Label messages received as 'single recipient', 'multiple recipients', or 'generated by system'.

Some icon or abbreviation could be used, of course, but the idea is to distinguish messages sent to you alone, those which are sent to a number of people (e.g., from one's hegemon, a polemarch, etc.), and those which are routinely generated by the system (e.g., someone telling you they made a hero with your character). No game balance concerns, certainly, but it would make it easier to know what messages to respond to. Thanks.

In order to have a chance to restore players' trust, Plarium must make sure that cheaters  lose significant parts of their enormous armies. Mainly, everything that was  gotten via the back door must be scrapped either by cheaters themselves, under the staff .supervision or by staffers  

Hi! If you suspect someone in cheating, please report them to Support. There are no cheats for our games that I would be aware of (meaning tools that give you certain in-game Items/currency made from air or some other advantages).

Looks like this thread is absolutely useless, as virtually no suggestions get implemented, unless they (accidentally?) match what the staff intended to do.

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Hi! If you suspect someone in cheating, please report them to Support. There are no cheats for our games that I would be aware of (meaning tools that give you certain in-game Items/currency made from air or some other advantages).

What if "someone" is plarium related?

Looks like this thread is absolutely useless, as virtually no suggestions get implemented, unless they (accidentally?) match what the staff intended to do.

One more attempt: after hitting PP, we sometimes receive coffers. In most cases, we discard them. Why not to give us pieces from coffers, like when we discard gears? 

Hi all, I personally feel that the current diplomacy features are inadequate for the amount of efforts the coalitions are putting in to negotiate in this game. I want that more flexibility to be allowed in the diplomatic negotiations.

The current features we get are as follows (All concern with the attack limits on Pantheons and Capitals) :-

Neutral - Normal Limits, the default

Ally - Normal Limits, but you have formally stated you are allies

Enemy - Normal Limits, but you have formally stated you are enemies

At Peace - You can not attack each other's Pantheons

At War - There are no Limits on Pantheon attacks.

________________________________________

My suggestions are-

1. Set price/cost/demand to enact a peace treaty. For example if Coalition X wants to make a peace treaty with Coalition Y who is harrasing X, then it can offer some perks to Coa Y to consider the peace treaty. For example, tax on orichalum(some percentage of orichalum would be given to coa Y)/tax on resource generated by the cities of Coa X(to some pre-determined amounts)/Some amount of Drachma to be transffered to the coalition Capital/ Transfer of Pantheon(s) to Y.

2. Peace treaties be limited to an agreed time decided by both the coalitions, for example 1 week/month/3 months etc.

3. Bring the alliances under one roof. I mean to say an alliance of the coalitions. Allow a coalitions to create an alliance charter it would have terms and conditions like who all can enter the alliance, its goals and duties. Maybe even create a new alliance chat which next to Global chat which would include only Commandants or above in the chat.The reason for this would be stated in the next point.

4. Making of Client States. A coalition can make another Coalition its client state by downgrading its capital to a certain level or besieging a number of its cities. Now the client coalition would have a reduction in its total resource collection by 30% whether its a raid, resource building or tribute. And that profit would distributed equally to the Main Coalition or made available to be used like the Orichalum System. Making a Client would give a huge boost in the Rankings too. This would create big battles between alliances to protect other coalitions in the alliance from making them client states, for example a coalition capital got downgraded now the enemy only needs to besige 60 cities to make it a client state, other coalitions in the same alliance would help that coalition not to be sieged like that. Maybe a thought that this can be done only during a Tourney like the Pantheon Massacre. Allow only to have a limited number of client states, the limit can be set by the number of Pantheons the coalition holds(New use for pantheons other than orichalum and rankings). The Peace Treaty can be used to avoid being a Client State, hence the custom feature i stated in the first point would help.

I know that my suggestions have many If and But in it and also a lot of changes in code. But if something along these lines can be implemented in the system it might give more player interaction to dead coalitions who want to communicate and learn. Also focus on battles would shift to more coalitions through the client system, the aim would be to have as many under the belt as possible.

Ike said:

Label messages received as 'single recipient', 'multiple recipients', or 'generated by system'.

Some icon or abbreviation could be used, of course, but the idea is to distinguish messages sent to you alone, those which are sent to a number of people (e.g., from one's hegemon, a polemarch, etc.), and those which are routinely generated by the system (e.g., someone telling you they made a hero with your character). No game balance concerns, certainly, but it would make it easier to know what messages to respond to. Thanks.

That's a good idea actually. How would those messages be distinguished? An icon in the message box or something else? Maybe you could illustrate your idea with screenshots?

Now that there are Chronos monthly quests to place in the top 50 in a weekly quest, make it possible to track one's progress and rank in weekly Chronos quests.

One more attempt: after hitting PP, we sometimes receive coffers. In most cases, we discard them. Why not to give us pieces from coffers, like when we discard gears? 

To receive Pieces you need to use Keys. Without using them you can't benefit from Coffers.

I know the way it is now - and it is not good. That is why I suggested that we fix it: give the players choice either to wait indefinitely for the key or crash it and get pieces 

Hi all, I personally feel that the current diplomacy features are inadequate for the amount of efforts the coalitions are putting in to negotiate in this game. I want that more flexibility to be allowed in the diplomatic negotiations.

