Fortuna said:

maso915 said:

I'm guessing that there are players already to the max level.  To change the bonuses could violate an implied contract: "I paid for all the advantages so that I can ruin the game for everyone else."  

well,  check terms of use http://support.plarium.com/ensparta/Knowledgebase/Article/View/554

To some extent it matters what the court where Plarium is based says about contracts in general and virtual currency, but legal arguments facing currency and contracts in most nations go back to quid pro quo and compensation. Wiping value out is actually not something they can do and expect to be invulnerable hiding behind a negative option TOS and EULA. Because you cant play unless you agree, its a level of duress and Plarium must assume a responsibility to give you SOMETHING for your money.

However, I would say good luck in bringing your action in a manner that will be worth it longterm.

I think its much better to appeal to Plarium in the non confrontational manner that whats healthy for MOST of their players is HEALTHY for them, and this will surely HURT those players and so long term hurt Plarium.

TinMan said:

Let's not get all communist on plaruim.  They are in business to make money (yes, YOUR money and MY money).  the 'free' game idea is obviously a lure, a gimmick.  Players that do not coin are only there for the enjoyment of the coiners.  Coiners are plariums customers, not free players.  The trick is to keep the game interesting while finding reason for players to spend more and more.

Its a bit beyond that. This game with only top coiners wont be the same game. Beyond entertainment your population IS in part the game. It will be a different game without the free players, let alone that those that remain will face a different reality.

Secondly, if you talk to people about their history here, some of the large coiners will tell you they tried this game because it was free and that they never intended to buy drachma but somehow it happened later (I did). Further some of the modest coiners became major coiners BECAUSE of the intrinsic value. Free players make your drachma per perceived value GREATER. Hence, less relevance of free players = less new coiners, and less apparent value of that coin.

I respect they are doing this for money. Most people discussing here would agree its acceptable that Plarium runs this game on a for profit model. There are a few over entitled wing nuts but anyone Ive seen so far with constructive criticism Ive thusfar seen falls in the accepting set.

I fully respect Plarium try to make money. It is a business and yes they actually SHOULD target to make money. No objections there....

However all of us are the consumers or their product or service wich is what we pay for. Others more others less depends and is free choise. But as consumers we also hold the right to be or not be happy with what is offered to us. The issue isn't if Plarium has the right to change the rules. Of course they do. No objection whatsoever there either. The real issue is to keep this beeing fun. To keep this beeing also a game in wich strategy, good gameplay and skills count for something. I dont think anyone doubts that money gives a big bonus to a player. And thats perfectly allright. It should. But these changes in the agreements (not the higher lvl's but the addition of defensive value to offensive troops and massive change in proportions and battle results) 

With this changes in the agreements and their effect in proportions of troops offence / defence values.... the game is done. There will be no way for a smaller guy to outbest a stronger enemy. You know.... when Barcelona plays against for example Rostof. We all know whats gonna happen. 8 out of 10 times they will win with a big score if not massive. 1 time it might end with Barcelona hammer their goalkeeper but the ball simply don't want to end up in the net. But maybe 1 out of 10 times... just maybe... the little team will do everything right, will have a good gameplan... and will execute this gameplan 101% correctly with discipline and commitment. And that together with the fact that maybe on that day the stronger team , Barcelona will underestimate them... and will not play that good as it could... that 1 time out of 10 Rostof might actually manage to win. And that 1 small opportunity.... that 1 out of 10 times or out of 20 times is what makes everybody from Barcelona fans to simple soccer fans pay their ticket or watch the game on tv. And that is what makes soccer the king of sports! Otherwise nonone would ever bother. We wouldnt even need to let the game be played. We could simply say Barcelona drafts against Rostof. Barcelona = 550 mill worth , Rostof = 10 mill worth , no need to waste time and go to the field.... Barcelona wins and lets draft the next pair.... what you actually do right now is to say : We forbid Rostof to win. Even if they try they need to win with 3 - 0 otherwise it wont count. You forbid them to even dream to do it...

I bet ya if they did that Champions League would be dead within season 1. Plarium is supposed to be a company for hardcore gamers. 

