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

Poll: Gem Stat Caps Update

TempranceTemprance Posts: 819Moderator
Empire Community,

If we did not care about the game and its updates, we would not be as vocal as we are now. Several of us have played the game for years watching its progression, both in improvements and in failures. It is not possible to have full compliance or agreement with everyone, but it is possible to have the support of the majority. 

For one, I do not agree with how this info was released... on a Friday. Therefore, leaving this issue in the hands of the mods, I am taking responsibility on how to deal with it. I have read through the pages of feedback and the general opinion is pretty uniform aside from maybe 1-2 outliers.

As a Player, I am 100% on the same boat as all of you. I play the game actively, I work very hard to get advantages over other players via PO, equip, etc, and I know the effects that such updates have on the gameplay as opposed to people who potentially do not play the game at the same activity as us.
As a Moderator, it is my job to collect data and feedback for updates like these and to not only pass it on but to fight for your opinions and concerns.

The poll below is very simple:
Do you agree or disagree with the upcoming Gem Stat Cap update.

Please vote honestly, the votes are anonymous.
Trolls, if there is one time I ask you to be serious, respectfully, be truthful.
The more vote results, the more leeway I will have with the higher-ups.

Thanks and Enjoy your weekend,

Temprance
Post edited by Temprance on

Temprance @ usa 1

Poll: Gem Stat Caps Update 756 votes

Agree
12% 97 votes
Disagree
87% 659 votes
«136

Comments

  • The 50% bonus cap should apply to equipment only and not gems. A 50% reduced fire reduction is not going to be enough for people who want more for their fire cast. 
    David Noble @ usa 1
  • Gobygirl3 (US1)Gobygirl3 (US1) Posts: 170
    edited 29.04.2017
    GGE is displaying a stunningly insulting level of arrogance.

    That single factor is more than sufficient reason to leave the game.

    Thank you for this poll, Temperance!
    Post edited by Gobygirl3 (US1) on
  • dreamtree (US1)dreamtree (US1) Posts: 1,366US1
    I like the idea of the top players being stronger than everyone else. If the gem cap is put in place players will get weaker...
    I don't want the playing field being leveled by players being made weaker. I want to be able to attain something similar to what they have through hard work.
    Example, weaker versions of the unique gems causing problems. The unique gems present now wouldn't lose value and it would give weaker players a way to fight back.
    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!


  • I think the idea of equalizing the game and make it more fair for more people is good, but this is really heavy and i don't think the compensation will be good enough for players that really have tons of gems that are affected now.

    I would suggest to slightly change those gems in function, rather than getting them with the limit. For example I have made a cast that makes sure less resources are stolen, but the gems work differently than the equipment does. I GGE would make sure that happens with every gem, so for example the gem for reducing fire would become a gem that protects only 1 building from fire (so with 4 gems, 4 buildings would be protected). That's just a (bad) example, but that would be my idea.

    Hello everyone!

    Good to see you. I'm Lucas from the dutch server (NL1) and i play in an amazing Alliance called Two Towers. I really enjoy playing the game. If you want to make contact with me leave a message here or if you are from the dutch server message me there!

    Kind regards Lucas1999



  • Haskell (US1)Haskell (US1) Posts: 217
    edited 29.04.2017
    Does my opinion matter... at all? 

    I voted... let's see where this goes...

      


  • Plumpy21 (US1)Plumpy21 (US1) Posts: 465
    edited 29.04.2017
    My (and mine only) proposed solution is to make a gem cap but separate it from commander stat caps
    You have the equipment as their own stats and the gems as their own stats, you max out Glory at I think 80% on commanders, so make a 60% cap on glory that is separate from EQ with gems
    Only apply these caps to the stats you usually find on coms like Ranged/Melee, Wall, Gate, Moat, Glory, etc
    People can still have their OP gemmed up coms, but just like com sets have maxes, gems do as well, but they are completely separated from commanders.
    This still allows us to build unique coms
    What yal think?
    Let's propose this 
    I have no loyalty.


  • K1LLER (US1)K1LLER (US1) Posts: 560US1
    My proposed solution is to make a gem cap but separate it from commander stat caps
    You have the equipment as their own stats and the gems as their own stats, you max out Glory at I think 80% on commanders, so make a 60% cap on glory that is separate from EQ with gems
    Only apply these caps to the stats you usually find on coms like Ranged/Melee, Wall, Gate, Moat, Glory, etc
    People can still have their OP gemmed up coms, but just like com sets have maxes, gems do as well, but they are completely separated from commanders.
    This still allows us to build unique coms
    What yal think?
    Let's propose this 
    You SOB
    Stole my post XD
    Spread it bro!!
  • lmao

  • gman3073 (US1)gman3073 (US1) Posts: 28
    edited 30.04.2017
    Thank You Temprance
    Post edited by gman3073 (US1) on


  • K1LLER (US1)K1LLER (US1) Posts: 560US1
    Tell me who votes "Agree" and I will eternally burn their angus in the fiery depths of Hades.
    Damn man, its an opinion some might have
    I voted disagree but remember, not everyone is on our side lmao 
  • I think limiting makes sense.  Not sure if as proposed makes sense.  I don't buy rubies and don't like to be disadvantaged by not being able to upgrade what is impossible (not merely improbable) to get by playing without buying rubies.

      I say right now it is nearly impossible to get high level gems without buying rubies, so i would prefer it is fairer.  Should there be a max of gems plus a max of equipment without rubies, probably, is that how it is proposed, not how I read it.  
    Most equipment max and gems don't overlap, but commanders overlap with equipment and gems, if  a max commander has a breadth of skills, the you have to have different max gems to get a maxed commander that has a variety of strengths not just a particular strength, then I can understand.  Ie a max commander would have 90-90 range max courtyard, max flank, not 90-90, and huge courtyard and no flank bonus...I sort of get that, because currently the offensive bonuses seem to massively outweigh the defensive bonuses.  Maybe I'm wrong but that is what I see in game currently, and can understand the effort to make more fair.  for those who have paid to get where they are, I agree with you, that's not a good thing from GGE, you've spent a lot of time/effort/money and I can see where you feel you have been ripped off.  
    Harper.cgy @ usa 1
This discussion has been closed.