Tonaya, I haven't spent a penny since may 2015. On that reason, I think. Palrium is causing troubles - they want suckers and spenders :)
yes,you can do a lot of stuff in game using money
buy drachma,buy boosters,buy troops,revive troops,.....money,money,money....where is fun there?
Tonaya
We've already asked our devs if they could cut training time by 50%, or allow 2 queues for each Unit type (Offense and Defense), etc.
The answer was very clear - no. And one of the main reasons is that it still wouldn't be enough. It would still take years to rebuild 10 millions, and it would still take months to rebuild after a major loss.
The only solution that would make players happy is a drastic training time reduce, and we are not ready to implement it. Our game works differently, and it has always been like that. When you started playing this game, training time didn't take seconds (Well, except for the tutorial Units), and it shouldn't take seconds now.
There are no actual reasons for our developers to change training time drastically, except for the complaints coming from players, that have major losses and want to rebuild fast. But if you want to do something fast in this game, you can use boosts (you get a lot of them for free, remember?), Drachmas (You also get them for free, you don't have to use in-app purchases).
However, I see that cutting training time is very important for you, so when we have the next meeting with devs, I will raise this suggestion again. However, don't forget that last few times their answer was "no", and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"
I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable. Increases the amount of lights and heavies you can convert to better troops in persians and pvp rewards.
It would actually call for a more robust battlefield. The Devs decreased travel time exponentially back in 2015 as i remember it took up to 24 hours to reach some targets so you never really bothered. That actually created more battles.
The Devs decreased travel time to emporia, that made it much more manageable
If it took mere seconds or minutes to create troops, more people would fight. 30 seconds for javs, 1 minute for hoplights and 5 minutes for agema or mounted pelts would be WAYYYYYYY more profitable for plarium.
If I could build 30 agema ponies an hour? I would spend tons of drachma on resource packs and battle much more because i know my troops can be replaced in much less time. That is a FACT
Slow builds cause MOST PLAYERS TO HAVE ART ARMIES OR MUSEUM ARMIES. Nobody wants to take a year to start over from one fight.
facts facts factys facts facts
RIX said:
I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable. Increases the amount of lights and heavies you can convert to better troops in persians and pvp rewards.
It would actually call for a more robust battlefield. The Devs decreased travel time exponentially back in 2015 as i remember it took up to 24 hours to reach some targets so you never really bothered. That actually created more battles.
The Devs decreased travel time to emporia, that made it much more manageable
If it took mere seconds or minutes to create troops, more people would fight. 30 seconds for javs, 1 minute for hoplights and 5 minutes for agema or mounted pelts would be WAYYYYYYY more profitable for plarium.
If I could build 30 agema ponies an hour? I would spend tons of drachma on resource packs and battle much more because i know my troops can be replaced in much less time. That is a FACT
Slow builds cause MOST PLAYERS TO HAVE ART ARMIES OR MUSEUM ARMIES. Nobody wants to take a year to start over from one fight.
facts facts factys facts facts
Without question or argument-
Your post "Exactly" hits the nail on the head for accuracy and truthfulness.
"Nobody wants to take a year to start over from one fight"
"I would spend tons of drachma on resource packs and battle much more because i know my troops can be replaced in much less time. That is a FACT"
Yes Sir-You are correct again!! So would I!
For clarity's sake: "I would spend tons of drachma on resource packs and battle much more because i know my troops can be replaced in much less time. That is a FACT"
I don't have a lot of money, but what I do have is a very particular set of skills-built up over a lifetime.
I hope someday to find you and buy you a Steak/Lobster/Sushi dinner with your choice of drinks!!
Great Post Sir!
Thank You & Much Respect!
Mick
Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
As it was proven multiple times, Palrium tasks your "devs" to be acting against interests of decent and skilled players. Double-digit IQ coiners would buy huge amount of boosts and resources and rebuild at no time. And these are who you favor. Shame.RIX said:Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
What are the criteria of 'a lot of boosts"? Is 10 days "a lot"? This time would not allow you to rebuild even 10% of losses. As for "drachmas for free" - it is not good even as a joke. In order to get good amount of drachmas, you have to win a tournament against 200-300 mil troops monster coiners a and cheaters. That is virtually impossible. But even if you do that, you can get couple scores of heavy troops for 5000 drachmas. That is nothing on the scale of battle losses.. But if you want to do something fast in this game, you can use boosts (you get a lot of them for free, remember?), Drachmas (You also get them for free, you don't have to use in-app purchases).
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
RIX said:
Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
I can respect this answer because it's the correct answer when the game was in it's infancy. When someone who has 200 champion units and 5000 promachos was a very big deal. Now its 75,000 promachos and 2000 champion units or 50,000 agema and 2500 champion units meanwhile a player who played in 2014 and 2015 and 2016 and 2017 who do not have any persian exploits or large amounts of drachma cannot compete because their build times have not eveolved like thos who know the persian algorithims or coin like a drunken sailor.