I quote from Plarium official site:

OUR GAMES

Plarium is dedicated to creating outstanding mobile and social experiences for hardcore gamers worldwide. With over 250 million registered users, we’re proud to be consistently ranked among the world’s top hardcore game developers. Our games offer richly-detailed production values, immersive stories, committed player communities, and action-packed strategic gameplay. Which world is right for you?

You are as you say the champions league of online gaming. I have no reason to doubt that. Protect your product and make it better. From your own words right above you are now trying to remove the words experiences , commited player communities and strategic gameplay. You should try read your statement above without these few words in it. 

I would like to hear 1 hardcore player state that he puts no value in good strategic play. That he puts no value to the better skilled player be able to win over a worse player with a bigger army. Personally i doubt you will find 1 real  hardcore gamer in the whole gaming society to back such a statement....

I am liking Total War Battles Kingdom more and more....it combines building/managing your city with battles.  you have much more control of troops during battles.  I am trying to learn the troops/units and how to use the different tools per unit during battle.

its pretty fun.

justin1234case said:

I am liking Total War Battles Kingdom more and more....it combines building/managing your city with battles.  you have much more control of troops during battles.  I am trying to learn the troops/units and how to use the different tools per unit during battle.

its pretty fun.

^ I'm gonna have a look at that game.

Well plarium have just about balanced new agreements anyway...gave offense over inflated defence statistics, and defence over inflated offense stastistics, mount peltast and legate have almost as high attack bonus increase as agemas and mac cavalry have for def increase, pretty pointless in screwing up one side when you can even it out and do both. I thought the point of off/def units was so they stood out greatly at their troop type values with the opposite stats being weak, now they are becoming just different alround units with a mixture of stats, not really proper offense or defence troop as such anymore.

BTW, wasn't there a topic on this forum about a year ago(can't find it cos search function doesnt work, lol), which Bas Leonidas suggested an idea from devs or whatever to increase offense troop defence stats. It got shot down by replies, because some numbers suggested were going to give offense units a better defence than it's opposite unit type counterpart.  I guess they still wanted to roll with the changes later on even though players were against initial suggestion.

Give us a break plarium...sketches introduced, then generals, now this double whammy of agreements and ampitheatre.  It's you that tell us to be patient, but you keep adding layers to the cake. 

Rahna said:

Uncle Junior said:

I would personally like to thank Plarium for ensuring the growth of our GW2 guild. Anyone who knows what I'm talking about feel free to msg me @ junior.3928

Rahna.5021

;)

bigbawz.2713

:)

Guys, new levels give you many benefits:

1) Your Units will become much stronger.

2) You will be able to upgrade Defensive stats for Offensive Units and vice versa. It means more space for strategic movements and less risk for your Offense to be caught and lost in unfair battle.

3) Only active players will receive this opportunity. The Defensive Units of players that are not playing the game anymore, but protecting other players or strategic sites will no longer be competitive.

4) Only the last 2 levels will require a special Resource.

5) You can get this Resource in Tournaments.

I can only agree with everyone here. I joined recently (45 days ago) after playing a similar game for 5+ years and they shut down the server eventually. At first I really like it, building your city, learning the mechanics etc..

But even in those 45 days there have been so many updates, some visible some not, that it has become extremely annoying. The persian positions are now just a scam and the stats of those new agreements are just crazy, what is the point of having off and def specific troops anymore when one just need to up all the agreements to make off troops be as efficient as def troops in defense..

I would also like to make an input on this:

Like every other game, Sparta is no different, it is not free a game (only to register), it is a pay to win game...

I personally like updates, because it means they are doing something with the game, but this time you plarium freeks totally copied stuff from a GOW (game of war), which is the worst game I have ever seen, I mean it's a freekin' phone game...

Copy stuff from that kind of a game it's just insulting our intelligence. WW (Wallet warriors) always had advantage, but somehow I don't see even them like this new ''update''... It's more of a joke than update...

Some1 wrote, and i agree with that, there is no point in having deff and off troops any more, and that was the point of the game in the start.

