Heat tournaments
the way the heat tournament are currently displayed as 1 tourney box for each heat is distracting and gets in the way of other tournaments, so my suggestion is can you add all the heats for the heat tournaments to one tournament box and you can chose the heat you'd like to view from a main tournament box.
Someone already explained why I want limit removal on iron/gold packs. It will not hurt anyone, some people can't bother raiding so they want to buy them. I don't see why we should have limit on those since food does not have it. Also would like to see lower prices for those packs. Its very hard to keep your barracks busy and in the same time upgrade 4 buildings ( I have 4 craftsmans ) plus upgrade lost arts. Some lost arts like dragon/chimera take 100-200k ea, big buildings also insane ress prices and plus you have to build troops. Those limits like on raiding and ress packs are needless. Time consuming games never have limits on those, this is the only thing that makes you play more than 5 min per day those games if you have no limit( because you set up everything and go off again now ).
I need you to balance cheap farming and cheap sieging through eternity, by and through automaticly generating wraiths at left behind castles.
All and ever abandoned village, should have at least 1 wraith generated, that wraith being the wraith of Gaea itself, each addicional day 1 addicional wraith, accorded to the castle level (not player level), till a maximum is reached. (This can be accomplished in one day).
At the same time, wraiths being costless, all abandoned, left behind, or with no activity for more then 3 days, should have the wraiths removed from the crypt to roam the castle itself (also allows for checking if a wraith has been lost and can be regenerated).
Clearly enough, if I was the caretaker of a cementerial lot, then that would be proper
This wraith generation should be able to overcome cheap sieges and allow cementarial lot maintainers to place more.
Declined. We are not planning to change the mechanics of Sieges or create additional features to change Sieges.
Lady Nerium KT-S2 said:
I don't think I've seen this as a suggestion before, but I apologize if it has come up already.
Can you make if possible to choose LORD or LADY on your profile, so people can tell which gender you are playing as? Many names are gender neutral and I am aware that the name isn't any real indicator of which you are in RL, since many choose to play otherwise, but it would make it easier to figure out how to address people on email or chat.
But you have a Hero now to show your gender to everyone.
If you are suggesting the hero shows the gender you are playing as, the game should at least have equal options for male and female heroes, rather than two male options and only one female option!
Could you add the league icon to the players picture when you view the Garrisons in the keep?
Passed to devs.
Gadheras said:
Find a better way to measure league ranking. You can have a league with a fewy few high level players and a league maxed with low, medium ranked players and they would prob end up higher in the rankings.
How about make league rankings based on the leagues total army strenght, or aprox. strenght.
Hi there, I think it is a great idea to reconsider how rankings are calculated. However, I don't think solving the problem solely on troop strength is a good indicator. It poses a security risk to leagues. A higher rank basically would mean having larger army and with some clever thinking you could have an educated guess on the total size of the army a league possesses Also would Off or Def count more or the same? They are essentially different units and can't be compared based on their strengths. Then what about leagues with great Def power but significantly lower Off? would they be worth less or more in the rankings? ... lots of questions that need clarifying here i think.
The only thing I miss in the achievement section is the notion of time. How fast a league can develop and grow? And subsequently how fast they decline. This achievement I have in mind would be flexible, changing according to the growth or decline of a league. This would move leagues around the table to their more likely place over time. What do you think?
Fortuneteller said:
Gadheras said:
Find a better way to measure league ranking. You can have a league with a fewy few high level players and a league maxed with low, medium ranked players and they would prob end up higher in the rankings.
How about make league rankings based on the leagues total army strenght, or aprox. strenght.Hi there, I think it is a great idea to reconsider how rankings are calculated. However, I don't think solving the problem solely on troop strength is a good indicator. It poses a security risk to leagues. A higher rank basically would mean having larger army and with some clever thinking you could have an educated guess on the total size of the army a league possesses Also would Off or Def count more or the same? They are essentially different units and can't be compared based on their strengths. Then what about leagues with great Def power but significantly lower Off? would they be worth less or more in the rankings? ... lots of questions that need clarifying here i think.
The only thing I miss in the achievement section is the notion of time. How fast a league can develop and grow? And subsequently how fast they decline. This achievement I have in mind would be flexible, changing according to the growth or decline of a league. This would move leagues around the table to their more likely place over time. What do you think?
In this Tournament, it's all about building units. Each unit built should give a specific amount of points.
As for the rewards, they could be similar to other tournaments, or something new perhaps (e.g Mainly (Legendary) Units, or boosters, etc.)! 
Take heed; Purchased units through the Black Market should NOT count! As for Battleground-earned units, feel free to discuss.
Why not? let's discuss all the details.
