Home English (UK) General Discussion

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe 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

Why are players leaving game. how to stop them leaving game IDEA'S

They are leaving game because of quite a few things.
1 Multi accounts shells dodgy cheap bank accounts making game unfair.
2 Abuse and bulling from other players which should be cracked down with longer bans.
3 Game play events are constantly repeated over and over instead of new and more pvp events.
4 GGS do not listen enough to players complaints enough 


 1 Stop the OP taking so it stops multi shell accounts destroying a players hard earned work
and then it means these players do not have any other option then make there own ops.
2 OPS should be able to be taking when accounts are in ruin not when players are still active
3 Listen to players and take idea's on board

Any one else got any idea's on how game could be saved from the bin .
God life is so boring in lockdown  :*B)
«1345

Comments

  • Philt123 (GB1)Philt123 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,839
    edited 15.01.2021
    Yup, its like loan consolidation, instead of lots of little problems lets consolidate them into one massive pomegranate.

    GGE genius at work.
    Post edited by Crom Cruach on
    Philt123 @ en 1
  • gazz65 (GB1)gazz65 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 705
    you could say wars in past they even took the main castle so why just ops.
    rvs taking gone so would be better if you reach a certain level to take ops.
    mind still loads of legend 800 shells around.

  • Wasso (INT3)Wasso (INT3) INT3 Posts: 3,332
    maybe a new server?
    The multis/shells would just go on the new server.
     
    I'm in two minds about OP captures. On one hand, the shells who just destroy players' work need to be dealt with, but on the other hand, capturing of someone else's asset for your own gain should still be achievable.  I mean, isn't that what a lot of wars throughout history were for? If that's taken away we might as well all pack up and go play SIMS.

    I've said this in another post, you'll never completely prevent multis because cheats will always find a way to buck the system, it's in their nature.  What you need to do is make it so creating a shell is not as worthwhile but still keep the game enjoyable for the majority of players who are decent people.  Here's my tuppence worth:

    1. Limit PVP to +/- 20 levels from the antagonists level for accounts below level 70.  Say +/- 100 levels for a Legendary player. You wouldn't pitch a flyweight against a super-heavyweight in a boxing ring.  If anyone says that introducing this reduces the amount of players a Legendary player can attack, then you are talking out your catflap. I reckon there are more active Legendary 800s on GB1 than levels 1-20.
    2. Don't allow research boosts to be sped up, either with skips or rubies.  Want to make your troops more powerful?  Then you have to work for it.
    3. Limit how many troops can be bought from the shop per week. Not much chance of that one being taken up but just an idea.
    4. Or how about this?  Shop-bought troops are "mercenaries" that you have to pay with coins. Say 1 or 2 coins per day per mercenary, depending on type or punching power.  If you run out of coins and can't pay them anymore then they march off into the sunset.  But make it so you can't buy coins and their only source is from event rewards, looting, the tax collector, Master Blacksmith or the Khan/Samurai shop.
    5. Limit how far you can go into minus food production to something like -30%.  Any further into the food "red" and you can't recruit. You could tie this into the mercenary idea and whilst you have to pay them, you don't have to feed them (much like the Berimond auxiliaries).
    6. Limit the amount of time an account can be logged on and active in any 24 hour period to say 16 hours a day.  We all know some of these accounts have credentials shared and are worked 24/7 by several people (or bots).  Best endeavours will never eradicate this, but you hamper it if a shell can't be used all day, every day.
    These are pretty good ideas..............
    Good night.
    Sleep well.
    I'll most likely kill you in the morning.




  • flug (NL1)flug (NL1) NL1 Posts: 1,441
    maybe a new server?
    The multis/shells would just go on the new server.
     
    I'm in two minds about OP captures. On one hand, the shells who just destroy players' work need to be dealt with, but on the other hand, capturing of someone else's asset for your own gain should still be achievable.  I mean, isn't that what a lot of wars throughout history were for? If that's taken away we might as well all pack up and go play SIMS.