Game developers should stop for a second and do some slapping on their own faces, because you are looking more and more ridiculous, but we all have a choice to play or not, to pay or not and to bitch or not about updates. I guess we all see our opinion here...

If game developers read this (which i doubt, because they only have eyes for their wallet, they should see what happened to Dark Orbit. In the start there was thousands of ships all over the maps, and after the many bs updates, suddenly you need to fly around for hours to just see at least 1 player) ...

That's why I play AA (America's army), it is all free, you cannot buy nothing for that game, and pure gaming skill needed, but it's a fps game, not strategy...

So just to sum my impression on all this that you updated for last 6-7 months. Here's an idea for you jokers that cannot put a decent update: put pokemons on the map, and make us all search them, when we find all pokemons, like 50 - 100 millions of them, our troops get a free trip to disneyland. Maybe that will bring you more players, because your ideas of updates are no better than what i wrote here, and just embarrassing.

Cheers

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Guys, new levels give you many benefits:

1) Your Units will become much stronger.

2) You will be able to upgrade Defensive stats for Offensive Units and vice versa. It means more space for strategic movements and less risk for your Offense to be caught and lost in unfair battle.

3) Only active players will receive this opportunity. The Defensive Units of players that are not playing the game anymore, but protecting other players or strategic sites will no longer be competitive.

4) Only the last 2 levels will require a special Resource.

5) You can get this Resource in Tournaments.

Would that be in the EPIC or LEGENDARY valued tournaments ???

After thinking it over for a few days i have to say i understand the updates.

not to happy about them but every game gets new content.

so not to weird.

even tho i hate that lame new building.

Marten Ekema said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Guys, new levels give you many benefits:

1) Your Units will become much stronger.

2) You will be able to upgrade Defensive stats for Offensive Units and vice versa. It means more space for strategic movements and less risk for your Offense to be caught and lost in unfair battle.

3) Only active players will receive this opportunity. The Defensive Units of players that are not playing the game anymore, but protecting other players or strategic sites will no longer be competitive.

4) Only the last 2 levels will require a special Resource.

5) You can get this Resource in Tournaments.

Would that be in the EPIC or LEGENDARY valued tournaments ???

Sure.

i want to think she has not even read the post because she asked in the other forum 4 days later (I want to think that as if i think she has read and is making this comments, well ... )

http://plarium.com/forum/en/sparta-war-of-empires/news-and-announcements/30320_discover-skills-and-defeat-challengers-to-earn-phylarch-points-/2

"guys, could you please specify what exactly you don't like about this new feature, or how would you improve it?"

I dont know how much more specific we can be explaining why we dont like or how to improve it, if they do nto read it ....

Ok let me give an example to explain exactly what is going on and let me clarify that the issue isnt the new building (amphitheater) or the new lvls on the agreements but the change in troops proportional values and results of battle aka especially the increase of defensive value for offensive troops wich has no point besides making this game a money trap and pointless for the smaller players try face an opponent with good strategy and skilled gameplay.

Numbers will be kept round in this as otherwise calculations would be too complex and confuse people more then they would make them understand the real issue.

example Player A with 50 mill offense, 50 mill defense and Player B with 10 mill offense , 10 mill defense. 

Player A attacks. Now we all know ( i hope) algorithm works proportional so in case that Player B pulls out his defence he is outnumbered 5 to 1. Result will be aproximatelly 80 to 85% kill for player A with about 15 to 20% loses. I dont think i need to point out that that is not the best strategy Player B could or should follow.

Now Player B desides to play a different plan. Before changes with them beeing on same lvl of agreements. No matter if it would be lvl 20 or lvl 32 as long as those new lvl's wouldnt mess with the proportions (aka increase the defense value of offensive troops etc...)

He strategizes (it is a strategy game or not???) and tryes to catch Player A offense to counterstrike it with his own. That move is not easy and lets also keep in mind Player A has allready many items to avoid that and shield himself from such a counter. (auto hider, full protection after his attack finished etc etc....) 

