on earth do you need a roadmap? Just do it.
Same as res farming multis. Adjust the game, so it gives out proper amounts of res though standard game play, ie playing events / hitting towers etc. and carry on with kingdom res production for players that prefer to build by res production, then just cap the limit of res gained by hitting a player to the amounts of res lost by the player in PVP. Job done in 2 seconds flat. That would make 80% of multis redundant overnight. Simple and effective and would not really effect anyones game at all. Something that should have been done 2 years ago when you knew exactly what was happening. No roadmap needed just common sense applied.
2+ years is way way too long to wait before you stamp on these things. 2 weeks after finding out would be a more realistic timetable.
You're going overboard on this "Fairness" issue.
Stop worrying about all the whiny cry babies who complain constantly and concentrate on fixing the glitches, (like no warning horns on incoming BC attacks). These whiners are the "play for free" crowd and contribute nothing to your financial bottom line. This is a WAR game. There is nothing fair about war. There are winners and there are losers. The losers always whine instead of working to get better.
"Fair" is: 1. We all pay the same price for rubies; 2. We all get offered, and have, the same opportunities; 3. We are all treated equally even if we don't WHINE. It's that easy.
I agree about the Bots.... but only because it effects your financial bottom line and is a sound business decision. Multiple accounts that have never bought rubies have the same effect, but accounts that provide you a positive cash flow should not concern you. Everyone has the same opportunity in this regard.
Take the money you spend on trying to satisfy the Whiners and spend it on some weekend support staff. The returns will be far better among your paying customers. The customer is very seldom right is they are constant WHINERS.
I'm just sayin .........
Whether you consider non-ruby buyers to be whiners is an opinion but you're failing to see the bigger picture. Contrary to what some people think, non-ruby players are crucial to the game. Without them, the game wouldn't be as varied and you'd soon see the ruby-buyers quitting. Those who buy rubies may well directly contribute revenue but GGS needs players (of all sorts) to keep the game going - it's how free-to-play games thrive.
You also fail to account for the middle group. Moderate ruby buyers. They directly contribute revenue but this update is not targeting them. This update is targeting the very small minority of players capable of spending large amounts of rubies on very specific gems which does create unbalanced situations.
Your argument about fairness doesn't stand up either. Yes, give everyone the same opportunity but you offer every player the chance to delete 1 account of their choosing for £500 - is that fair? Everyone has the opportunity but it's not fair and it's not healthy for the game. That's an extreme example but by your argument, it would still be equal.
fire these horrible screw ups who keep doing this. gge do you think people will keep spending money on a game that has all these buggs ?really how do you screw it up 2 times now where people can log in ?
Just to say thanks to Chris for a clear explanation of the issue and insight into the testing. Appreciate him taking the time to help us understand the issue more clearly. If this is what comes from the testing group than I think most of us could get behind it and support the players involved. What would be good to see next is a moderator flag this up to a CM or QA so that they can pick up on the explanation and give a bit more detail so we can assess who is effected and how. Much better to know even in advance than log in a find the situation Chris describes particularly with high value bought items.
Here are 10 steps to make yourselves more successful.
1. READ ALL THE POSTS IN THIS THREAD.
2. don't change the gem's at all, i might not have an super cast's/comm's but i am considering spending millions of rubies buying the gems to make better casts. 90:90 is what is achievable for non ruby players, why should it be the same for the players that spend thousands like @Negan (US1) @billdo09 (US1) @Morentz (US1) and many more??? these players spend money so that they are STRONGER than us that don't spend tons.
3. the personal rv idea is DUMB are you guys trying to destroy PvP entirely??? this will also make wars pointless and impossible to win
4. we all want the Alliance Tourney, yes, boosting does happen a lot, but is that a bad thing? if an alliance loses 20k defenders boosting they will buy more. which means more money.
5. We want the Royal Capital too, it is an event that is good for Kingdom Resources, and the winning alliance does receive a nice award.
6. Multi accounting is a bad thing, but is there a problem with alliances sharing PW's so that someone can set defenses? if sharing passwords is a problem, how about making it so that War Marshals, Deputy's and Leaders are able to set the players defenses?
7. Stop with the new updates, and fix all the bugs first
8. The reason we play this game and spend money on it is because it is very entertaining. if you want to lose all your long time players that spend money, and a lot of it(like my self) make the dumb changes that will defeat the purpose of this being a WAR game.