In fact this should be the Concept behind the Saga Quest in Battleground.Reading other posts I came across an idea. Could we get something like Balur Outposts where leagues could practice league attacks or multiple players working together without having to cause a war by hitting Beacons or fortresses, something similar to BattleGrounds but for teams with comparable returns but no banks simply a score for completely destroying all units and multiple levels so that players can achieve not only experience but points as well by working as a team?
That's an interesting idea, and I will ask our devs if there's any chance we could do something like that. Until then, you can discuss this suggestion in Game Discussion thread with other players.
Hamlets if already occupied by one player leave another player with only 3 option.
Option 1 - Attack
Option 2 - Capture
Option 3 - Dispatch Spy
If any player choose to go for Option 1 - then there should be an indication like (incoming attack in XXX Sec)
If any player choose to go for Option 2 - then there should be an indication like (another player is capturing it in XXX Sec)
If any player choose to go for Option 3 - then there should not be any indication.
Hope you consider this suggestion.
This will definitely not kill the thrill in the Game...
Actually we're working on one new feature that will give you something similar to this indication.
Lord Mark said:
Can we have Paragon 11? or sell the extra points above paragon 10
Will be added with one of the future updates.
When we will have paragon 11 ?
Could it be possible for maybe, just maybe that the actual developers host a thread where the masses can ask them to implement changes and not have a middle man saying yes or no? No offense, but I see mostly declined and the answers you give are pretty blunt to why you think it would not work. Just a thought, since half of the ideas in this thread would greatly improve the game, and they just get shot down.
Unfortunately, no. Our developers have other tasks to do, so they don't read Forums. We have 8 games, 4 Forums in different languages for each one of them, groups on Facebook, in Russian social networks, Forums on other game portals. And it takes a lot of time to check all of them and answer players' suggestions daily.
I attend each meeting with our developers concerning players' suggestions. And most of the suggestions I see in Forums have been suggested before, in one game or another. Some of them are unique. If they are good enough, I always pass them. However, there are some points which our devs are pretty clear at. If your suggestion was discussed with our devs before, or it fits some criteria to decline it (like Flash or browser limitations, possibility to be abused by alts or sellers, going against our game mechanics, basic principles of the game, current plans, etc.), it is declined.
It's not my personal opinion. If I have any doubts and I don't know if we can do that, I always pass a suggestion.how about on friends list the inactive ones get shown a different color like yellow then red , so we dont have to search through the whole league list looking thanks in advance for accepting this great suggestion
coiners already spend a fortune on rev units, buy units and all kind of other stuff. To even make good use of resource packs, you would have to buy time boosters in addition. With time being a factor and storage of resources. I dont really see a big issue with it compared to lot of other stuff.vakonziko said:
Someone already explained why I want limit removal on iron/gold packs. It will not hurt anyone, some people can't bother raiding so they want to buy them. I don't see why we should have limit on those since food does not have it. Also would like to see lower prices for those packs. Its very hard to keep your barracks busy and in the same time upgrade 4 buildings ( I have 4 craftsmans ) plus upgrade lost arts. Some lost arts like dragon/chimera take 100-200k ea, big buildings also insane ress prices and plus you have to build troops. Those limits like on raiding and ress packs are needless. Time consuming games never have limits on those, this is the only thing that makes you play more than 5 min per day those games if you have no limit( because you set up everything and go off again now ).
Passed to devs.Absolutely do not support this.
Pack limits prevent uncontrolled coining. Why any normal player would suggest this is beyond me.
No packs are required by someone actively playing the game and raiding properly.
Building troops costs less than reviving, if a player is already spending money for saphs chances are they have a lot of boosts from the package deals, so yes this would be an unfair advantage for a big coiner to build limitless amounts of troops. Reviving troops costs a lot even with a 75% discount.djmoody said:coiners already spend a fortune on rev units, buy units and all kind of other stuff. To even make good use of resource packs, you would have to buy time boosters in addition. With time being a factor and storage of resources. I dont really see a big issue with it compared to lot of other stuff.vakonziko said:
Someone already explained why I want limit removal on iron/gold packs. It will not hurt anyone, some people can't bother raiding so they want to buy them. I don't see why we should have limit on those since food does not have it. Also would like to see lower prices for those packs. Its very hard to keep your barracks busy and in the same time upgrade 4 buildings ( I have 4 craftsmans ) plus upgrade lost arts. Some lost arts like dragon/chimera take 100-200k ea, big buildings also insane ress prices and plus you have to build troops. Those limits like on raiding and ress packs are needless. Time consuming games never have limits on those, this is the only thing that makes you play more than 5 min per day those games if you have no limit( because you set up everything and go off again now ).
Passed to devs.Absolutely do not support this.