RIX said:
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
RIX said:
Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
I can respect this answer because it's the correct answer when the game was in it's infancy. When someone who has 200 champion units and 5000 promachos was a very big deal. Now its 75,000 promachos and 2000 champion units or 50,000 agema and 2500 champion units meanwhile a player who played in 2014 and 2015 and 2016 and 2017 who do not have any persian exploits or large amounts of drachma cannot compete because their build times have not eveolved like thos who know the persian algorithims or coin like a drunken sailor.
The game has evolved, the devs know this and have made other revisions based on that. The only thing they are stuck on is troop build times. I don't get it
I believe the troop build times is the "centering" algorithm which the game functions on. Change that, and the game dynamics change.
As for the 50K in Agemas or 75K in Promachos-I have seen those numbers on occasion in screen shots from pan/capitol battles, from individuals who shared the screen shot of the attack. But, the troop numbers don't add up to the individual's time in game.
Given the current build times, since they have not changed, training time for an army that huge must have started back in 1999 or so I believe or..they were "coining like a drunken sailor"...lol:))
Given all of above, my coalition, in conjunction with a few others have set up different rules of engagement to preclude losing your entire army. Lets face it-it does take to long to build and it is much to expensive to revive.
Respect
Mick
I've been on the receiving end of those big hits and have had javs in cities where those hits occur regularlyRIX said:
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
RIX said:
Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
I can respect this answer because it's the correct answer when the game was in it's infancy. When someone who has 200 champion units and 5000 promachos was a very big deal. Now its 75,000 promachos and 2000 champion units or 50,000 agema and 2500 champion units meanwhile a player who played in 2014 and 2015 and 2016 and 2017 who do not have any persian exploits or large amounts of drachma cannot compete because their build times have not eveolved like thos who know the persian algorithims or coin like a drunken sailor.
The game has evolved, the devs know this and have made other revisions based on that. The only thing they are stuck on is troop build times. I don't get itI believe the troop build times is the "centering" algorithm which the game functions on. Change that, and the game dynamics change.
As for the 50K in Agemas or 75K in Promachos-I have seen those numbers on occasion in screen shots from pan/capitol battles, from individuals who shared the screen shot of the attack. But, the troop numbers don't add up to the individual's time in game.
Given the current build times, since they have not changed, training time for an army that huge must have started back in 1999 or so I believe or..they were "coining like a drunken sailor"...lol:))
Given all of above, my coalition, in conjunction with a few others have set up different rules of engagement to preclude losing your entire army. Lets face it-it does take to long to build and it is much to expensive to revive.
Respect
Mick
RIX said:
Mick13000 said:
I've been on the receiving end of those big hits and have had javs in cities where those hits occur regularlyRIX said:
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
RIX said:
Of course it would. I know that players would happily accept any change to the training time. However, our game dynamics was purposely designed in a certain manner. Meaning that you need to make a choice between Offense and Defense, between different types of Units, etc. And building them should take some time. Our devs add possibilities to boost this process. However, basic training time for a huge army MUST take long. And our devs are not planning to change it.I think cutting troops build times and doubling up on separate defense and offensive queues would actually be very favorable.
I can respect this answer because it's the correct answer when the game was in it's infancy. When someone who has 200 champion units and 5000 promachos was a very big deal. Now its 75,000 promachos and 2000 champion units or 50,000 agema and 2500 champion units meanwhile a player who played in 2014 and 2015 and 2016 and 2017 who do not have any persian exploits or large amounts of drachma cannot compete because their build times have not eveolved like thos who know the persian algorithims or coin like a drunken sailor.
The game has evolved, the devs know this and have made other revisions based on that. The only thing they are stuck on is troop build times. I don't get itI believe the troop build times is the "centering" algorithm which the game functions on. Change that, and the game dynamics change.
As for the 50K in Agemas or 75K in Promachos-I have seen those numbers on occasion in screen shots from pan/capitol battles, from individuals who shared the screen shot of the attack. But, the troop numbers don't add up to the individual's time in game.
Given the current build times, since they have not changed, training time for an army that huge must have started back in 1999 or so I believe or..they were "coining like a drunken sailor"...lol:))
Given all of above, my coalition, in conjunction with a few others have set up different rules of engagement to preclude losing your entire army. Lets face it-it does take to long to build and it is much to expensive to revive.
Respect
Mick
..as I have had troops in cities as well. We are in agreement then on this point Sir.
While I truly love the game, I have discussed with other players, the incongruities of players with that size army/troops and the time on game. Calculating troop builds for that size army runs into double digit years. The math does not lie!
Thank you for your response. Back to building troops:)
Respect to you
Mick
RIX said:
The game has evolved, the devs know this and have made other revisions based on that. The only thing they are stuck on is troop build times. I don't get it
They aren't stuck on building times :)
Huge armies never supposed to be built at an instant. But as I said, I'll remind them anyway.I think that to have a huge army of perhaps 1 billion in strength, use it to topple entire coalitions then have it back to where it was before you attacked them, would take decades of building or 100's of thousands of real life euros to buy instantly. Many players see these irregularityies on all servers and have to question how are players acquiring 50/75/100k agema and mounted pelts in such short times, using them in battle, then a week later be right back to where you were. I cannot imagine the amount of money someone would spend to use millions of drachma building these huge armies.RIX said:
The game has evolved, the devs know this and have made other revisions based on that. The only thing they are stuck on is troop build times. I don't get itThey aren't stuck on building times :)
Huge armies never supposed to be built at an instant. But as I said, I'll remind them anyway.