9.Bring back the Great Tournament, it encourages a lot of PvP
10. Think about what type of player is more important to you, the non ruby players that MIGHT buy rubies at some point, or the actual ruby buyers?
and to all the penny pinching sissies that whine about spending money on the game, go play farmville, or stop complaining
Peace Out
Red
P.S. thanks for bringing the real beri back, thats a step in the right direction
NR
Hi @hionmentho (US1)
I'll try and cover the 3 main topics you've highlighted as problems:
Reworking Gems - This really does need a solution, players are currently able to create massively overpowered comms/castellans by spending lots of rubies, and so it's something which unexpectedly increased he ruby divide. We're still discussing potential solutions for this problem on the closed beta, testing various different options, and everyone is giving feedback on the current proposed solution. We as players agree that we want to keep customisation of sets open as much as possible, so lots of different solutions have been suggested, feel free to message me any solutions you may have, and I'll throw them into the discussions.
Private RVs - Firstly, this isn't a concrete feature (it isn't guaranteed to arrive in the game). This is really so as not to dishearten people from joining the outer kingdoms due to a lack of RVs, which there will be due to the fact there generally isn't a rapidly increasing number of players in the outer kingdoms. The way RVs are distributed has to be considered, as the original game mechanics did not account for the player created 'fair-play' rules which stop players from taking RVs from others, originally the idea was that players were constantly fighting over these RVs, hence why it is being revised, to make it fair on newer players in smaller alliances.
More Kingdom res production buildings - This is also another feature to help newer players progress once they hit level 70, by increasing the number of kingdom res buildings which have a workload of 100% they become a more valuable building to use space for, which is especially important as space in a castle has never been more highly sought after than currently (similair to the £/m^2 of land in London and Silicon valley....)
Hi @trey564 (US1)
I've passed this on, and personally I totally agree
Hi @L7Jevs (GB1)
I assume you found your solution with the test server? It has been taken offline for a while, as there isn't anything to test at the moment. Also, the test server has been designed to find bugs in features which will be arriving in the game, whereas the closed beta is designed to get condensed feedback about very specific features, the players involved in the closed beta have been selected carefully, and more players will be joining in the future, the selection was based on everything from playing style to quality of feedback given about updates (not just people who are constantly overjoyed about the update btw, I mean the concise, clear sort of quality feedback)
Hi @Philt123 (GB1)
As you can see I've cut the first part of your post out, as I've replied elsewhere about this, and passed it on. I'll try and discuss each of your points below:
Bots- I really like the suggestion of the moving camps, if it was possible for GGE to do so, although do you think it would be ok to keep something like the ability to send multiple commanders at one camp, the commanders following the camp once it moves, i.e. at the moment I personally use the train method on events like the nomads/samurais, sometimes sending up to 10 comms at the target and skipping after each hit lands, it makes the whole process a lot more efficient, but I guess if it's the only way to stop bots from being useful then it may be a sacrifice we have to take, along with the changing setups of the nomads and samurais.
Multis - as we've said so many times before, it's a really difficult subject to tackle for everyone involved, for example, the support team have to decide how to take action, do they ban both accounts permanently? Ban just one, assuming which one is the main account, or do they get in contact with the player who broke the rules to find out which account to ban? I agree it is great to see some steps being taken on this subject, even if they are just ideas at the moment.
Kingdom res - I've passed on your feedback on this subject, and I'm sure that the way this is tackled will be up for discussion in the closed beta discussions, so none of what has been mentioned is guaranteed to be the path taken to tackle this.
RVs - I'm trying to clarify how this will work at the moment, as it could be implemented in a way which won't stop PvP in the way you've described, I think it is another thing which will be influenced very easily in the closed beta discussions when it is launched there.
WotR - I think this is something which again will be defined closer to the time of implementation, it could be that it is just the annoying really small castles are removed from the event, or that half the castles are guaranteed to be big castles, with the other half being smaller castles which anyone could hit, as I say, it will be defined closer to the time, and hopefully this is something we'll be able to discuss heavily on the forums beforehand.
Hi @Hidingfromyou (US1)
I don't think heroes will have any limits put on them any time soon, there won't be limits put on heroes because they don't pose the same problem as gems, as you can only put one hero on, whereas you can put multiple copies of the same gem on one set.
See my other post about the customisation of sets.
Hi @Nikki5853 (US1)
Firstly, the closed beta isn't a seperate place to suggest new features and test them, it is a place to test features which have been suggested on the forum, or suggested within the team at GGS.