    I've said this in another post, you'll never completely prevent multis because cheats will always find a way to buck the system, it's in their nature.  What you need to do is make it so creating a shell is not as worthwhile but still keep the game enjoyable for the majority of players who are decent people.  Here's my tuppence worth:

    1. Limit PVP to +/- 20 levels from the antagonists level for accounts below level 70.  Say +/- 100 levels for a Legendary player. You wouldn't pitch a flyweight against a super-heavyweight in a boxing ring.  If anyone says that introducing this reduces the amount of players a Legendary player can attack, then you are talking out your catflap. I reckon there are more active Legendary 800s on GB1 than levels 1-20.
    2. Don't allow research boosts to be sped up, either with skips or rubies.  Want to make your troops more powerful?  Then you have to work for it.
    3. Limit how many troops can be bought from the shop per week. Not much chance of that one being taken up but just an idea.
    4. Or how about this?  Shop-bought troops are "mercenaries" that you have to pay with coins. Say 1 or 2 coins per day per mercenary, depending on type or punching power.  If you run out of coins and can't pay them anymore then they march off into the sunset.  But make it so you can't buy coins and their only source is from event rewards, looting, the tax collector, Master Blacksmith or the Khan/Samurai shop.
    5. Limit how far you can go into minus food production to something like -30%.  Any further into the food "red" and you can't recruit. You could tie this into the mercenary idea and whilst you have to pay them, you don't have to feed them (much like the Berimond auxiliaries).
    6. Limit the amount of time an account can be logged on and active in any 24 hour period to say 16 hours a day.  We all know some of these accounts have credentials shared and are worked 24/7 by several people (or bots).  Best endeavours will never eradicate this, but you hamper it if a shell can't be used all day, every day.
    that's asking to gge to drill a hole in their wallet :)   
    flug @ nl 1
  • John Titor (INT1)John Titor (INT1) INT1 Posts: 204
    maybe a new server?
    The multis/shells would just go on the new server.
     
    I'm in two minds about OP captures. On one hand, the shells who just destroy players' work need to be dealt with, but on the other hand, capturing of someone else's asset for your own gain should still be achievable.  I mean, isn't that what a lot of wars throughout history were for? If that's taken away we might as well all pack up and go play SIMS.

    I've said this in another post, you'll never completely prevent multis because cheats will always find a way to buck the system, it's in their nature.  What you need to do is make it so creating a shell is not as worthwhile but still keep the game enjoyable for the majority of players who are decent people.  Here's my tuppence worth:

    1. Limit PVP to +/- 20 levels from the antagonists level for accounts below level 70.  Say +/- 100 levels for a Legendary player. You wouldn't pitch a flyweight against a super-heavyweight in a boxing ring.  If anyone says that introducing this reduces the amount of players a Legendary player can attack, then you are talking out your catflap. I reckon there are more active Legendary 800s on GB1 than levels 1-20.
    2. Don't allow research boosts to be sped up, either with skips or rubies.  Want to make your troops more powerful?  Then you have to work for it.
    3. Limit how many troops can be bought from the shop per week. Not much chance of that one being taken up but just an idea.
    4. Or how about this?  Shop-bought troops are "mercenaries" that you have to pay with coins. Say 1 or 2 coins per day per mercenary, depending on type or punching power.  If you run out of coins and can't pay them anymore then they march off into the sunset.  But make it so you can't buy coins and their only source is from event rewards, looting, the tax collector, Master Blacksmith or the Khan/Samurai shop.
    5. Limit how far you can go into minus food production to something like -30%.  Any further into the food "red" and you can't recruit. You could tie this into the mercenary idea and whilst you have to pay them, you don't have to feed them (much like the Berimond auxiliaries).
    6. Limit the amount of time an account can be logged on and active in any 24 hour period to say 16 hours a day.  We all know some of these accounts have credentials shared and are worked 24/7 by several people (or bots).  Best endeavours will never eradicate this, but you hamper it if a shell can't be used all day, every day.
    These are pretty good ideas..............
    Pretty bad ideas.

    1. Have suggested many times all ready.
    2. Why? This game has all ready huge advantage on those who has played years.
    3. Never going to happen. Cut gge profit, sure. :D (No)
    4. Same as 2.
    5. Then this come totally p2w game, now its almost... You understand that someone has 200k food production or even higher all ready? Then starter great if get 10k....
    6. LOL

    Few stuff is all ready available only for those who pay...

    I have suggested this maybe before all ready, but one fix would that lvl 13 player could not capture from lvl70 player OR if lvl13 are allowed to capture, then def vs. attack troops should be same lvl as captured op (owner), so it would more difficult to defend flag.





    Trolling and rolling since ....... who knows?
  • Joe Pineapples (GB1)Joe Pineapples (GB1) GB1 Posts: 16
    edited 14.01.2021
    that's asking to gge to drill a hole in their wallet :)   
    They already have by doing nothing.