The current features we get are as follows (All concern with the attack limits on Pantheons and Capitals) :-

Neutral - Normal Limits, the default

Ally - Normal Limits, but you have formally stated you are allies

Enemy - Normal Limits, but you have formally stated you are enemies

At Peace - You can not attack each other's Pantheons

At War - There are no Limits on Pantheon attacks.

________________________________________

My suggestions are-

1. Set price/cost/demand to enact a peace treaty. For example if Coalition X wants to make a peace treaty with Coalition Y who is harrasing X, then it can offer some perks to Coa Y to consider the peace treaty. For example, tax on orichalum(some percentage of orichalum would be given to coa Y)/tax on resource generated by the cities of Coa X(to some pre-determined amounts)/Some amount of Drachma to be transffered to the coalition Capital/ Transfer of Pantheon(s) to Y.

2. Peace treaties be limited to an agreed time decided by both the coalitions, for example 1 week/month/3 months etc.

3. Bring the alliances under one roof. I mean to say an alliance of the coalitions. Allow a coalitions to create an alliance charter it would have terms and conditions like who all can enter the alliance, its goals and duties. Maybe even create a new alliance chat which next to Global chat which would include only Commandants or above in the chat.The reason for this would be stated in the next point.

4. Making of Client States. A coalition can make another Coalition its client state by downgrading its capital to a certain level or besieging a number of its cities. Now the client coalition would have a reduction in its total resource collection by 30% whether its a raid, resource building or tribute. And that profit would distributed equally to the Main Coalition or made available to be used like the Orichalum System. Making a Client would give a huge boost in the Rankings too. This would create big battles between alliances to protect other coalitions in the alliance from making them client states, for example a coalition capital got downgraded now the enemy only needs to besige 60 cities to make it a client state, other coalitions in the same alliance would help that coalition not to be sieged like that. Maybe a thought that this can be done only during a Tourney like the Pantheon Massacre. Allow only to have a limited number of client states, the limit can be set by the number of Pantheons the coalition holds(New use for pantheons other than orichalum and rankings). The Peace Treaty can be used to avoid being a Client State, hence the custom feature i stated in the first point would help.

I know that my suggestions have many If and But in it and also a lot of changes in code. But if something along these lines can be implemented in the system it might give more player interaction to dead coalitions who want to communicate and learn. Also focus on battles would shift to more coalitions through the client system, the aim would be to have as many under the belt as possible.

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Hi! Very interesting ideas. Right now our devs are working on some improvements for Coalitions. So maybe they will consider some of your ideas ;)

Thank you  Alyona and Developers

Mullenz said:

I know the way it is now - and it is not good. That is why I suggested that we fix it: give the players choice either to wait indefinitely for the key or crash it and get pieces 

I've got your point, but it was designed that way for a reason :)

One more suggestion. 

This game definitely doesn't make us better persons: vanity, ruthlessness, greed and other human sins seem to flourish here. 

What if we reward noble things?

For example, if you are reinforcing your friend/ally's defense, you lose troops, don't revive any for free and get lousy PVP, because usually your contribution is not the largest. Why not to use some intensives? Could be PVP multiplier, or revival option, or something else. Especially if you help a weaker player.  

Reward for good deeds!!  Do something to look humane!

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Mullenz said:

I know the way it is now - and it is not good. That is why I suggested that we fix it: give the players choice either to wait indefinitely for the key or crash it and get pieces 

I've got your point, but it was designed that way for a reason :)

And the "reason" is to hurt/annoy players, as usual?  :)

One more suggestion. 

This game definitely doesn't make us better persons: vanity, ruthlessness, greed and other human sins seem to flourish here. 

What if we reward noble things?

For example, if you are reinforcing your friend/ally's defense, you lose troops, don't revive any for free and get lousy PVP, because usually your contribution is not the largest. Why not to use some intensives? Could be PVP multiplier, or revival option, or something else. Especially if you help a weaker player.  

Reward for good deeds!!  Do something to look humane!

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

Hi! Very interesting ideas. Right now our devs are working on some improvements for Coalitions. So maybe they will consider some of your ideas ;)

Thank you  Alyona and Developers

By the way, do you mean they are working on something new other than the recent facebook update they have brought in? I am on Plarium server 1

Hi. 

in coalition/warriors,  can you add a button (send friend request) here: 

http://screenshotlink.ru/a28029e79aba87e6d5466dbe668dc4be.png

thank you. 

Hello.  I have a suggestion for the study academy and scroll cypher.

Situation - If we want to reset skills, we must use a scroll cypher.  But if we use a scroll cypher, we can only reset ALL skills. 

Solution - Please add a scroll cypher   option button.  We click 'use scroll cypher'.  Next we see an option button.  First option is 'reset all skills'.  Next option is 'select skill to reset'. If we click the first option, all skills reset.  If we click the second option, we then move arrow to the skill we want to reset. Click the skill.  Reset complete. Easy.

For players with many skills, 'all reset' is not convenient. But if we can reset 1 skill at 1 time, that could be much better.