See my post above as to why the gem rework has to happen and other details, same with RVs.
Increasing the kingdom resources gained from hitting towers, events, etc. has been passed on as a suggestion to the team.
We're not looking a tool for tool trading here, it is instead looking to stop a practice which is against the T&Cs.
Hi @reetz (IN1)
Thanks for your feedback, I have of course passed it on, and I'd also ask if you have any suggestions for solving it, as it would also be unfair to take away a reward an alliance has worked hard to earn.
Hi @Hanzolo (US1)
Neither of the events have been discontinued, they just either need to be reworked or bugs fixed with them.
Hi @pjpj001 (NL1)
Regarding the gems, it is only very specific gems which need to be changed, as they can be used to make overpowered castellans and commanders. Such as these:
http://prntscr.com/ehah4r
http://prntscr.com/efiig2
The Royal capital will be coming back, it just needs to be fixed first, so your resources won't have been wasted on the capital upgrades
The glory boosting is not supposed to be the way the alliance tournament is won, it is seen on many servers as 'cheating' and really anyone can do glory boosting, but not everyone can do proper PvP hits to gain glory, so it is a test of skill as opposed to who can sacrifice the most defensive troops.
Angus
Hi @TwistedMind (GB1)
I'm not quite sure what you mean about this only helping ruby buyers? Firstly, there is a definite mix of ruby and non-ruby buyers on the closed beta, so that shouldn't be a problem there. Secondly, the overpowered gems which is the subject of the closed beta at the moment are gems which can only be bought with rubies, hence there is talk of refunds being offered if they are reduced in power, etc.
Hi @Streidominating (INT1)
I believe that the private RV feature wouldn't be a case of capturing RVs and then making them private, they would be RVs which only you can see and capture I would think....
The thing with the gems is that they are being used in sets other than the original commander/castellan, and the same gem is being used multiple times in one set to create an unprecedented OP set overall.
Hi @FabulousStelios (GR1)
These changes will be happening over the next 6 months or so, they'll gradually be added into the game, some are planned for the near future and are more clearly defined, whereas others are still in need of shaping in terms of their details.
Hi @Hessju (SKN1)
I'd like to reassure you that the bulk of comms/castys shouldn't change, it is just a few Overpowered gems which need to be reworked.
@Perryl (AU1) and @himnextdoor (GB1)
I've passed on this idea, I believe it may have been passed on before, but if you don't ask, I guess you don't get! I like the idea, and I think it makes a lot of sense if you're thinking about the game as if conducting a real battle. Hi @bruijsend blond (NL1) @WarlordStrider (GB1) and @Lord Septiums (US1)
Firstly, the bug should only be affecting the alliance horn, and only with incoming attacks from bloodcrows, secondly, you can check out the details of the hotfix due tomorrow here.
Hi @Batten (GB1)
I'm going to do my best to clear up some of the queries you have highlighted, and if I miss any, feel free to point them out to me, and thank you for the detailed response
3) I agree with you that the gem rework needs to go back to the test servers, and we'll continue to test different approaches until we find one we think suits. You can find a couple of examples of the overpowered castellans available in this post further up. Personally I agree with you, that there should be either a universal new max, which is similair to what was originally tested (with the 150% melee/ranged max - although this was far too high), or indeed a seperate maximum for gems alone, e.g. a maximum of 15% melee/ranged given from gems, or as you say, 20% speed from gems, etc.
4) You can find a link to the survey about some of the achievements which will be added to the game here in case you haven't already seen it.
6)I do agree with you that being able to produce more does free up time to do other things, I also see the point of the other side, in that if you've opted to remove kingdom resource buildings in favour of food production, this change doesn't help you, I think the important thing to remember is it does help others who have opted for a different style of play, so thank you for highlighting that.
11) What are you referring to in this one? I can see if I can sort something out if it is something arriving in the near future.
I hope the above post covers quite a lot of questions,
Angus
Perryl @ UK1 and AU1. Will be back on UK1 soon.
@ 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 2020. 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.
2020 - Not dead yet.
This has become a modern trend to link to facebook etc for comments and it has denied me comments on other sites and Im disturbed gge is going down this path..
You don't actually have to be signed up to facebook to view the post and go to the survey, it is simply done through facebook so as to highlight that the poll is in English for our non English speaking communities.
Thanks,
Angus