Forget logic and mathematics, guys. Don't trust your eyes. Because otherwise massive cheating is obvious: some players have access to massive back-doors, while others are destined to face additional hurdles.
.
^^ This.Slow builds cause MOST PLAYERS TO HAVE ART ARMIES OR MUSEUM ARMIES. Nobody wants to take a year to start over from one fight.
facts facts factys facts facts
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
We've already asked our devs if they could cut training time by 50%, or allow 2 queues for each Unit type (Offense and Defense), etc.
The answer was very clear - no. And one of the main reasons is that it still wouldn't be enough. It would still take years to rebuild 10 millions, and it would still take months to rebuild after a major loss.
The only solution that would make players happy is a drastic training time reduce, and we are not ready to implement it. Our game works differently, and it has always been like that. When you started playing this game, training time didn't take seconds (Well, except for the tutorial Units), and it shouldn't take seconds now.
There are no actual reasons for our developers to change training time drastically, except for the complaints coming from players, that have major losses and want to rebuild fast. But if you want to do something fast in this game, you can use boosts (you get a lot of them for free, remember?), Drachmas (You also get them for free, you don't have to use in-app purchases).
However, I see that cutting training time is very important for you, so when we have the next meeting with devs, I will raise this suggestion again. However, don't forget that last few times their answer was "no", and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
We've already asked our devs if they could cut training time by 50%, or allow 2 queues for each Unit type (Offense and Defense), etc.
The answer was very clear - no. And one of the main reasons is that it still wouldn't be enough. It would still take years to rebuild 10 millions, and it would still take months to rebuild after a major loss.
The only solution that would make players happy is a drastic training time reduce, and we are not ready to implement it. Our game works differently, and it has always been like that. When you started playing this game, training time didn't take seconds (Well, except for the tutorial Units), and it shouldn't take seconds now.
There are no actual reasons for our developers to change training time drastically, except for the complaints coming from players, that have major losses and want to rebuild fast. But if you want to do something fast in this game, you can use boosts (you get a lot of them for free, remember?), Drachmas (You also get them for free, you don't have to use in-app purchases).
However, I see that cutting training time is very important for you, so when we have the next meeting with devs, I will raise this suggestion again. However, don't forget that last few times their answer was "no", and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"
.....and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"...
WE? you changed sides Alyona?
did i converted you,finally?
Tonaya
d3vnul said:
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
We've already asked our devs if they could cut training time by 50%, or allow 2 queues for each Unit type (Offense and Defense), etc.
The answer was very clear - no. And one of the main reasons is that it still wouldn't be enough. It would still take years to rebuild 10 millions, and it would still take months to rebuild after a major loss.
The only solution that would make players happy is a drastic training time reduce, and we are not ready to implement it. Our game works differently, and it has always been like that. When you started playing this game, training time didn't take seconds (Well, except for the tutorial Units), and it shouldn't take seconds now.
There are no actual reasons for our developers to change training time drastically, except for the complaints coming from players, that have major losses and want to rebuild fast. But if you want to do something fast in this game, you can use boosts (you get a lot of them for free, remember?), Drachmas (You also get them for free, you don't have to use in-app purchases).
However, I see that cutting training time is very important for you, so when we have the next meeting with devs, I will raise this suggestion again. However, don't forget that last few times their answer was "no", and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"
Easy , get new developers , existing ones suck big time ! Or even the sucking existing ones will agree to it as soon as their job will be on the line. I do hope more and more players realize that there's no plarium without them ! use your powers or they will(plarium) against you
With all respect D3vnul,
-A few months ago players banded together and formed a "Drach Boycott". If you search the forum you can find and read all the threads.
The only power an individual has is to chose to play this game or not, or to chose to spend their euros/dollars.
I personally think I would have a better chance of meeting Alyona, taking her to dinner, falling in love with her, marrying her and spoiling her for the rest of her life...before Plarium makes any changes with regard to what we the players want (faster build times, low revival costs etc..)
I enjoy the game for the people I have made contact with all over the world thru the various chat methods (Skype, TS3 etc..) It's for fun, it has become a "social" point for me. Spending to make up for troop loss or to hope or wish for a huge army that will not disappear in a single battle is but a dream.
Enjoy the game for what is, and enjoy the time you spend with your fellow coalition members.
Respectfully,
MickNever changed any sides, Tonaya :) But I'm always on your side at least on 50% :)
.....and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"...
WE? you changed sides Alyona?
did i converted you,finally?
Tonaya
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:
Tonaya said:
Never changed any sides, Tonaya :) But I'm always on your side at least on 50% :).....and I don't think we have good chances to hear "yes"...
WE? you changed sides Alyona?
did i converted you,finally?
Tonaya
i saw only the other half where you are 50% against me ^^