Now before the proportions change this would go like this:

On a mixed offense troops defense value of the offense is about 1/15 of its offensive value (dependign on how many high troops in it)

So player B hits the 50 mill offense with his 10 mill. He outnumbers his enemy 10/3,5 at best this time.so rougly 3/1. Result is this:

Player B will kill at least 35 mill of his enemy and lose about 2,5 mill. If this happens in Players A city he will get 50% of his loses back for free ( i assume all money players have infirmary max out) so about 17,5 mill and will have 15 + 17,5 = 32,5 mill offense while player B will be at about 7,5 mill offense after it. Pretty clear who won and why as even if outnumbered he played a much  better strategy and did a risky skilled move.Lets not forget if Player A plays correctly and pulls his defense player B is done. So Player A even if stronger played really bad as his moves were full of mistakes.

Lets see what happens with the new agreements ( i repeat not the lvls put the proportional changes with adding way bigger defensive value to the offensive units) 

Player B hits the 50 mill offence of Player A with his 10 mill. only now the 50 mill defend about at 1/4 of their offensive value at least. 

Player A loses the fight as the defensive value still enough to outnumber him. He probably will lose about 5,5 mill of his offence and kill about 16 to 17 mill of his enemy offense. Again if thats in Players A city he will get half of it back so result after battle is Player B is left with 4,5 mill offence and player A has 33 + 8,5 = 41,5 mill after this fight. Now Player B took a big risk , performed really good and still went out really bad from that battle while PLayer A did everything wrong and got shielded from the new changes.

Same way this whole new "idea" works on pantheon or capital wars. We all know that the strategic way to play would be to try catch the launcher of coalition strikes to them and try neutralize the offence in the city prior to launch. Now this cant really be done and even if it will result in heavy loses for the side that try's it and actually plays right in strategic manner. May i remind here that strategy is to achieve the maximum possible result by taking the minimum possible damage to your own strength. Even in real war that is how it goes.

Now plarium desides to take out the strategy part. Saying , no matter if you play strategic or smart or skilled. We deside the bigger spender will always win and you cant do anything about it. I mean allready it was far from easy to counter an opponent that was buying way more. But to make it nearly impossible to do it really puts out any strategic aspekt from this game. No skills requiered , no plan , no patience for the right moment or mistake from the enemy.... 

Now Alyona , you still dont understand what is going on or what we dont like about this new update???? Do i need to point out that every strategy game player actually wants to feel the pleasure of a good strategic plan turn out to be a success??? Do i need to point out that true gamers actually dont find it that satisfying to hammer a weak opponent but to bring in victory against a bigger one that looks for trouble???

Vodkaonice , you sure now you like the new changes???

To say it clear and loud: This is a change to shield of the bigger spender , make it impossible for a smaller player to really consider stand up to a stronger opponent and in end effect only ment to make players spend even more money on this. Like its not expencive enough allready as it is.... THIS IS NO STRATEGY GAME ANYMORE AFTER THIS. 

Also mark that if the outnumber ratio between the 2 players is bigger it gets even worse for the smaller player. At least before that he could still hope to find a way and bring in a victory against a stronger enemy that bully him.... Sure he would not whipe him out but at least he could teach him a little (painfull) lesson.... Now that is made impossible. The only way to win is to caclulate how much his enemy spent and deposit more then that to Plarium. now if thats not pay to win what is??? May i remind us all it is a game???

This money trap only works cause it is based on the sunk cost effect and i would strongly suggest you read about it if you do not know what it is...

dxr250 said:

Ok let me give an example to explain exactly what is going on and let me clarify that the issue isnt the new building (amphitheater) or the new lvls on the agreements but the change in troops proportional result aka especially the increase of defensive value for offensive troops wich has no point besides making this game a money trap and pointless for the smaller players try face an opponent with good strategy and skilled gameplay.

Numbers will be kept round in this as otherwise calculations would be too complex and confuse people more then they would make them understand the real issue.

example Player A with 50 mill offense, 50 mill defense and Player B with 10 mill offense , 10 mill defense. 