    I'm not saying my suggestions are a panacea to all our woes.  I'll gladly listen to anyone's ideas.

    But I will say this: GGE needs to do something to retain existing players and attract new ones in order to survive. You will always get people giving up across all levels for various reasons, but what happens when all that's left are the cheats, multis and shells?  I'll tell you what will happen - they'll get bored and find another game to wreck.
  • gazz65 (GB1)gazz65 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 705
    Well we all have our idea's which might help the game in future and idea's which might have helped in the  past..
    but like most have said gge don't want to listen to the decent players on server.

    keep up the good work gge and remember never listen to us real decent players.  :*


  • Poseidon X AngelPoseidon X Angel Moderator Posts: 1,325
    This thread is a great example of why it's difficult to do these things, one player says "great ideas" an then someone else says he doesn't like these ideas. So what is it, are they good or bad ideas?
    That's up to the developers and balancers to decide, which isn't an easy task.

    It's impossible to listen to everyone in the community
  • gazz65 (GB1)gazz65 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 705
    If every player who played the game got a decent survey about what in game things
    they would change and what is wrong with the game. ggs would then be able to take
    it away and act on these concerns.

    got survey asking about my buildings other day. why not about the concerns
    of players that would give them a good idea were the game is heading.

    probably down the sewer if they don't start to listen more.
  • flug (NL1)flug (NL1) NL1 Posts: 1,441
    survey???? 
    flug @ nl 1
  • Wasso (INT3)Wasso (INT3) INT3 Posts: 3,332
    survey???? 
    Yeah,  mine went straight to the bin.

    They wanted you to rank the build items from 1 - 36.

    Like I am going to bother to do that............
    Good night.
    Sleep well.
    I'll most likely kill you in the morning.




  • Crom CruachCrom Cruach Community Manager Posts: 1,360
    survey???? 
    Yeah,  mine went straight to the bin.

    They wanted you to rank the build items from 1 - 36.

    Like I am going to bother to do that............
    I made that survey, we were asked for the players opinion and while it was a hard one to format I was hoping that Game Design would get some good information on player desire from that. I really couldn't format it any better, sorry.
    Forum SignatureDiscordFacebookTwitter
  • Venom (AU1)Venom (AU1) AU1 Posts: 93
    Best way to keep players is not having hard to win rewards worth less than what you can buy. 

    By far the worst decision for keeping a long term player base that is active.
    I don't regret a mother fucking thing I said.
    https://prnt.sc/sasorm
  • Venom (AU1)Venom (AU1) AU1 Posts: 93
    Also turning around the public opinion about the game without directly making the game better would be to create sponsorships with top players, they would produce YT content and post positively about updates and features, and in return receive in game currency and bundles. 

    Also would entice players to spend more looking at these top players accounts lol 
    I don't regret a mother fucking thing I said.
    https://prnt.sc/sasorm
  • Wiglema (NL1)Wiglema (NL1) NL1 Posts: 723
    survey???? 
    Yeah,  mine went straight to the bin.

    They wanted you to rank the build items from 1 - 36.

    Like I am going to bother to do that............
    I made that survey, we were asked for the players opinion and while it was a hard one to format I was hoping that Game Design would get some good information on player desire from that. I really couldn't format it any better, sorry.
    I appreciate the effort into making the survey, but I could not do the ranking. Too many factors play a role there.
    When I choose to make a build item, I have to consider the costs, the number of build items per castle, the building type it fits on (some buildings can only have one type of item, others multiple different ones, so which one to choose? etc.).
    Just ranking them in a list, is like asking me to rank fruit. Do I prefer grapes over watermelons? What if the choice is between one grape and one watermelon? Do I change my preference then? And what if one grape costs ten times more than one watermelon, or the other way around? Sooner or later I don't know what to choose anymore, if I don't know the conditions...
    Wiglema (NL1)
  • gazz65 (GB1)gazz65 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 705
    survey???? 
    Yeah,  mine went straight to the bin.

    They wanted you to rank the build items from 1 - 36.

    Like I am going to bother to do that............
    I made that survey, we were asked for the players opinion and while it was a hard one to format I was hoping that Game Design would get some good information on player desire from that. I really couldn't format it any better, sorry.
    mine went straight in bin . you need to listen to players then send something which will make players reply.
    always next time with a new one 
This discussion has been closed.