Pack limits prevent uncontrolled coining. Why any normal player would suggest this is beyond me.
No packs are required by someone actively playing the game and raiding properly.
There are many castles that are inactive, user deleted and even bot fields on Untamed Lands. Unlike The Dark Plains there are no vacant or a way to move to them. This puts League players and Beacon owners at a distinct disadvantage of not being able to create a well of players around their fortress or beacon. Please remove unnecessary castles replace with vacant and allow purchase of relocation and Precision relocation spells.
at this stage in the game, cheaper and no limit on res packs would benefit those that doesnt spend as much more than heavy coiners imho.Gadheras said:Building troops costs less than reviving, if a player is already spending money for saphs chances are they have a lot of boosts from the package deals, so yes this would be an unfair advantage for a big coiner to build limitless amounts of troops. Reviving troops costs a lot even with a 75% discount.djmoody said:coiners already spend a fortune on rev units, buy units and all kind of other stuff. To even make good use of resource packs, you would have to buy time boosters in addition. With time being a factor and storage of resources. I dont really see a big issue with it compared to lot of other stuff.vakonziko said:
Someone already explained why I want limit removal on iron/gold packs. It will not hurt anyone, some people can't bother raiding so they want to buy them. I don't see why we should have limit on those since food does not have it. Also would like to see lower prices for those packs. Its very hard to keep your barracks busy and in the same time upgrade 4 buildings ( I have 4 craftsmans ) plus upgrade lost arts. Some lost arts like dragon/chimera take 100-200k ea, big buildings also insane ress prices and plus you have to build troops. Those limits like on raiding and ress packs are needless. Time consuming games never have limits on those, this is the only thing that makes you play more than 5 min per day those games if you have no limit( because you set up everything and go off again now ).
Passed to devs.Absolutely do not support this.
Pack limits prevent uncontrolled coining. Why any normal player would suggest this is beyond me.
No packs are required by someone actively playing the game and raiding properly.
lol, this game is way past ballance. its way past being a train wreck of ballance as well.
15 a day is plenty of advantage that can be bought. No more is needed. For example that is a farm a day. Why the hell is it a good idea that people coin their buildings up uber fast.
And consider the free boosts the uber coiners have already got for free from buying packages. Unlimited res packages = instant VERY CHEAP troops for uber coiners.
I don't know why we are still discussing it, its such a bad idea. Wreck game balance further for little to no benefit.
i will try to explain in a possitive way
i was one of the ones who came up with the idear to fortress
i surgested a "fort knox" for the league !!! this was a surgestion
made for improving the game but all in favor of the players features
was removed and replaced with money to plarium
so i would like to se my original idears added to the fortress
no.1 league members should be able to set in food iron and gold
to be directed where needed within the league
We are planning to create another feature which will include something similar. I can't say more right now.
no. 2 leaguemembers should be able to contribute saphires
of what ammount they can affort set in to a joined pool
No for Sapphires, unfortunately.
But it's possible that we will give a possibility to buy a certain amount of Fortress Resources according to the number of Sapphires you have (Some packs maybe), and we are planning to give an opportunity to contribute to your Fortress Upgrade times.these two topics means then
ressurces and saphires where to be in the fortress as in a bank
all this with no limitations (no limit for the day/week
not in and not out)
then the marshall and maby two captains should all aprove
for a transaction to take place !! like neuclear security
examble to what this where meant for !!!!
used for split the cost of upgrading beacons/fortress
or even handed to players within the league in need
thx hope plarium will make this real
so the fortress also have features to improve gaming
for the players without any dollar charge
as the whole idear with the fortress was about the players game
getting improved by being able to help eachother within the leagues
not to try to increase plariums economy ( dont have my interrest what so ever )
regards miraculix
1) Encourage players that just lost large part of their army to make a "Comeback".
Increase the production of units depending on food production.
Either by plain numbers (10 000/h production - + 100%)
Or by % (producing 20 000/h food out of 30 000/h resulting in 66% boost)
This would encourage ppl to 1) play BGs
2) Not quit the game
3) Boost could be in favor of Imparial units thus increasing playrium income.
2) Units purchased by gold/iron/food/amulets resources could be bought back
A) In limited numbers (only 1/5 of the lost units) back with double of the resources that they originaly cost
B) In a similar way the Imperial units are bought, little amount of sapphires + resources. In this case it could be original cost (normal units cost) + 1/2 of sapphires cost from Imperial units.
C) You can introduce Healing row. Once a week you would be able to revive 10%-20% of your lost units for free but you would need to wait 1 week until the units are healed.
This would of course go only for PvP attacks not for Battleground attacks !!!!!
Also of course Legendary and special Sapphire only units (thieves etc.) EXCLUDED