Player A attacks. Now we all know ( i hope) algorithm works proportional so in case that Player B pulls out his defence he is outnumbered 5 to 1. Result will be aproximatelly 80 to 85% kill for player A with about 15 to 20% loses. I dont think i need to point out that that is not the best strategy Player B could or should follow.

Now Player B desides to play a different plan. Before changes with them beeing on same lvl of agreements. No matter if it would be lvl 20 or lvl 32 as long as those new lvl's wouldnt mess with the proportions (aka increase the defense value of offensive troops etc...)

He strategizes (it is a strategy game or not???) and tryes to catch Player A offense to counterstrike it with his own. That move is not easy and lets also keep in mind Player A has allready many items to avoid that and shield himself from such a counter. (auto hider, full protection after his attack finished etc etc....) 

Now before the proportions change this would go like this:

On a mixed offense troops defense value of the offense is about 1/15 of its offensive value (dependign on how many high troops in it)

So player B hits the 50 mill offense with his 10 mill. He outnumbers his enemy 10/3,5 at best this time.so rougly 3/1. Result is this:

Player B will kill at least 35 mill of his enemy and lose about 2,5 mill. If this happens in Players A city he will get 50% of his loses back for free ( i assume all money players have infirmary max out) so about 17,5 mill and will have 15 + 17,5 = 32,5 mill offense while player B will be at about 7,5 mill offense after it. Pretty clear who won and why as even if outnumbered he played a much  better strategy and did a risky skilled move.Lets not forget if Player A plays correctly and pulls his defense player B is done. So Player A even if stronger played really bad as his moves were full of mistakes.

Lets see what happens with the new agreements ( i repeat not the lvls put the proportional changes with adding way bigger defensive value to the offensive units) 

Player B hits the 50 mill offence of Player A with his 10 mill. only now the 50 mill defend about at 1/4 of their offensive value at least. 

Player A loses the fight as the defensive value still enough to outnumber him. He probably will lose about 5,5 mill of his offence and kill about 16 to 17 mill of his enemy offense. Again if thats in Players A city he will get half of it back so result after battle is Player B is left with 4,5 mill offence and player A has 33 + 8,5 = 41,5 mill after this fight. Now Player B took a big risk , performed really good and still went out really bad from that battle while PLayer A did everything wrong and got shielded from the new changes.

Same way this whole new "idea" works on pantheon or capital wars. We all know that the strategic way to play would be to try catch the launcher of coalition strikes to them and try neutralize the offence in the city prior to launch. Now this cant really be done and even if it will result in haevy loses for the side that try's it and actually plays right in strategic manner. May i remind here that strategy is to achieve the maximum possible result by taking the minimum possible damage to your own strength. Even in real war that is how it goes.

Now plarium desides to take out the strategy part. Saying , no matter if you play strategic or smart or skilled. We deside the bigger spender will always win and you cant do anything about it. I mean allready it was far from easy to counter an opponent that was buying way more. But to make it nearly impossible to do it really puts out any strategic aspekt from this game. No skills requiered , no plan , no patience for the right moment or mistake from the enemy.... 

Now Alyona , you still dont understand what is going on or what we dont like about this new update???? Do i need to point out that every strategy game player actually wants to feel the pleasure of a good strategic plan turn out to be a success??? Do i need to point out that true gamers actually dont find it that satisfying to hammer a weak opponent but to bring in victory against a bigger one that looks for trouble???

Vodkaonice , you sure now you like the new changes???

To say it clear and loud: This is a change to shield of the bigger spender , make it impossible for a smaller player to really consider stand up to a stronger opponent and in end effect only ment to make players spend even more money on this. Like its not expencive enough allready as it is.... THIS IS NO STRATEGY GAME ANYMORE AFTER THIS. 

Also mark that if the outnumber ratio between the 2 players is bigger it gets even worse for the smaller player. At least before that he could still hope to find a way and bring in a victory against a stronger enemy that bully him.... Sure he would not whipe him out but at least he could teach him a little (painfull) lesson.... Now that is made impossible. The only way to win is to caclulate how much his enemy spent and deposit more then that to Plarium. now if thats not pay to win what is??? May i remind us all it is a game???

End effect will be all our friends and teammembers that dont spend huge amounts on this but only do moderate buys will be sooner or later chased out of the game as it will be pointless for them to try face a heavy or simply heavier spender. That is what we protest and try to act against in here. Do you really think you will make more money if only the big spenders stay on this map??? I give you my prediction... this map will soon be a sahara like place .... and when this happens it will also get way too borring for the biggest spenders too... Or do you really think they gonna enjoy pay you a few thousands every time they battle eachother over a dead map????

This money trap only works cause it is based on the sunk cost effect and i would strongly suggest you read about it if you do not know what it is...

I agree with your analysis. It is clear that it is the end of any strategical planning in the game. I am still waiting for a proper reply from either the community manager or the developers. 
Also, allow me to repeat myself, since they do not listen to words we can go to actions. At first we can end all wars, challenges and grudges. All coalitions will have universal truce for a certain period of time (e.g 2 weeks). Then I bet that we will have a proper response to our matter. 

Hello, some suggestions to cool down this topic.

1. Lower the bonus for Level 31 and 32 to 70%

2. Make Level 31 and 31 avaliable for (a lot of) resources and/or

3. Give more sketches in the tournaments. It should be possible for an active player to earn 10.000 sketches in one year.

Regards Archill

Hundigo said:

you gonna achieve nothing at all, that's for sure. 

There's a simply explanation for it; some already went up in the agreements, so Plarium Games can't reverse it anymore. 

Next time be a little bit realistic 

Yes, they can.... The whole issue isnt the new lvl's and them making the troops stronger. Keep the 32 lvl's as they are but reverse the defense value boost on offensive units and the offensive value boost for defensive troops. So both offense and defense value will get an equal 70% on lvl 32 for example. We will still all try to get to lvl 32 to get our troops stronger as we worked to get to lvl 20. But it will not destroy the battle proportions complettely for weaker players.

Zenekin said:

dxr250 said:

Ok let me give an example to explain exactly what is going on and let me clarify that the issue isnt the new building (amphitheater) or the new lvls on the agreements but the change in troops proportional result aka especially the increase of defensive value for offensive troops wich has no point besides making this game a money trap and pointless for the smaller players try face an opponent with good strategy and skilled gameplay.

Numbers will be kept round in this as otherwise calculations would be too complex and confuse people more then they would make them understand the real issue.

example Player A with 50 mill offense, 50 mill defense and Player B with 10 mill offense , 10 mill defense. 

Player A attacks. Now we all know ( i hope) algorithm works proportional so in case that Player B pulls out his defence he is outnumbered 5 to 1. Result will be aproximatelly 80 to 85% kill for player A with about 15 to 20% loses. I dont think i need to point out that that is not the best strategy Player B could or should follow.

Now Player B desides to play a different plan. Before changes with them beeing on same lvl of agreements. No matter if it would be lvl 20 or lvl 32 as long as those new lvl's wouldnt mess with the proportions (aka increase the defense value of offensive troops etc...)

He strategizes (it is a strategy game or not???) and tryes to catch Player A offense to counterstrike it with his own. That move is not easy and lets also keep in mind Player A has allready many items to avoid that and shield himself from such a counter. (auto hider, full protection after his attack finished etc etc....) 

Now before the proportions change this would go like this:

On a mixed offense troops defense value of the offense is about 1/15 of its offensive value (dependign on how many high troops in it)

So player B hits the 50 mill offense with his 10 mill. He outnumbers his enemy 10/3,5 at best this time.so rougly 3/1. Result is this:

Player B will kill at least 35 mill of his enemy and lose about 2,5 mill. If this happens in Players A city he will get 50% of his loses back for free ( i assume all money players have infirmary max out) so about 17,5 mill and will have 15 + 17,5 = 32,5 mill offense while player B will be at about 7,5 mill offense after it. Pretty clear who won and why as even if outnumbered he played a much  better strategy and did a risky skilled move.Lets not forget if Player A plays correctly and pulls his defense player B is done. So Player A even if stronger played really bad as his moves were full of mistakes.

Lets see what happens with the new agreements ( i repeat not the lvls put the proportional changes with adding way bigger defensive value to the offensive units) 

Player B hits the 50 mill offence of Player A with his 10 mill. only now the 50 mill defend about at 1/4 of their offensive value at least. 

Player A loses the fight as the defensive value still enough to outnumber him. He probably will lose about 5,5 mill of his offence and kill about 16 to 17 mill of his enemy offense. Again if thats in Players A city he will get half of it back so result after battle is Player B is left with 4,5 mill offence and player A has 33 + 8,5 = 41,5 mill after this fight. Now Player B took a big risk , performed really good and still went out really bad from that battle while PLayer A did everything wrong and got shielded from the new changes.

Same way this whole new "idea" works on pantheon or capital wars. We all know that the strategic way to play would be to try catch the launcher of coalition strikes to them and try neutralize the offence in the city prior to launch. Now this cant really be done and even if it will result in haevy loses for the side that try's it and actually plays right in strategic manner. May i remind here that strategy is to achieve the maximum possible result by taking the minimum possible damage to your own strength. Even in real war that is how it goes.

Now plarium desides to take out the strategy part. Saying , no matter if you play strategic or smart or skilled. We deside the bigger spender will always win and you cant do anything about it. I mean allready it was far from easy to counter an opponent that was buying way more. But to make it nearly impossible to do it really puts out any strategic aspekt from this game. No skills requiered , no plan , no patience for the right moment or mistake from the enemy.... 

Now Alyona , you still dont understand what is going on or what we dont like about this new update???? Do i need to point out that every strategy game player actually wants to feel the pleasure of a good strategic plan turn out to be a success??? Do i need to point out that true gamers actually dont find it that satisfying to hammer a weak opponent but to bring in victory against a bigger one that looks for trouble???

Vodkaonice , you sure now you like the new changes???

To say it clear and loud: This is a change to shield of the bigger spender , make it impossible for a smaller player to really consider stand up to a stronger opponent and in end effect only ment to make players spend even more money on this. Like its not expencive enough allready as it is.... THIS IS NO STRATEGY GAME ANYMORE AFTER THIS. 

Also mark that if the outnumber ratio between the 2 players is bigger it gets even worse for the smaller player. At least before that he could still hope to find a way and bring in a victory against a stronger enemy that bully him.... Sure he would not whipe him out but at least he could teach him a little (painfull) lesson.... Now that is made impossible. The only way to win is to caclulate how much his enemy spent and deposit more then that to Plarium. now if thats not pay to win what is??? May i remind us all it is a game???

End effect will be all our friends and teammembers that dont spend huge amounts on this but only do moderate buys will be sooner or later chased out of the game as it will be pointless for them to try face a heavy or simply heavier spender. That is what we protest and try to act against in here. Do you really think you will make more money if only the big spenders stay on this map??? I give you my prediction... this map will soon be a sahara like place .... and when this happens it will also get way too borring for the biggest spenders too... Or do you really think they gonna enjoy pay you a few thousands every time they battle eachother over a dead map????

This money trap only works cause it is based on the sunk cost effect and i would strongly suggest you read about it if you do not know what it is...

I agree with your analysis. It is clear that it is the end of any strategical planning in the game. I am still waiting for a proper reply from either the community manager or the developers. 
Also, allow me to repeat myself, since they do not listen to words we can go to actions. At first we can end all wars, challenges and grudges. All coalitions will have universal truce for a certain period of time (e.g 2 weeks). Then I bet that we will have a proper response to our matter. 

That is a very good idea and proposal Zenekin. We though also consider a way more radical solution allready and i know many other players from other teams we talked too are considering it too.... The true value of this game/server/map is its population... The interactions we make with our ally's. friends and enemies.... So... if the place is turning into the wrong place we will seek a new one....

Personally i am allready not actually playing besides doing the absolute basics and of course stopped wasting my $ on this. I simply log in and check where this goes... If it stays as it is i dont really see much point in staying on this game...